TSA Insists That It Doesn't Pick Hot Women Out For Extra Scrutiny

from the no-really dept

The TSA apparently has heard enough of various claims that its agents have been giving... um... "special attention" to attractive women making their way through airport security, and has issued a clear denial that the TSA ever focuses on looks, rather than security. In the specific case they're discussing, in which a woman claimed that she was forced to go through a body scanner three times, the TSA says that it happened so long ago that there aren't any specifics to go on. However, it does note that the machines at that airport are not the infamous "nudie scanners" but rather the newer machines that don't show a person's direct scan (and that these images are viewable by the person being scanned): It does seem likely that the TSA is correct that the claims of this woman being put through a scanner for prurient purposes may have been exaggerated, but that doesn't mean that attractive people aren't necessarily called out for extra attention. The TSA categorically denies this possibility, but how would it know? It's not like TSA agents have a particularly good track record in obeying the law. Could there have been a situation where someone sent a woman through the scanner multiple times not to see the scan, but to keep paying her special attention? That seems much harder to rule out, and nothing in the TSA's post even acknowledges that possibility.

Either way, the blog post also notes that the woman did not file a complaint at the time, and suggests that if you have a problem, you should do so. Perhaps the TSA's Blogger Bob has never traveled like us "normal" people, but the whole process of getting through security is often such a hassle, the last thing you want to do after finally being allowed into the gate area is to continue dealing with the TSA and/or to provoke further scrutiny. As we've seen in the past, the TSA also does not have the best record when it comes to responding to those who complain about its activities.

I'm sure Blogger Bob believes that the TSA doesn't give special attention to attractive passengers, but perhaps it's time to acknowledge that the entire security theater setup is open to such charges because of how poorly designed it is?

Filed Under: hot women, security theater, tsa

Security Theater... Or Why I Had To Go Dumpster Diving At The US Capitol Last Week

from the feeling-safer? dept

We've had plenty of stories about the ridiculousness of security theater at airports, but it's been spreading elsewhere as well. Last week, I was in Washington DC from Monday through Thursday, for a few things (mostly related to the SOPA/PIPA debate). On Thursday morning, I took part in a press briefing about the SOPA/PIPA fight (this was before it had been shelved, but after the web blackouts) at the US Capitol. I was actually heading to the airport soon after, so I had checked out of my hotel, and had put the metal water canteen that I use in my bag. It was empty, knowing that I'd have to go through airport security a little later.

However, at security to get into the Capitol, I was told I could not bring the canteen in, even though it was empty. I asked if there was any reason for this. I was told I just couldn't bring it in. I asked if there was any place I could "leave" it, and I was told to go outside and there were dumpsters to the right. I even asked if someone could hold it for me, since it would just be an hour or so. No luck. Dumpsters, outside to the right. The canteen isn't anything special, but I do like it. According to the price tag still on the bottom, it cost $11 when my wife bought it for me. I can buy another canteen, but really, there's a bit of a principle thing to all of this. If the canteen itself is dangerous, then, putting it in a dumpster outside isn't going to change that.

I went outside and there were some police there, so I asked them if there was anything I could do. They also pointed me to the dumpsters. I asked if I might be able to get it back, and they said, "if you don't mind climbing in... and if the garbage isn't picked up by then." And so, an hour and a half later, after the press briefing was done, I (wearing a suit), climbed into the dumpster at the Capitol to pick up my water canteen, so I could take it with me back home. Again, it certainly wouldn't have been the end of the world if I'd lost it. But I'm at a loss as to what this little bit of security theater accomplished. Either the canteen is dangerous, or it's not. If it's dangerous, I shouldn't be able to leave it right next to the Capitol... and I shouldn't then be able to go retrieve it. If it's not dangerous (and, um, it's not), then the whole thing is a complete joke. Oh, and I shouldn't forget the other punchline: I saw at least two people in the press briefing with their own (brought from home) water canteens.

Somehow, none of this makes me feel any safer.

Filed Under: dumpster diving, security theater, us capitol

Bakery Creates TSA-Safe Cupcakes After TSA Defends Its Confiscation Of 'Dangerous' Cupcakes

from the at-least-those-terrorists-won't-get-fat dept

While the TSA continues to not catch terrorists, it is catching flak for its decision last month to confiscate a cupcake. Even more bizarre, the TSA is continuing to defend the confiscation, claiming that since this cupcake was in a jar it meant that the frosting was considered a gel and subject to the totally silly and pointless 3 oz. rule.

I wanted to make it clear that this wasn’t your everyday, run-of-the-mill cupcake. If you’re not familiar with it, we have a policy directly related to the UK liquid bomb plot of 2006 called 3-1-1 that limits the amount of liquids, gels and aerosols you can bring in your carry-on luggage. Icing falls under the “gel” category. As you can see from the picture, unlike a thin layer of icing that resides on the top of most cupcakes, this cupcake had a thick layer of icing inside a jar.

In general, cakes and pies are allowed in carry-on luggage, however, the officer in this case used their discretion on whether or not to allow the newfangled modern take on a cupcake per 3-1-1 guidelines. They chose not to let it go.

Or maybe they were just hungry. Either way, rest assured that terrorists who get through security won't be able to get fat on cupcakes.

Or... maybe they can. A bakery in Rhode Island, picking up on this ridiculousness and sensing a marketing opportunity, is now offering a TSA-complaint cupcake, complete with exactly 3 oz. of frosting... a plastic baggie, and a faux boarding pass declaring compliance: Yes, there's now a dessert menu for your airport security theater...

Filed Under: cupcakes, overhype, security theater, tsa

The TSA Posts Its 'Top Good Catches Of 2011' List, Not One Of Which Is An Actual Terrorist

from the because-one-time-that-guy-tried-to-ignite-a-cupcake-with-a-lightsaber dept

Everyone loves a good "Best of..." list and with 2011 having just wrapped up, pretty much every site on the web has a few posted. Bruce Schneier points us in the direction of The TSA Blog, which has posted its own self-congratulatory list, "The Top 10 Good Catches of 2011."

"Good" is very much a sliding scale when you're a government agency that combines the incompetent brusqueness of classic security theater with the thoroughness of an overenthusiastic gynecological exam.

So, what sort of "epic gets" made the TSA's list? Well, there's a variety of weapons, ranging from normal loaded handguns in carry-on bags to something called a "Tactical Spike" to throwing knives to a taser disguised as a cellphone. There's also a science project, some wildlife, inert landmines, some chunks of C4 explosive and a flare gun. There's a lot of items that sound dangerous, but Bruce Schneier points out what's missing from the TSA's collection:

That's right; not a single terrorist on the list. Mostly forgetful, and entirely innocent, people. Note that they fail to point out that the firearms and knives would have been just as easily caught by pre-9/11 screening procedures. And that the C4 -- their #1 "good catch" -- was on the return flight; they missed it the first time. So only 1 for 2 on that one.

So, the TSA looks as though it had its gloved hands full during 2011, especially when you consider all the non-terrorist, non-weaponry that was seized in the name of safety over the past year. In addition to those incredibly threatening cupcakes, our favorite theatre troupe saved us from being killed to death by the following items:

TSA confiscates a butter knife from an airline pilot. TSA confiscates a teenage girl's purse with an embroidered handgun design. TSA confiscates a 4-inch plastic rifle from a GI Joe action doll on the grounds that it's a "replica weapon." TSA confiscates a liquid-filled baby rattle from airline pilot's infant daughter. TSA confiscates a plastic "Star Wars" lightsaber from a toddler.

With the list of threatening objects covering everything from actual guns with actual bullets to fake guns that can only be fired by those possessing ultra-tiny hands and the requisite "kung fu grip," it seems like it will only be a matter of time before we're asked to board the flight naked with our clothing and belongings being shipped to our destination on a bulletproof, bombproof supertrain. It also looks as though our children, previously thought to be "the future," are apparently now the "new face of terrorism."

Congratulations, Blogger Bob and the rest of the TSA crew! Here's hoping 2012 brings an even better list, one where inert plutonium sits side-by-side with purloined KFC sporks and back issues of Guns & Ammo in the 50-gallon trash container 15 feet away from the checkpoint. Safe!

Filed Under: security theater, terrorism, tsa

NFL Ramps Up Security Theatre

from the don't-fumble-my-junk dept

Security theatre has been the goal of the TSA these past few years. Whether they're valiantly inserting their fingers into our orifices , standing bravely to defend travelers from insulin and icepacks, or simply lying to people in telling them they can't be taped during their most nefarious actions, The TSA does fake security like no other group can. Nobody, and I mean nobody, has worked harder at not producing any results than these people.

But that won't keep the NFL from trying, damn it.

Dementia writes in about a Yahoo Sports post describing the new breakthrough security technique at NFL games this year: pat-downs. That's right, the NFL is going to solve security at their games by somehow patting down seventy thousand people as they enter stadiums within roughly an hour's length of time. No, the pat-downs won't be done by federal employees, just low-paid yellow jacket-wearing folks (seriously, click the article and look at the picture, it's awesome). No there aren't any metal detectors or machine screeners a la the airport. Basically, no, these security measurements won't make anyone more...you know...secure. As Chris Chase notes:

"As far as I can tell, the only purpose gate security has is to create a mass of humanity at the entrances and comb through women's purses. The pat downs are jokes. Security personnel only checked from the waist up. If they felt anything in your pocket, their most likely recourse was to ask, "what's that?" A halfway-decent answer got you a pass."

And, as Chris also notes, if you think these measures are stupid now, just wait until the weather turns. I can just picture myself walking up to Soldier Field on a January morning in Chicago, seven layers deep between regular undergarments, long-underwear, longsleeve t-shirt, t-shirt, hoodie sweatshirt, down-insulated winter jacket, and my lovely Where's Waldo-esque scarf to tie it all together, and giving these security types a sideways glance as they attempt to pat me down. I could carry a 1967 Buick Skylark in my pants and they'd never feel it.

Why can't we stop this? Who are the NFL playing to with this nonsense? I'd like to think my fellow citizens and football consumers aren't so totally devoid of intelligence that they can't see how pointless and annoying this all is.

Filed Under: nfl, patdowns, security theater
Companies: nfl

Looking At Security Theater Through The Lens Of The Utøya Massacre

from the tragedy dept

Like many people, I've been horrified all weekend reading story of the Utøya massacre in Norway. Although it's difficult to use such a fresh tragedy to prove a point, a post by Rick Falkvinge looks at why security theater in Norway was ineffective in preventing this tragedy, and how no further ratcheting up of security theater is likely to do much until it reaches ridiculous levels (random, frequent police raids of farms). The key point is the one Falkvinge concludes with:

Benjamin Franklin famously said, that “a people who gives up its freedom to gain a little security will lose both and deserve neither”. But now that it has been shown in the most gruesome, in-your-face way that we don’t even gain a little security by giving up these freedoms, then why are we doing so?

Norwegian Prime Minister Stoltenberg is absolutely right when he says we must fight antidemocratic lunacy with more democracy and more humanity. His quote from one of the young on Utøya, "if one man can show so much hate, imagine how much love we all can show together", is one of the most statemanworthy I have seen in my entire life. Both when it came from the young surviving lady right off the island, and from Stoltenberg on repeating it in his official capacity.

It brings me to tears, and to something more important: hope.

As with past tragedies such as this one, we're already seeing some evidence that some people are using this tragedy as an excuse to ratchet up security theater. Editorials bemoaning the openness in Norway quickly appeared, and officials in other countries, such as the Philippines and Australia, have already used the tragedy to talk about changing security laws and even how such laws could prevent similar incidents from happening there. Of course, some of the laws they're talking about were already in place in Norway.

Thankfully, as Falkvinge noted at the end of his story, Norwegian politicians (so far) appear to be going in the other direction, noting how the response to such a cowardly (and yes, such a massacre is cowardly) and fear-inducing act is not more cowardice and fear, but openness and love. Hopefully those views continue to predominate in Norway. Giving in to such acts by increasing the culture of fear is actually what killers like Anders Breivik want.

Filed Under: norway, security, security theater, tragedy

TSA Chief Pistole: Maybe We Can Stop Petting Your Children

from the but-probably-not dept

There are things in this life that are difficult to figure out.  Quantum Physics, for instance, just ain't easy.  Hell, I'm 29 years old and I still don't don't understand the very basics of neuro-regenerative surgery.  So perhaps we should all take a moment to stand up and applaud TSA boss John Pistole for deciphering the it's-probably-not-okay-to-touch-our-children code.

At a recent meeting of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, Pistole relented:

"We have changed the policy to say that there'll be repeated efforts made to resolve that without a pat-down."

This was in response to outrage over a YouTube video in which a six year old girl gets groped by a TSA employee, including having the inside of the waist of her pants checked (video embedded below).  As he was specifically discussing airport gropings at this meeting, it's as yet unclear if this policy change will also apply to the TSA Flashmob Security Theatre Troupe that they have roaming around other transportation hubs throughout the country.  Besides which, it's hardly a firm admission that strangers sticking their fingers down our children's pants may not be the best of ideas.  In fact, at the same meeting, Pistole went on to say:

"Unfortunately, we know that terrorists around the world have used children as suicide bombers."

This is the kind of thing that drives me crazy.  What we have is a few rather isolated incidents of bad things happening on the other side of the world and we somehow go from that to what can only be described as overreactionist policies on our side of the ocean.  Have terrorists ever used a baseball bat to commit their crimes?  Probably.  There goes the national past time.  I'm pretty sure they've used cell phones too.  How could we possibly allow these combination sexting/bomb-making devices to enter an airplane?  It's said that bin Laden had a stash of porn at his Pakistani safehouse.  Why haven't we arrested Jenna Jameson yet?

Senator Rand Paul appears to think the threat posed by American child-terrorist wunderwaffe is overblown as well:

"This isn't to say we don't believe in safety procedures," Paul said. "But I think I feel less safe when we're doing these invasive exams on a 6-year-old. It makes me think that you're clueless, that you think she's going to attack our country, and that you're not doing your research on the people who would attack our country."

Indeed.  Why are we spending time converting our airports into Mr. Rogers' land of Make Believe, where children are a threat and the good guys are the ones twisting our naughty bits?  And, perhaps as infuriating, why are we paying for it?

Filed Under: children, john pistole, rand paul, security theater, tsa

Tonight On Security Theater: After Hours Airport Antics Expose Security Tunnel Vision

from the pay-no-attention-to-the-men-beyond-the-checkpoint dept

We've written quite a bit, recently, about the more controversial actions of the TSA and their airport screening practices. And now there's a somewhat amusing story that demonstrates why many people think that doing things like groping little children -- and claiming that it's not only proper, but necessary -- is really just security theater. Two travelers, stranded at Dallas-Fort Worth airport, made the local news after filming themselves goofing around in the terminal, after hours. A DFW airport board member was not amused and vows that this kind of thing is "not going to happen again." However, this isn't the first time something like this has happened (though it might be a first at DFW), so it kind of makes you wonder why the security folks hadn't already taken steps to prevent this. Of course, it looks like these guys were just having fun, but doesn't it seem like a couple of guys wandering unchecked in a nearly empty terminal might be a bit more of a security risk than a toddler's underwear? Apparently, the experts don't think so:

Aviation security experts who have seen the video say it doesn’t show any major security concerns because the two guys were ticketed passengers who had already been screened by the TSA.

Hmm, so, the fact that they were "ticketed" and "already screened" means that there's nothing that they could have gotten their hands on, as they made their way through the terminal (at one point, entering the kitchen of a restaurant), that might pose a threat to other travelers? While I don't think anyone should be freaking out about these incidents, they do seem to lend credence to the idea that many of the actions taken by the TSA are just for show, while obvious security holes are left wide open. They'll go out of their way to make sure a baby isn't the next underwear bomber, but can't even send someone to remind some marauding men to stick to the designated passenger areas and quit messing with airport property? Good show.

Filed Under: airports, security, security theater, tsa

Ink Toner Banned On Passenger Flights, As Security Theater Steps Up A Notch

from the not-even-in-a-clear-baggie? dept

It appears that security theater has stepped up a notch. Following the recent bombing attempts that used ink toner cartridges to hide bombs, the US is now banning ink toner on passenger flights. They're also blocking any cargo aircraft flights from Somalia and Yemen. While you can understand why they're doing this, as with nearly all responses to air travel threats, it looks like the US is taking a rather blunt sledgehammer to any threat they hear about.

Filed Under: ink toner, security, security theater, tsa