Huckabee: It’s time for Obama to send the first family through TSA’s new screening

November 23, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

Oh my.


Via Greg Hengler, why not? Why not at least send them through the scanner, just as a PSA to remind passengers that they can skip the junk-touching if they’re willing to stand in front of the machine for a few seconds? Frankly, I’m surprised that The One hasn’t mobilized Napolitano and TSA chief John Pistole [...]

Read this post »

Hot Air » Top Picks

More Fun with the Airline Screening Playset: Body Imaging X-Ray Edition!

November 21, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

Daniel Solove’s post is a must see.




ProfessorBainbridge.com

San Diego TSA Airport Screeners Out of Control … Passenger Arrested For Refusing TSA Screening, Parade Him Thru Airport in Underwear

November 21, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

TSA, the Audacity of Grope, San Diego Edition Part Deux:

The TSA is nothing more than a microcosm of Barack Obama and his Administration … a bunch of unqualified screw ups given power and abusing it. WTF AMERICA … THIS IS STILL AMERICA, ISN’T IT? The TSA and this government have totally lost focus on what airport security is supposed to do. IDIOTS, YOU FOOLS ARE TO CATCH TERRORISTS, NOT ARREST INNOCENT AMERICANS!!!

This time the TSA has overreacted and arrested  Sam Wolanyk, a San Diego resident, this weekend after he refused to complete the TSA screening process. Wolanyk then suffered the indignity at the hands of the TSA by being paraded through the airport in his underwear. Is this how the Obama/Napolitano TSA saves face for their screw up in letting the “underwear” bomber on a place last Christmas?

The TSA is out of control and some thing must be done before the Thanksgiving Day travel rush. If this continues, there is going to be mayhem this week. As stated at the Left Coast Rebel, from the airport that brought us, “Don’t Touch my Junk” comes the sequel … “Don’t Show us, We’d Rather Feel For Ourselves”.

In what can only be described as TSA handlers gone wild, the San Diego Harbor Police arrested an area resident for refusal to complete the screening/security process yesterday. This is the same airport that created the TSA security catch phrase“don’t touch my junk.” John Tyner of San Diego started the airport screening firestorm last week as Americans head into the busiest travel week of the year in the United States.

This time the defendant, Sam Wolanyk says he was asked to pass through the 3-D x-ray machine. When Wolanyk refused, Transportation Security Administration (TSA) personnel told him he would have to be patted down before he could pass through and board his airplane.

Wolanyk said he knew what was coming and took off his pants and shirt, leaving him in Calvin Klein bike undergarments.

Was this really necessary for the TSA would look to further humiliate air passenger by parading him through two separate airport terminals in his underwear.

Once Harbor Police arrested Wolanyk, he was handcuffed and paraded through two separate airport terminals in his underwear to the Harbor Police office located inside a different terminal at the airport than Wolanyk had originally gone through during his TSA security process.

It gets even worse from the Banana Republican created by Barack Obama … the TSA confiscated the camera of the woman who filmed fiasco and arrested her.

Share This

Scared Monkeys

2009 Transportation Act Prohibits WBI Use As Primary Screening Tool

November 20, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

A bipartisan amendment to the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Authorization Act of 2009 “prohibits the TSA from using Whole Body Imaging (WBI) machines for primary screening.” Today TSA calls this equipment Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT).

The amendment was co-sponsored by Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) and Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH) and passed the House on a 310-118 vote. See how your Representative voted. (Seven of Washington State’s nine Congressmen voted yes: only Hastings (R) and Dicks (D) voted no.)

The bill (HR2200, summary) is stalled in the U.S. Senate; it passed the House on a 397-25-11 vote. See how your Representative voted.

According to Speaker of the House Pelosi:

This bill is the first reauthorization of TSA since it was created in the Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001 (PL 107-71).  (In 2002, TSA was moved into DHS when the Department was created.) The bill authorizes $ 7.6 billion in FY 2010 and $ 8.1 billion in FY 2011 for the activities of TSA, including key increases over FY 2009 funding.

Ever since TSA was created in 2001, its focus has been on aviation security.  A key aspect of this legislation is beginning to put surface transportation security on an equal footing with aviation security – with key surface transportation security enhancements.

Consumer Traveler lauded the bill, noting that this was ” the first time [since 2001] that Congress said, ‘Whoa, TSA.”

On 8 June 2009, the bill was referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, where it has languished. The committee is composed of 25 Senators and led by Chairman John D. (Jay) Rockefeller IV (D-WV) and Ranking Member Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX).

Remaining Democrats (alpha)

  1. Senator Mark Begich, AK
  2. Senator Barbara Boxer, CA
  3. Senator Maria Cantwell, WA
  4. Senator Byron L. Dorgan, ND
  5. Senator Daniel K. Inouye, HI
  6. Senator John F. Kerry, MA
  7. Senator Amy Klobuchar, MN
  8. Senator Frank R. Lautenberg, NJ
  9. Senator Claire McCaskill, MO
  10. Senator Bill Nelson, FL
  11. Senator Mark Pryor, AK
  12. Senator Tom Udall, NM
  13. Senator Mark Warner ,VA

Remaining Republicans (alpha)

  1. Senator Sam Brownback, KS
  2. Senator Jim DeMint, SC
  3. Senator John Ensign, NV
  4. Senator Johnny Isakson, GA
  5. Senator Mike Johanns, NE
  6. Senator George S. LeMieux, FL
  7. Senator Olympia Snowe, ME
  8. Senator John Thune, SD
  9. Senator David Vitter, LA
  10. Senator Roger Wicker, MS

This is cross-posted from IWillOptOut.org.


The Moderate Voice

Screaming About Screening

November 17, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 
style="float: right; margin-bottom: 1px; margin-left: 1px;"> href="http://blog.heritage.org/wp-content/uploads/body-scanner.jpg"> class="alignnone size-full wp-image-46737" title="body scanner" src="http://blog.heritage.org/wp-content/uploads/body-scanner.jpg" alt="" width="384" height="244" />

There is a lesson to be learned in href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jaLDxc9XMzwy07iPnGAUp2ibTW6A?docId=CNG.fdbb7c4f77a7e27e62fcb703b7e9f08a">the tempest against TSA: be careful what you ask for. After the underwear bomber tried to take down a Detroit-bound Christmas flight last year Congress and the citizenry lined up to cheer lead for deploying body scanners everywhere. Nobody paused to think if that was a wise response.

Non-metalic material hidden under clothes has always worried airport screeners. When someone dressed suspiciously there was only one option-an intrusive pat down. The scanner technology offered an option-a less intrusive way to check on the rare occasion when some one was sent to “secondary” screening (the more thorough going over some travelers get after, or instead of, the normal walk through the magnetometer). id="more-46725">

When the decision was made to use the body scanners for primary screening that is when the trouble really started. Now instead of using them for suspicious travelers a wide swath of the traveling public must face the foreboding scanning chamber. Many are opting out of being subjected to the scanners for various reasons. That is their right. But then they have to subject themselves to a pat down and the pat downs are intrusive. So the irony here is that a technology that was developed to require less pat downs is driving up the number.

Frankly, the threat does not justify the indiscriminate use of body scanners for primary screening. Eliminating the threat of serious liquid bombs by restricting carry-on liquids took that immediate danger of the table. Small bombs strapped to bodies or air mailed are far from guaranteed to bring down a plane. Sure any bomb on a plane might do some damage-but let’s face it you could also just stab people in the neck with sharpened pencils to kill a couple of passengers on a plane. And if you wanted to kill a handful of people with a bomb, you could just blow yourself up at the ticket counter before you got near security.

That is not to say that sensible primary screening, or more thorough and rare secondary screening, should end. But we should be spending our security buck where it gives us the biggest bang.

The best security is intelligence and law enforcement that finds and stops the bad people before they get near the plane. Let’s continue to do common sense screening at the airport, but lets stop pretending that is the best line of defense.

TSA should back off requiring the body scanners for primary screening.

The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

TSA Enhanced Screening Procedures Explained

November 17, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

In a handy, and hilarious, animation:




Outside the Beltway

Did you know airports can opt out of TSA screening?

November 16, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

With the latest news of the TSA’s invasive security searches, leaks of nude body scanners, and children crying over these pat downs, Americans are getting sick of it.

But did you know that local airports can opt out of these TSA screenings? NJ and Idaho legislators are introducing legislation to get these scanners out.

Liberty Pundits Blog

Airports Can Opt Out Of TSA Screening

November 16, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

Apropos of the gathering public outcry against invasive screenings by the Transportation Security Administration that James Joyner wrote about earlier today, Glenn Reynolds passes along a link which shows that airports can opt out of TSA screening:

‘§ 44920. Security screening opt-out program ”(a) IN GENERAL.—On or after the last day of the 2-year period beginning on the date on which the Under Secretary transmits to Congress the certification required by section 110(c) of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, an operator of an airport may submit to the Under Secretary an application to have the screening of passengers and property at the airport under section 44901 to be carried out by the screening personnel of a qualified private screening company under a contract entered into with the Under Secretary.

I’m not sure whether this really solves the problem since the private company, and presumably the procedures it uses, must be approved by the Department of Homeland Security. Nonetheless, to the extent that the TSA is the problem this would seem to be an alternative option.

Additionally, there is news that legislators in New Jersey and Idaho have introduced legislation in their respective state legislatures to ban body image scanners. Whether these laws would have any effect in the face of federal law is unclear, though.




Outside the Beltway

Airports Can Opt Out Of TSA Screening

November 16, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

Apropos of the gathering public outcry against invasive screenings by the Transportation Security Administration that James Joyner wrote about earlier today, Glenn Reynolds passes along a link which shows that airports can opt out of TSA screening:

‘§ 44920. Security screening opt-out program ”(a) IN GENERAL.—On or after the last day of the 2-year period beginning on the date on which the Under Secretary transmits to Congress the certification required by section 110(c) of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, an operator of an airport may submit to the Under Secretary an application to have the screening of passengers and property at the airport under section 44901 to be carried out by the screening personnel of a qualified private screening company under a contract entered into with the Under Secretary.

I’m not sure whether this really solves the problem since the private company, and presumably the procedures it uses, must be approved by the Department of Homeland Security. Nonetheless, to the extent that the TSA is the problem this would seem to be an alternative option.

Additionally, there is news that legislators in New Jersey and Idaho have introduced legislation in their respective state legislatures to ban body image scanners. Whether these laws would have any effect in the face of federal law is unclear, though.




Outside the Beltway

Will the New GOP House Majority Address TSA Screening Abuse?

November 16, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

Maybe somebody in Washington is listening to the growing outcry:

In addition to being large, impersonal, and top-heavy, what really worries critics is that the TSA has become dangerously ineffective. Its specialty is what those critics call “security theater” — that is, a show of what appear to be stringent security measures designed to make passengers feel more secure without providing real security. “That’s exactly what it is,” says [Rep. John Mica, the Republican who will soon be chairman of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.” “It’s a big Kabuki dance.”

Now, the dance has gotten completely out of hand. And like lots of fliers — I spoke to him as he waited for a flight at the Orlando airport — Mica sees TSA’s new “naked scanner” machines and groping, grossly invasive passenger pat-downs as just part of a larger problem. TSA, he says, is relying more on passenger humiliation than on practices that are proven staples of airport security.




ProfessorBainbridge.com

Next Page »

  • Laptop ac adapters, keyboards, batteries, inverters, LCD screens at LaptopZ.com
  • National Business Furniture, Inc
  • Toshiba - Toshibadirect.com
  • Save 10% for Orders Over $129 at GadgetTown.com