Pixiq

Since November 4^th, when we posted our first experience with TSA’s new pat-down procedures (“The Airport Security Grope: Keep your hands off my equipment”), our commentary has been viewed more than 100,000 times, and we’ve seen lots of responses in a host of venues. We’ve been applauded as freedom-fighters, maligned as unAmerican, concurred with by civil libertarians on both ends of the political spectrum, equated with terrorists, told to “grow a pair” (this hurts George the most) and to “shut up” (this hurts Kathy the most). The responses from colleagues on these very pages have ranged from flippant (Bob Krist’s “You have the right to remain at home”), to angry (Paul Harcourt Davis’s comment), to tongue-in-cheek helpful advice such as “Next time, George, pack your Barbie Video Girl . . .” (Ellen Horovitz’s post, “Barbie Video Girl DOES Airport Security”).

 We’ve been through airport security on three more occasions since that post, and we’re not laughing, we’re still angry, and, unfortunately, our livelihoods depend on travel, so we can’t just stay home. Most important, even with all this security ramp-up, we’re still not feeling all that secure about the way TSA does its job.

 The media frenzy that followed our first post, and those of others, was answered on November 15^th by Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano in a USA Today editorial (“Napolitano: Scanners are safe, pat-downs discreet” http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-11-15-column15_ST1_N.htm). We were disappointed in the response. The Secretary’s assertions as to the safety and privacy of scanners have been contested and protested by scientists across the country. Her own experts say their research has been mis-stated by TSA. And the necessity and efficacy of “enhanced” pat-down procedures continues to be a gross denial of our Constitutional rights to privacy and unwarranted search. Once again, the Secretary cites the 2009 Christmas Day Underpants Bomber as motivation for the groin checks, when in Senate Hearings in January 2010 she laid the blame on flawed analysis of intelligence that should have put Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab on the No-Fly List.

 Perhaps what galls us the most about Secretary Napolitano’s essay is her gratuitous advice to those with “hidden” medical devices: “Bring it to the officer’s attention before screening. We’ll be better able to help expedite your screening that way.” Frankly, there once was some truth to the Secretary’s statement. For the last five years, prior to entering the metal detector, George has alerted the agent that he would set it off because of his metal knees. Before the institution of “enhanced” pat-downs this month, the ensuing scan with a metal-detecting wand and massage of the knees served to verify the existence and location of the metal in George’s body, and to eliminate the possibility of additional metal being carried on his person. It was relatively quick and impersonal, although we can imagine that an artificial hip joint might instigate more objectionable probing. Considering that everyone got the same fairly innocuous treatment, it seemed a reasonable and prudent procedure.

 But, as we observed in our previous post, the ramped-up security is unreasonably invasive and hardly prudent. Last Monday we flew from San Diego International Airport, which on the preceding Saturday had been the site of the now-famous “If you touch my junk I’ll have you arrested” incident with software engineer John Tyner. (We had to agree with Tyner’s premise that in any other environment, the enhanced pat-down rises to the level of sexual assault.) We knew the airport used body scanners in the security area, and we incorrectly assumed that every passenger was expected to pass through them. After all, this is America’s response to the Underpants Bomber, right? So we decided in advance that as part of our continuing national security research project, George would accept the scan, and that Kathy would refuse, thus initiating the female version of the “enhanced pat down.” But that’s not how it worked out.

 First, we walked through metal detectors. George and the detector announced his metal knees, and he was diverted to the scanner, where he did the dance and was released. We can only assume that the image verified that he does, indeed, have a pair. Kathy, not yet having metal body parts, did not set off the detector and was waved past the scanner. An extra search of George’s computer bag followed. While the familiar recording chided us to “Keep all your belongings in sight at all times,” the TSA agent took them away to run through the baggage X-ray again. In the twenty or so minutes we were in the security area, we did not see any other passengers either pass through the scanner nor receive a pat down, enhanced or otherwise. The metal detector remained the first line of defense, sorting (profiling) all of us senior citizens with “hidden medical devices” (some one million Americans each year receive joint replacements) into the category of terror suspect without rights. If another Underpants Bomber was in line, he/she was not detected that morning, and nothing about our experience made us feel any safer as we boarded the flight toward home.

 With all due respect, we wonder if Secretary Napolitano has ever been in an airport screening area. Since members of Congress (some of whom are very scary suspects indeed, you might have noticed) and high government officials are escorted around the screening area and not subjected to screening, they really don’t have a clue about what goes on in what The Atlantic’s travel expert Jeffrey Goldberg calls “the most dangerous places in America,” (see www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2010/10/the-most-dangerous-pla....

 According to a recent CNN poll, 81% of Americans don’t have any problems with the enhanced screening procedures. We figure they don’t fly much, or they don’t have medical conditions that require repeated affirmation. Or they, like President Obama, have never been subjected to the scanner or the pat down. Or maybe they do just stay home. But if you fly 100,000 miles a year to do your job, earn money, (and pay taxes to support agencies such as Homeland Security), staying home is not an option. Protesting the senseless violation of your rights, and those of other innocent people repeatedly harassed by airport security, is all that’s left.

 Here’s where you can add your voice and your experience:

 The American Civil Liberties Union is gathering specific detail about objectionable TSA experiences. See the website at https://secure.aclu.org/site/SPageServer?pagename=watchlist_survey&JServ...

 The TSA receives “compliments and complaints” on line at https://contact.tsa.dhs.gov/DynaForm.aspx?FormID=10.