Kicked out of EWR! The Double Opt-Out, Part II

Discussion in 'Aviation Passenger Security in the USA' started by Affection, Nov 1, 2011.

  1. Affection

    Affection Original Member

    phoebepontiac and jtodd like this.
  2. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    Jon, was this an ATR, and if so, what's your objection to it? other than the obscene posture, the gratuitous copping of a feel for most pax afterward, etc...
    You are not going to be able to fly much, it looks like.
     
  3. Lisa Simeone

    Lisa Simeone Original Member

    I sympathize with anyone who is forced to fly for work. I would've lost my job (longer before I just did!:)) if I still had to fly for work, because I would've refused to submit to these abuses. The fact that many people simply cannot afford, especially in this economy, to take a stand, even if they want to, just makes it worse. They are indeed prisoners.
     
    Fisher1949 likes this.
  4. FetePerfection

    FetePerfection Founding Member Coach

    Happy to hear there were no threats of a "failure-to-complete-screening" fine which bodes well for the future. I do believe you are a game changer Jon and thank you for your efforts.
     
  5. CelticWhisper

    CelticWhisper Founding Member

    Seconded.

    (Having re-read the following, I fear that in some places it comes across as though I were shaking a finger at Nachtnebel, "shame on you for considering ATR acceptable." Just wanted to say that that isn't the case - I'm undercaffeinated and was just trying to articulate my objection to even the "less offensive" (as TSA would have us think) ATR. We're cool, nacht. No hostility here.)

    Also, with regard to ATR objections, I cannot speak for Jon but my own objections are the fact that MMW radiation may still have deleterious effects on DNA, the fact that it's still a 4th-amendment violation, and frankly, the fact that TSA wants it too much. The way I see it, these smurf-clerks have been engaged in one rights-trampling after another and it's the duty of any freedom-loving citizen to refuse as much as possible to give the smurf-clerks what they want. We must make their lives miserable because we can, for the sake of always pushing back. Governments encroach upon freedom - it's in their nature - and no matter how light-handed, liberal (or even libertarian), and minimal a government may be at its inception, it will always tend toward increasing its own power. At that point it's not even about TSA specifically anymore. It's about giving the government, and in this case a particularly noxious arm of the government, a constant and ubiquitous reminder that the people can and will always say "NO."

    Granted, if some mysterious, cosmic causal force were to compel me to go through some kind of nude-o-scope and I had to choose between BKSX and ATR'd MMW, no third option, no way around, not even the choice to stop existing (because mysterious, cosmic causal forces are assholes like that) I'd choose the ATR'd MMW. It's definitely preferable to Cap'n Chertoff's Cancer Cornucopia. However, as we're (thankfully) not under the influence of Lovecraftian outer gods pushing us through scanners for the lulz, we do have the ability to refuse and I think refusal should always be put forth when smurf-clerks try to violate our rights.
     
    Fisher1949, Lisa Simeone and Caradoc like this.
  6. RB

    RB Founding Member

    I'm mixed on this subject. I personally don't think the MMW presents any health issues. RadioGirl has been pretty convincing on that point. With ATR my objection to the "pervert in the booth" is satisfied although I suspect the perv is still watching the images. I object to the search, either grope down or Virtual Strip, because I think it exceeds the scope of TSA's mandate for using the least intrusive means possible. TSA has not complied with standing regulations on obtaining public comment before using this type of equipment so I don't think we should give any quarter.
     
  7. jackonferry

    jackonferry Original Member

    In addition to the other objections noted, I'll add that I see no point in "taking" ATR'd MMW because chances are you are going to get a patdown anyway.
     
  8. gojirasan

    gojirasan Original Member

    You are seriously my hero. I especially loved this part:
    Nevertheless, for the mmw with ATR I would have gone through the scanner and only double opted out if they wanted to pat me down afterward. My main objection to the scanners is the strip search aspect of them and those objections have been appeased enough that it wouldn't be worth it for me to miss a flight over it. As far as safety I don't believe the 30 Ghz scanners are any more dangerous than the ubiquitous police radar that is pointed at your head whenever you drive down a road in the US. And even though I don't like it, police radar doesn't stop me from driving.
     
  9. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    How are you going to double opt out after you've gone through the scanner?
     
  10. gojirasan

    gojirasan Original Member

    I would be 'opting out' of the patdown. Not the scanner. But I guess you have a point. It's not really a double opt-out anymore. Just a single opt-out.
     
  11. Fisher1949

    Fisher1949 Original Member Coach

    Great job Jon! Your doing the front line fighting that many others only wish they could do.

    Pretty crappy about AA with the rebook, but sadly not surprising. I understand that these are businesses and must make a profit but the entire travel experience has become so hostile and predatory in the last decade I'm surprised anyone would fly unless it was absolutely necessary.

    TSA is the worst offender but the airlines are complicit and the hotels and car rental outlets have followed suit. Just this week I found that Budget would charge a days rental for a car if I didn't show or cancel the reservation 24 hours in advance. That was a new one on me and wasn't there a year ago.

    I guess its a matter of perspective and since I've been flying since the early 80's my standards were developed in that era so today's air travel environment seems to me like Soviet era Aeroflot on a bad day. Maybe I shouldn't be surprised when co-worker say their travel experience was 'just fine".
     
  12. Fisher1949

    Fisher1949 Original Member Coach

    WRT to the supposedly "safe" MMW scanner, this seems to be a popular myth with the media lately. While their rise takes business away from Chetoff's RapeScan BKSX units, which is good, there is no proof that the MMW is any safer or any more dangerous than the x-ray scanners. Like many products and devices that use new technology, they are often consider safe, sometimes for decades, until the cumulative effect of using them is fully known.

    There was a diet pill in France in the 1960's that was considered safe and effective in testing. It work by "uncoupling" a cellular biochemical process called oxidative phosphorylation. People began using it and after a year doctors realized that stopping use of the pill didn't restore the process. The users eventually all died from starvation, unable to metabolize the food they ate.

    There is a long list of supposedly safe products that are now banned after people began dying from them an examples are all around us. There are still asbestos claims being filed and ads on televisions by asbestos tort lawyers decades after that "safe" product was banned.

    Being told that the MMW scanner are safe by the same Government that said the same thing about above ground nuclear testing and Agent Orange is hardly reassuring.

    Both systems need to be banned as a primary screening device as originally proposed and further, fully independent studies conducted.
     
  13. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    As one who basks in the continuous glow of 10-24 GHz radiation from process radar units in my cubicle & lab, I'm not going to worry too much about it.,

    The major issues are power levels (ours run on a few mA at < 32V). I'm sure the Nude-O-Scopes consume & radiate a lot more than my toys. The question is, at what point does it become harmful, and when it does become harmful, what are the effects? Those questions do need to be researched.

    The other issue is privacy. Lacking probable cause, what's under my clothes is none of anyone's business.
     
    Lisa Simeone and KrazyKat like this.
  14. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    suppose the data from WTMD *could* be rendered into an image of your body, but in fact was not so rendered and instead only generates an alarm if finding sufficient metal. Isn't this analogous to MMW data in the ATR machines, which could be rendered as an image, but in fact is not, in all likelihood. So, on that count, I'm not bothered by the scan per se. I am bothered by the posture it requires, legs spread hands up like a perp. There is a huge message being sent by that, IMO a deliberate message, and I'm inclined to opt out just on that.

    But it is only a piece of the regime TSA has put in place, the others being the false-positive generating ETD swabs, the gestapo hustle toward the privates room and the crotch massage, the feelups of random pax at the checkpoint, and the random feelups at the gate, all imparting the message to us that they can do just about whatever they want when they want. That we lose every vestige of 4th amendment protections by going to the airport, that we lose every expectation of civilized behavior from these viscious *ssholes, that this is the equivalent to entering a prison as an inmate. The TSA has turned the flying experience into a h*ll . No shock that pax numbers are down.
    It is my hope that before this is all over, John Pistole is brought to justice for what he has done.
     
    Lisa Simeone, KrazyKat and barbell like this.
  15. CelticWhisper

    CelticWhisper Founding Member

    First off, I'm 100% in agreement about the "perp pose" they want. They can shove that (expletive deleted), sideways.

    As for whether or not ATR'd MMW scans are rendered into an image, I recall hearing an argument that they would have to be in order to guarantee accuracy of ATR. Granted, this may be only in test scenarios but it raises the question of what happens if ATR detects a threat - would they save the image as evidence for any criminal proceedings? Would they save it for ATR calibration purposes? Not expecting you to be able to answer these (after all, who can honestly say with Reichskommissar Pistole's hard-on for Secret Squirrel Inanity?) but they're sufficiently worrisome to ponder. We know for a fact that TSA lies about image-retention. My own dear Senator Durbin voted in favor of the bill to ban dissemination of saved images - a bill which should have been entirely superfluous if TSA were telling the truth about the NoS not being storage-enabled in the first place. ATR is a clear step forward in terms of privacy but I just worry that it isn't enough. Ruining the fun of the TSA peep-creep watching the NoS monitor is good, but it's a hollow victory if the raw image can still be conjured up somewhere.

    Speaking reasonably, I'm inclined to agree that they wouldn't be saving ATR images, even if only out of fear of another PR catastrophe. Cthulhu knows they've certainly had enough of those for one year. However, since we don't know for certain and we haven't had Reichsminister Napolitano or Reichskommissar Pistole swear under oath that they don't, I figure we can use it as another means of casting doubt upon TSA procedure when talking to elected officials. "But Senator, how can We The People know for certain that our privacy rights are being respected? Better to be sure, better to just ban all body-scanners and be done with it."

    Let TSA's tight-lipped reticence be the noose that hangs them.
     
    Lisa Simeone likes this.
  16. RB

    RB Founding Member

    I wouldn't believe either Nappy or Pissy under oath or not. Those two are just evil!
     
  17. Affection

    Affection Original Member

    Just a quick update: AA, two months later, refunded my original flight in the form of a voucher. I'm continuing to press them to make this a standard practice in instances of TSA abuse, rather than as a one-time courtesy.

    --Jon
     
  18. jtodd

    jtodd Original Member

    Good work. I've been trying to get a few of my rewards programs to keep and honor my points for when/if I'm able to travel again. So far no luck, but their loss as I just just save my money.
     

Share This Page