TSA Claims You Need To Be Naked Scanned Or Groped After A Flight?
from the say-what?!? dept
The latest bizarre story of TSA scans, submitted by multiple readers here, is the story of blogger Matt Kernan, who recently flew from Paris to Cincinnati, and upon landing, but before being able to claim his bags, was told he had to go through a naked scanner or be groped. He has a detailed account of what happened on his blog, where he actually was able to eventually convince the TSA to let him through without a scan or a grope. Some of the coverage of his story highlights the fact that he was actually able to talk his way out without having to through the backscatter naked scan or the groping. And that is, indeed, an interesting point. He highlights his Constitutional rights, which state that as a US citizen with a valid passport, he should be free to enter the country. After a long while of going back and forth with multiple parties, he is escorted by over a dozen folks out of the security area and to the baggage claim without having to through the scanner or a groping.But what's a bigger point to me is why did he have to go through such a search after he'd already flown. At first I thought it was to get on a connecting flight, but that's not the case. He just wanted to leave the airport and go home, and eventually he was allowed to do just that. He flew into the Cincinnati airport and lives in Cincinnati -- and was initially told that his only options were to be scanned or groped... or to go back through customs. Kernan recorded (audio) many of the interactions. You can hear them below:
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Absolute power?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Absolute power?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What I find funny...
Basically:
"It's up to these guys."
"No, it's up to you guys."
"Well, hm... I dunno... Let me talk to my boss. I've no idea wtf I'm doing."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Poor airport design
The same sort of thing used to happen at Orlando (MCO), which is one of the reasons that I've used Miami and Tampa on my more recent visits to M Mouse.
Most likely this problem exists elsewhere. Hopefully somebody will put together a list.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Poor airport design
Do the international arrivals in Cincinnati get dumped into a terminal at a point where departing passengers have already been screened, perhaps?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Good plan.
/sarcasm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Any plan for racial profiling gets a downvote by me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/140797
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/744199---israelification-high-security-little -bother
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I've never read it except bits online but I don't recall any bit in your constitution or bill of rights that says "Everyone is equal except when it's inconvenient for that guy over there then we can urinate all over whoever else we like as long as he's fine".
Americans go on about those documents so much I'm pretty sure I'd have heard if it was in there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I am white.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It's this stupid fear that people have about planes going down, after 9/11 don't you think that passengers will take that kind of shit laying down?
So far every attempt after 9/11 have been foiled either through sheer stupidity from the "terrorist" or by fellow passengers stopping the attempt in its tracks.
The TSA refuses to acknowledge whether they've stopped anything, probably meaning that they've stopped 0 attempts. All they have done so far has been reactionary.
We don't need to be afraid. The chance of any one of us actually becoming a victim of terrorism is smaller than being struck by lightning. By being afraid you are letting the terrorists win, as their goal is not to attack you, but to strike fear in you.
Al Qaeda couldn't have wished for a better outcome than this. 9 years after their attack, and America is still running scared, like headless chickens.
Also, you need to follow the money, who stands to gain the most by the deployment of these gaterape machines? Chertoff is one of the names.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
As layered defenses go, profiling has its place but relying on any one defense leaves gaping holes for attackers to get through.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ein minuten bitte!
Can someone therefore explain why said terrorist, having gone to all the trouble of getting said bomb onto a plane somewhere else would then carry it off with him again?
OK if you don't want foreigners in America, fine... dumb but fine... but isn't there something in the constitution about illegal searches and seizures? At what point does this kind of farce hit that? And at what point do sheeple realise that "security" (public security at least) is a long way from the object of these measures?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ein minuten bitte!
In the end what measures like this do is lose public support for their very existence. How long, I wonder, before the American public demands these things and anything like them be removed in their entirely from the airports as now the traveling public doesn't know who to fear more -- the statistically remote chance of a highjacking or the invasive and objectionable security attempts to prevent it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Ein minuten bitte!
Really, I'm suspicious of 9/11. 200+ people on a plane, and NO ONE reasoned out that "Hey, these guys are terrorists and most likely.... SUICIDE TERRORISTS! STOP THEM NOW!"
Seriously, if I was on board a plane, that is EXACTLY what I would have shouted out to the whole plane!
No, 9/11 REEKS of an allowed attack and/or government run attack. Yes, I am saying that Bush was involved in some way MORE than just allowing it to happen, or his government was!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Ein minuten bitte!
So no, you *wouldn't* have done that, because before 9/11, airplane passengers would have assumed the hijack was for money and that they were an asset to the terrorists, rather than collateral damage in an oversized incendiary missile.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Ein minuten bitte!
...Right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cinci, not surprised.
And to respond to George's comment, Yes TSA are a bunch of underachievers who lucked into a govt job and now think they are US Marshals.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
/sarc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: /sarc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And?
So? When flying, which do you go for? Nudity or groping?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: And?
Neither. As noted, only a small % of people are "selected" for such screenings, and I was not at any point in the trip.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: And?
So do you just mean neither as in you lucked out? or do you mean neither as in: if selected, you would opt out and assert your rights not to be groped?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: And?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: And?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My experience flying back from Europe
As I understand it, passengers traveling to the US must go through international security that meets US security standards. So why did I have to go through security again? To everyone in line it seemed like a massive waste of time (1 hour or so) and resources (TSA salaries etc.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The state can never have too much security!
A few decades ago German citizens woke up to find that they had become much more secure from threats against the state and other undesirable elements.
We joke about it until it happens. And then we stop joking, or rather, the jokers start disappearing...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The state can never have too much security!
I thought Obama and the Democrats would stop that. Apparently not. Or, they are trying to but the Republicans and conservatives are getting in their way big time!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The state can never have too much security!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The state can never have too much security!
It's hard to give up powers you are enjoying, and easy to demand it of someone else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ridiculous
It also occurs to me that "random selection" is the same as conviction without a trial, isn't it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ridiculous
The TSA folks in the recordings don't know what they are doing. More like robots than people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not really news
I was forced to do the same empty pocket, take off jacket, remove everything routine as when I left the country to begin with. This is despite the fact that I had been searched in Dublin and cleared through customs without any issue and was escorted by an airport employee to the ticketing desk (not for anything nefarious, I just had no idea where to *go*). My 2nd round of security in the US involved a pat down, albeit a light one. When I expressed my concern that the TSA and the government doesn't want its own citizens to return to their own country, I was met with doe eyed expressions and laissez faire, no one cared. It was the first time in my entire life that I felt so disgusted at the actions of my government and its lack of care about its citizens. The fact that the TSA employees didn't see any problem with meaningless searches didn't help either.
Passengers are simply being groomed to not care about their rights and that being searched -- potentially unlawfully -- at whim is normal. While I'm not conspiratorial, I do believe this mentality is being engendered.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not really news
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I had a feeling this was going to happpen
This is just sad. TSA style screening on U.S. citizens just to "enter" the country? I thought the backscatter and patdowns were to protect us on the flight? I see... lied to, again. Just plain old incrementalism taking hold, once again. If the Cincinnati Airport was designed in such a way as to cause this "screening" to occur, then it's time for the ACLU to file a class action lawsuit for intentional violation of 4th Amendment Rights by design.
Was there any Probable Cause? Were they momentarily confused and thought he was a laptop or a portable storage device? Was the call to the Federal Security Director part of a Turing Test to confirm the passenger was human and not a self-aware inket/laser printer toner cartridge?
Sounds like 4th Amendment violations and "fishing expeditions" are going to come fast and furious upon many citizens who do not understand their Constitutional Rights.
I suggest a new t-shirt for U.S. airline travelers coming back from abroad:
Keep your "policies" off of my "Constitutional Rights"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
OPT out OPTED out
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: OPT out OPTED out
On the news this morning, they were reporting everything was going smoothly at the local international airport, no crowds (very few people), and no signs of any opting-out taking place. They left out a crucial detail however, the airport currently has no backscatter machines installed, leaving nothing for anyone to "opt-out".
This news report was kind of like going on a trip to "save the whales", only to find out you were taken to the desert. I'll have an order of Security Theater with a side order of News Theater to go along with it please.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: OPT out OPTED out
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: OPT out OPTED out
In the approx 5 min report, the 2 dozen or so people I saw behind the news reporter at the TSA checkpoint were putting their shoes, coats and carry-ons on the x-ray conveyor, walking through the metal detector, and picking up their stuff on the other side. I saw no groping or patting. Perhaps not enough people showed up for the random search generator to kick in.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
why he needs to go through the scanner/groping process after the flight
After hearing what the TSA guys had to say, I thinkhe had to be re-screened because A) the Paris screening wasn't up to TSA standards and B) this screening was after leaving customs where the passengers had access to their luggage and would be released into the airport post-screening area to reach other flights. The fact that Matt's travel terminated in Cincinnati didn't matter to them.
So it sounds like if they had an exit into the pre-screening part of the airport, they could have let him go.
That's the only logical reason I can think of.
Peace,
Rob:-]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: why he needs to go through the scanner/groping process after the flight
I agree with your assessment. By placing the only exit after Customs to the outside thru a TSA pre-screened area of the airport, a mandatory TSA checkpoint would be required.
So it sounds like if they had an exit into the pre-screening part of the airport, they could have let him go.
Until the day someone decides this type of "TSA checkpoint"is a good idea and they start doing it at all international U.S. airports, and purposefully set up the only exit out this way. All in the name of "security".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
-jcr
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Its a losing cause...
Take alook at http://blog.hjbnet.com/2010/11/23/what-will-happen-next.aspx for an example of how easy it would be to cause massive destruction right under the noses of TSA.
If we have an enemy, then we are in combat and those in combat who chose to have a siege mindset usually lose. Victors are those who go on the offensive.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TSA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If I were a terrorist or other warrior type I would make a huge distraction (printer bombs) and get all of the attention directed towards planes (like now) and then blow the hell out of a stadium (50,000 plus), subway (unknown numbers) or any other highly attended event, that is policed only by rent-a-cops. It's called a distraction. Throw the rock to the left and go right. Also it would be so easy to make up a couple of thousand laser cartridges and ship them to the US by a convoluted route and then sell them here to companies only to be installed on their Laserjets. We already get all of our goods from a foreign country.
After growing up on the streets in America I learned I should go right after hearing the rock hitting something on the left.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
abuse
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why not...
Or maybe someone has figured out a way to stuff a bunch of explosives up your..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2010-11/scanners-coming-trains-subways-and-b oats-homeland-security-chief-says
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Actually this all made sense, but took way too long.
I worked for TSA for 7 years (left in disgust this year), so I think I understand perfectly why they were doing the screening, although I think their Screener and Supervisor did not take the appropriate action. The FSD did the right thing to just have this man escorted through the sterile area.
The reason for the screening was that this man's plane from France let the passengers out into the sterile area for domestic flights, meaning the area where they would have access to all other passengers on all other domestic flights. France does not screen per US standards, so additional screening, i.e.the intrusive BS that TSA is now having its dufus employees blindly follow for show (Theater Security ), was needed to satisfy the requirement that all passengers entering the sterile area have gone through this rigorous screening. The worry of TSA is that if they do not do this, terrorists can use a flight from France to Cincinnati to get explosives on a domestic flight without getting this type of screening and thus defeat the system. France is a known avenue for terrorists to try to bypass rigorous screening due to lax French screening.
Where the front line TSA idiots screwed up is not recognizing that since this passenger was from Cincinnati, all they needed to do was get him through the sterile area to assure he did not give a prohibited item to another cleared passenger, since that was the purpose of the additional post-flight screening of arriving passengers from the French flight. That is what the FSD (to top TSA official in Cincinnati)was clever enough to recognize to resolve the situation, which is why the TSA escorted the passenger through the sterile area to the public area.
I agree with you on this one, Mike. TSA stands for Those Stupid Asses but at least there was one guy (the FSD) with a brain and some common sense at the top to resolve it in a logical and secure way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Actually this all made sense, but took way too long.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is TSA technology so bad that they have to resort to this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TSA again and again and again .....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shithole of a country called USA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]