It’s about giving away liberty for false security. “Americans have yet to make any really major sacrifices for their security,” says professor.
AP
Inverted Body Scanner Image
An airport traveler who famously resisted a full-body scan and groin check with the words “If you touch my junk, I’ll have you arrested” has become an Internet sensation, tapping into rising frustration over increasingly invasive searches.
John Tyner’s online account — complete with cell-phone video of the encounter — has helped fuel a campaign urging travelers to decline the body scans next week during the busiest travel day of the year.
It also raised questions about the complaints: Are Americans standing up to government overreach or simply whining about the inconvenience of air travel while insisting on full protection from terrorists?
“I think Americans, in their hearts, still feel airport security is just a big show — form over substance,” said Joseph Schwieterman, a Chicago-based transportation expert. “So they’re impatient with strategies they feel are just there to placate political demands rather the genuine security threats.”
Many of the people who have little tolerance for airport security are the same ones who want the government to work aggressively to prevent terrorist attacks, Schwieterman said.
Long-simmering annoyance among passengers and even plane crews has recently risen to new heights with wider use of full-body scanners, which show a traveler’s physical contours on a computer in a private room removed from security checkpoints. Faces are never shown, and the person’s identity is supposedly not known to the screener reviewing the images.
About 300 of the scanners are in use at 60 U.S. airports. The Transportation Security Administration hopes to deploy approximately 500 units by the end of the year.
Not all travelers are selected to go through the scanners, but the TSA requires people who decline to submit to pat-downs that include checks of the inside of their thighs and buttocks. Top federal officials insist the procedures are safe and necessary to ward off terror attacks.
“It’s all about security,” Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said. “It’s all about everybody recognizing their role.”
Tyner, a 31-year-old software engineer from Oceanside, Calif., insisted he was not looking for notoriety when he confronted TSA agents last weekend at the San Diego airport.
“I don’t think I did anything heroic,” he said in a telephone interview Tuesday. “I stood up for what I thought was right.”
After Tyner declined to go through the full-body scanner, he refused to submit to a groin check as part of a pat-down. He was thrown out of the airport Saturday after being threatened with a fine and lawsuit.
His confrontation spawned online sales of T-shirts, bumper stickers, hats and even underwear emblazoned with the words, “Don’t Touch My Junk!”
But he does not advocate travelers following his lead, saying he appreciates that most people cannot afford to put expensive trips at risk.
“But people ought to do what their consciences say they should do,” he said. “If civil disobedience is a way they think would work, I think they should do it.”
TSA Persecuting Opt-outs
Tyner’s one-man protest has inspired other efforts, including an online campaign urging air travelers to refuse body scans in a “National Opt-Out Day” the day before Thanksgiving, one of the year’s busiest travel days.
Brian Sodergren, 33, of Ashburn, Va., said he put up the site a week ago. Interest spiked after Tyner’s video went viral.
“This issue has picked up steam more than I ever would have imagined,” said Sodergren, who works in the health care industry. “The outpouring has been huge.”
Sodergren stops short of urging people to refuse both the scanner and pat-down.
“The proper reaction isn’t walking away and subjecting yourself to penalties,” he said Tuesday. “The proper response is to write to your lawmakers and get the law changed.”
But compared to security in some other countries, Schwieterman argued, procedures in the U.S. are far from intrusive.
In Israel, where Palestinians attacked planes in the 1970s, passengers face tough questioning and multiple inspections. Single women who are not Israeli citizens are sometimes inspected more intensely because militants have tried to use them as couriers.
“Americans have yet to make any really major sacrifices for their security,” said Schwieterman, a professor at DePaul University in Chicago. “Pat-downs and scanners are minimally evasive — and there’s even resistance to this, just 15 seconds of awkwardness.”
TSA Hit with Lawsuits as resistance against scanners grows
A woman whose flight was targeted by a Nigerian man suspected of carrying explosives in his underwear said she believes all security measures, including full-body scanners, should be considered to curb threats.
“People shouldn’t be too much concerned about their privacy because this is a life-and-death matter,” said 55-year-old Shama Chopra of Montreal, who was traveling from Amsterdam to Detroit on Christmas Day of last year. “We should be discussing all security.”
But it’s not just passengers putting up resistance. Some airline pilots are pushing back, too.
“I would say that pilots are beyond fed up,” said Tom Walsh, a pilot and sometime aviation security consultant. “The TSA is wasting valuable time and money searching the crew, who are not a threat.”
One of the nation’s most celebrated pilots, Capt. Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger, has also detected the growing unease.
“The fundamental reason is that airline pilots are already the last line of defense for anyone who poses a threat to the airplane,” said the soft-spoken Sullenberger, who successfully ditched his US Airways plane in the Hudson River last year after it struck birds during takeoff. “We are — and would like to be considered — trusted partners in that important security mission.”
At least one pilots union, the U.S. Airline Pilots Association, has issued new instructions to members to call in sick and not board flights if, after a pat-down, they are too upset to fly.
“If the pilot feels the groping is too much and they are stressed out — they are obliged not to fly,” union spokesman James Ray said. He insisted the new instruction is not meant as a protest, saying it complies with rules that pilots don’t fly if they feel they are not fit.
Despite the concerns about pat-downs, Ray said, the union recommends pilots avoid going through scanners out of concern that cumulative effects of low radiation could be harmful.
But Ray agreed that if enough pilots and travelers opt out of body scans, delays could result, especially if there aren’t enough TSA screeners to conduct the more time-consuming pat-downs.
From now on, Tyner said, his protest of choice will be more straightforward: Whenever he can, he simply won’t fly. He said that should be practical option because most of the friends and relatives he visits are in the California area.
“I would suggest other people also take the train, bus or car instead of a plane,” he said. “Take a trip and enjoy the countryside.”
Related Articles:
Naked body scanner images leaked online
TSA harasses children
In the report entitled Shared Vision or Myopia: The Politics of Perimeter Security and Economic Competitiveness, former Foreign Service officer Gar Pardy warns that a perimeter security deal with the U.S. could sacrifice Canadians privacy while doing nothing to improve the flow of trade across the border. In his report, Pardy reveals that “The concessions the Americans want is the transfer of enormous amounts of information about Canadians and others about whom Canada collects information. It is evident that to meet such expectations Canadian privacy laws will need to be ignored, violated or weakened.” He also stated that, “The Shared Vision approach essentially promotes the idea that in order to restore the status quo ante implicit in the free trade agreements there have to be large political concessions by Canada that will satisfy American security concerns.” This could explain the Conservative government’s announcement that it will reintroduce anti-terrorism measures which have expired and are on par with sections of the liberty-stripping U.S. Patriot Act. The move is tied to plans for a security perimeter and is aimed more at satisfying U.S. fears.
