TSA FOIA Request: How To, PLUS Pics/Name/Address/Ph# of Abusive TSM

Discussion in 'Aviation Passenger Security in the USA' started by Affection, Sep 19, 2011.

  1. Affection

    Affection Original Member

    I posted the FOIA documents I'm using to get the security camera feeds from my incident at FLL on my blog, along with some details of the process. I was assigned claim number TSA11-0859, which makes me assume that I was the 859th request of the year -- far too low. Hopefully this will inspire more people to get the documents they need:

    http://tsaoutofourpants.wordpress.c...ernment-and-not-take-any-(expletive deleted)/

    Also, for naming & shaming purposes, I found out the identity (home address and phone number to the best of my ability based on Internet research) of the TSM who unlawfully detained me and told me that I would be forcibly searched, along with a picture his wife posted on Facebook:


    Transportation Security Manager Alejandro Chamizo
    (address removed by OP)
    (phone removed by OP)

  2. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    wow. good work Jon. Make the b*st*rds pay. I wish it had been you that got strip searched on that Frontier flight....meant in a complimentary way of course...
  3. Affection

    Affection Original Member

    Almost forgot, you guys also get my FTCA claim within those documents. Awesome to have if you're planning on suing the federal government!

  4. Affection

    Affection Original Member

    lol... most interesting compliment I've received in a long time ;) But thanks!

  5. Cartoon Peril

    Cartoon Peril Original Member

    I don't think this is a good idea. I'm very uncomfortable with this, and I think you should remove the personal identification information.
    DeafBlonde likes this.
  6. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Names and addresses are fine, I even post such things myself from time to time. Section 230 makes Jon responsible for what he posts. As long as it's factual, he should not have any repercussions from it.

    Copyrighted material is another matter, but facts (e.g. names, addresses, phone numbers) are not subject to copyright.
  7. myadvice

    myadvice Original Member

    I have no ethical or moral dilemmas with people posting the name, work address, work email, work telephone numbers or even the salaries of any government employee. Posting ones home address and phone number, and pictures of their families is where things cross the line because it tends to snag the family members of the individuals involved, even though those family members have done nothing wrong.
  8. Lisa Simeone

    Lisa Simeone Original Member

    Rugape and Cartoon Peril like this.
  9. barbell

    barbell Coach Coach

    Thanks for posting this, Jon.

    I am in the midst of a very similar FOIA uh "situation" myself. I swear TSA creates far more problems than they solve at every level.

    My favorite part?

    Place of birth: none of your business

  10. Bart

    Bart Original Member

    I hope this doesn't turn out bad. Reminds me of online stalking. I think some of you folks carry this thing too far.
    Rugape, myadvice and Cartoon Peril like this.
  11. Cartoon Peril

    Cartoon Peril Original Member

    I agree with Bart. (Am I really saying this?)

    Bottom line for me is that I don't have to blog here and I'm not going to if personal information such as home addresses and telephone numbers are posted of anyone.
    Rugape likes this.
  12. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

    Then we agree on something. I think the TSA takes everything they do too far. In the wrong direction, even.
  13. Cartoon Peril

    Cartoon Peril Original Member

    I completely agree, and let's look at it from a political point of view. Posting of such information may forfeit public support. So it shouldn't be done.
    Elizabeth Conley likes this.
  14. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

    Agreed. Publicly posting personal information of TSA or other government employees will make it too easy for people to find them to offer bribes, too.
    DeafBlonde likes this.
  15. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    I think a picture of the culprit sans wife and family (after all, they aren't responsible for this guy's actions) is ok. Of course, if you link to something he's made available to just everyone on the web, as is evidently the case here, this seems a bit self-inflicted.
    Maybe instead of the precise street address, you could say "on the 2000 block of W. 182.
    Elizabeth Conley likes this.
  16. Bart

    Bart Original Member

    This "identity" is based on the OP's own self-admitted questionable internet skills. What if it's the wrong person? I think a line has been crossed.

    Place your bets.
  17. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

  18. myadvice

    myadvice Original Member

    Bart, when I was with local government, I had a nutcase maintain a web site full of half-truths and inuendo's against me and some of my colleagues. It was not fun. I also had to deal with aggrieved people on a regular basis. That wasn't fun either, but it goes with the territory. People can and do carry things too far, and I have already commented on why I think posting ones home address and phone number, and pictures of their families crosses the line.

    So while I agree with your post in general, I also think that it is hyperbole to insinuate that something bad might happen just because someone posted information that could easily be found in a phone book or other online sources.

    Edited to add: I see that you also raise a valid point about the posted information even being correct. I agree with you on that point as well. But I don't understand what you mean by "place your bets" .
  19. I haven't decided for sure how I feel about the personal info and picture, but do consider that Jon's own address is right there on his legal documents. He puts his own self out there for the cause in a big way.
  20. Affection

    Affection Original Member

    Some thoughts:

    1) Picture & Copyright -- Mike, I do believe my use of that photo here would meet the criteria for the fair use exception of federal copyright law, but it doesn't really matter, a link is just as good -- no problem.

    2) Picture Generally - The photo was posted publicly on the Internet by his wife. I didn't go to his house and start taking snapshots. If you don't want pictures of yourself on the Internet, a good way to start is by not posting them there.

    3) Address - Again, if you don't want your address on the Internet, getting yourself unlisted from the White Pages would probably be a good start. This is nothing that a few minutes of Google couldn't return to anyone interested. I can be reasonable sure of the accuracy due to the fact that the house was bought by a man with his name and a woman with the same name as the woman in the Facebook picture. The intent is not to harm or provoke others to harm (and I fully state that no one should take up violence against TSA employees), but rather to identify those complicit with violating our rights. You want to work with a company that molests children and the elderly all day, and then tell someone who opts-out that you're going to have them arrested and forcibly searched? Fine, but don't think you're going to do it anonymously. Maybe the fact that you will be known will deter you from violating others. And, indeed, I needed his home address: I have to have a lawsuit served there. ;)


Share This Page