Now, don't act surprised, but the maintenance records for the TSA's full-body scanners show tremendously higher radiation levels than originally reported.
The TSA says the maintenance reports are wrong. That may be so, but what can we believe? Are the reports actually wrong, or is the TSA exposing the public to much higher levels of radiation than had been previously admitted? Should we trust the official maintenance documents, or the word of the TSA? If the maintenance reports are truly flawed, how can we trust any other documents the TSA provides?
Read the full USA Today article here.
"TSA to Retest Airport Body Scanners for Radiation"
March 12, 2011
March 2, 2011
TSA Misses Three Boxcutters at JFK Airport
The Transportation Security Administration has managed to publicly embarrass themselves yet again. The TSA let, New Jersey man, Eusebio D. Peraltalajara pass through security with boxcutters in his carryon luggage and board JetBlue Flight 837 to Santiago, Dominican Republic on February 26, 2011.
As Peraltalajara was stowing his bag, he accidentally discovered the boxcutters. To Peraltalajara's credit, he immediately notified the JetBlue staff. The plane was evacuated, the plane was searched, the passengers were re-screened, etc. Peraltalajara was not charged with any crime, and the incompetent TSA screeners are supposedly being disciplined and retrained.
Don't people remember that al-Qeada managed to pull off the most horrific act of terrorism in American history using several boxcutters? If the TSA is not capable of keeping boxcutters off of the planes, what good are they? This is not nearly the first such incident. TSA screeners are constantly failing tests where undercover agents attempt to sneak all sorts of contraband onto the planes. Fake bombs, guns, knives, etc. are making it onto the planes. The security failures are staggering.
The most irritating thing about all of this is that the TSA is so busy virtually gazing at our naked bodies with scanners and poking around in our crotches that they do not have enough time to actually look for any weapons in the luggage. So not only are we having our privacy and dignity violated by the TSA, they are doing very little to keep us safer.
As Peraltalajara was stowing his bag, he accidentally discovered the boxcutters. To Peraltalajara's credit, he immediately notified the JetBlue staff. The plane was evacuated, the plane was searched, the passengers were re-screened, etc. Peraltalajara was not charged with any crime, and the incompetent TSA screeners are supposedly being disciplined and retrained.
Don't people remember that al-Qeada managed to pull off the most horrific act of terrorism in American history using several boxcutters? If the TSA is not capable of keeping boxcutters off of the planes, what good are they? This is not nearly the first such incident. TSA screeners are constantly failing tests where undercover agents attempt to sneak all sorts of contraband onto the planes. Fake bombs, guns, knives, etc. are making it onto the planes. The security failures are staggering.
The most irritating thing about all of this is that the TSA is so busy virtually gazing at our naked bodies with scanners and poking around in our crotches that they do not have enough time to actually look for any weapons in the luggage. So not only are we having our privacy and dignity violated by the TSA, they are doing very little to keep us safer.
February 2, 2011
Sports Domains Seized by Federal Government
Just in case you are not already freaked out enough by the increasing reach of the United States federal government, Immigration and Customs Enforcement has just seized some more Web domains without a trial for allegedly facilitating access to pirated streaming sports content.
Given the way the Egyptian government has abused it's power by shutting down the nation's Internet as a measure to control civil unrest, American citizens should be alarmed by how freely the United States government is seizing domains from companies it suspects are breaking the law.
The US government has already seized domains of companies it suspects of selling counterfeit merchandise. Now it is going after streaming sport content. What will be next? If the United States government is willing to ignore due process to seize domains under these circumstances, where will they draw the line? We are only a few steps away from the seizure of Web sites critical of the government and politicians that ICE determine might be breaking some law.
Here is a list of the Web sites seized by the US government on February 2, 2011.
atdhe.net
channelsurfing.net
firstrow.net
hq-streams.com
hq-streams.net
ilemi.com
iilemi.com
iilemii.com
rojadirecta.com
rojadirecta.org
Just to demonstrate how ridiculous and ineffective all of this is, ATDHE.net is already back online as ATDHE.me.
Given the way the Egyptian government has abused it's power by shutting down the nation's Internet as a measure to control civil unrest, American citizens should be alarmed by how freely the United States government is seizing domains from companies it suspects are breaking the law.
The US government has already seized domains of companies it suspects of selling counterfeit merchandise. Now it is going after streaming sport content. What will be next? If the United States government is willing to ignore due process to seize domains under these circumstances, where will they draw the line? We are only a few steps away from the seizure of Web sites critical of the government and politicians that ICE determine might be breaking some law.
Here is a list of the Web sites seized by the US government on February 2, 2011.
atdhe.net
channelsurfing.net
firstrow.net
hq-streams.com
hq-streams.net
ilemi.com
iilemi.com
iilemii.com
rojadirecta.com
rojadirecta.org
Just to demonstrate how ridiculous and ineffective all of this is, ATDHE.net is already back online as ATDHE.me.
January 13, 2011
TSA Pays Settlement for Exposing Lynsie Murley's Breasts
Lynsie Murley, an attractive young Amarillo woman, is another brave individual standing up for the civil rights and dignity of innocent travelers. Murley sued the Transportation Security Administration for an incident in which the TSA pulled down her blouse and publicly exposed her breasts during a pat-down at Texas' Corpus Christi airport in March of 2008.
After the humiliating incident, TSA workers joked with her about it. One TSA worker, who had missed the incident, told Murley he was sorry he had missed the event and would have to watch it later on security camera footage.
Rather than face the lawsuit, the TSA paid off the woman in a settlement. Apparently, the amount was nominal. According to the lawyer, the settlement was "way less" than $100,000.
Regardless of the cash amount, Lynsie Murley got a little justice out of the TSA. Most importantly, Lynsie Murley did not passively take the abuse TSA is routinely dishing out to innocent citizens. If more people stood up to the TSA, this out-of-control agency would not be tormenting innocent people so flagrantly.
If the TSA abuses you, consider suing. You might get a little money. You might get a little justice. You might even help preserve the civil rights of other people.
What does the TSA care? They get to feel you up, and when you sue, they will pay you off with taxpayer dollars. Think of it as a groping lottery you get to play every time you try to get on a plane.
After the humiliating incident, TSA workers joked with her about it. One TSA worker, who had missed the incident, told Murley he was sorry he had missed the event and would have to watch it later on security camera footage.
Rather than face the lawsuit, the TSA paid off the woman in a settlement. Apparently, the amount was nominal. According to the lawyer, the settlement was "way less" than $100,000.
Regardless of the cash amount, Lynsie Murley got a little justice out of the TSA. Most importantly, Lynsie Murley did not passively take the abuse TSA is routinely dishing out to innocent citizens. If more people stood up to the TSA, this out-of-control agency would not be tormenting innocent people so flagrantly.
If the TSA abuses you, consider suing. You might get a little money. You might get a little justice. You might even help preserve the civil rights of other people.
What does the TSA care? They get to feel you up, and when you sue, they will pay you off with taxpayer dollars. Think of it as a groping lottery you get to play every time you try to get on a plane.
January 9, 2011
Obama Wants Internet ID for Americans
Obama is planning to give the U.S. Commerce Department authority over a system to establish unique Internet identities for people. The National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace is a plan to create a system that will allow participants to establish who they are online through the use of some sort of identification feature. There are many systems that would allow for this identification, such as digital passcode generators, hardware keys, biometric scanners, RFID cards, voice recognition, etc.
The Obama administration is selling this as something that is voluntary and will be driven by the private sector, but the potential for future abuses must be recognized. Certainly, it would be convenient to have a single and secure Internet ID that you could use to access all of your various Internet-based accounts, but this could make you extremely vulnerable to having your entire online life hijacked in one single move.
People are probably not going to feel terribly threatened by this Internet ID program at first. We are going to be told it is for our protection, and it is completely voluntary, but that is not the way things are going to work out in reality.
If this Internet ID program takes hold, here is what is could happen step-by-step.
1) The Internet ID will be introduced. Banks will offer it to clients. People will use it and enjoy the convenience and feeling of security.
2) After a while, some banks will require users to have an Internet ID in order to access their accounts online.
3) Internet IDs will be required by all major banks for online access.
4) Mortgage companies and credit card companies will require customers to use the Internet ID system online.
5) Credit card companies will require the Internet ID be used for online purchases.
6) After several years, Internet IDs will be commonplace. Internet users may even be required to have Internet IDs to use free resources such as Web-based email accounts, social networking sites, blogging sites, etc.
Eventually, what will happen is that many Americans will have all or most of their online lives under one single Internet ID, effectively placing people's online lives under one universal account. It will be very convenient for people. People will just be able to log onto their computers and do everything without the need to worry about passwords and screen names.
Not only will this be convenient for legitimate users, it also going to be very convenient for identity thieves. We are always told systems are hack-proof, but we often find out later some hacker beat the security. Nothing is hack-proof. Right now, it is really a headache if an identity thief steals your credit card number or manages to hack your email account. Now, imagine if a hacker got hold of your Internet ID and was suddenly able to access every single one of your online accounts. Imagine if a thief had access to your bank accounts, credit cards, mortgage, driver license, cell phone, email accounts, Facebook account, Amazon account, and everything else you have. Your online life would suddenly be in the hands of someone else, and you would have very few resources available to you to correct the problem. In cyberspace, you would virtually cease to be your virtual self.
Here is an even scarier thought. Imagine if the you had your entire online life under a single Internet ID, and you had some dispute with the government. What if your tax return got lost in the mail? Imagine how easy it would be for the IRS to get hold of your Internet ID information and freeze all of your accounts until the matter was resolved. What if the Department of Homeland Security mistakenly identified you as a security threat and just decided to shut off your access to all of your online accounts during an investigation?
The potentials for abuse are tremendous. If you use the Internet ID system, know that you will be placing all of your virtual eggs in one basket. If a thief or the government decides to come along and take your basket, where is that going to leave you?
The Obama administration is selling this as something that is voluntary and will be driven by the private sector, but the potential for future abuses must be recognized. Certainly, it would be convenient to have a single and secure Internet ID that you could use to access all of your various Internet-based accounts, but this could make you extremely vulnerable to having your entire online life hijacked in one single move.
People are probably not going to feel terribly threatened by this Internet ID program at first. We are going to be told it is for our protection, and it is completely voluntary, but that is not the way things are going to work out in reality.
If this Internet ID program takes hold, here is what is could happen step-by-step.
1) The Internet ID will be introduced. Banks will offer it to clients. People will use it and enjoy the convenience and feeling of security.
2) After a while, some banks will require users to have an Internet ID in order to access their accounts online.
3) Internet IDs will be required by all major banks for online access.
4) Mortgage companies and credit card companies will require customers to use the Internet ID system online.
5) Credit card companies will require the Internet ID be used for online purchases.
6) After several years, Internet IDs will be commonplace. Internet users may even be required to have Internet IDs to use free resources such as Web-based email accounts, social networking sites, blogging sites, etc.
Eventually, what will happen is that many Americans will have all or most of their online lives under one single Internet ID, effectively placing people's online lives under one universal account. It will be very convenient for people. People will just be able to log onto their computers and do everything without the need to worry about passwords and screen names.
Not only will this be convenient for legitimate users, it also going to be very convenient for identity thieves. We are always told systems are hack-proof, but we often find out later some hacker beat the security. Nothing is hack-proof. Right now, it is really a headache if an identity thief steals your credit card number or manages to hack your email account. Now, imagine if a hacker got hold of your Internet ID and was suddenly able to access every single one of your online accounts. Imagine if a thief had access to your bank accounts, credit cards, mortgage, driver license, cell phone, email accounts, Facebook account, Amazon account, and everything else you have. Your online life would suddenly be in the hands of someone else, and you would have very few resources available to you to correct the problem. In cyberspace, you would virtually cease to be your virtual self.
Here is an even scarier thought. Imagine if the you had your entire online life under a single Internet ID, and you had some dispute with the government. What if your tax return got lost in the mail? Imagine how easy it would be for the IRS to get hold of your Internet ID information and freeze all of your accounts until the matter was resolved. What if the Department of Homeland Security mistakenly identified you as a security threat and just decided to shut off your access to all of your online accounts during an investigation?
The potentials for abuse are tremendous. If you use the Internet ID system, know that you will be placing all of your virtual eggs in one basket. If a thief or the government decides to come along and take your basket, where is that going to leave you?
December 25, 2010
TSA Gate Rape Resistance Gets Claire Hirschkind Arrested
On December 22, 2010, Claire Hirschkind, a 56-year-old rape victim was arrested at Austin-Bergstrom Airport in Texas after refusing a TSA pat-down. Claire Hirschkind could not pass through the full-body scanner due to safety concerns about a pacemaker-type device imbedded in her chest.
Hirschkind told a female TSA agent not to touch her breasts during the pat-down. The TSA agent insisted she would touch the rape victim's breasts. When Hirschkind refused to have her breasts touched by the federal employee, she was forced to the ground and arrested.
The story probably has a few more details that will certainly add to the reasons behind this woman being pushed to the ground. Logic says there must have been some sort of additional resistance, but this is the TSA, so logic is not necessarily applicable. Thee fact remains, however, that an innocent, law-abiding rape survivor with a pacemaker-type device was humiliated, inconvenienced, and tormented because she did not want a federal employee to touch her breasts.
How many more places can you imagine this going on? Imagine trying to walk into Grand Central Station and an NYPD cop stops you and says, "I am going to have to feel your breasts and crotch before I let you in the building."
Don't worry. This sort of thing will not be happening for at least another few weeks. If it makes us feel a little safer, it's perfectly okay, right?
Hirschkind told a female TSA agent not to touch her breasts during the pat-down. The TSA agent insisted she would touch the rape victim's breasts. When Hirschkind refused to have her breasts touched by the federal employee, she was forced to the ground and arrested.
The story probably has a few more details that will certainly add to the reasons behind this woman being pushed to the ground. Logic says there must have been some sort of additional resistance, but this is the TSA, so logic is not necessarily applicable. Thee fact remains, however, that an innocent, law-abiding rape survivor with a pacemaker-type device was humiliated, inconvenienced, and tormented because she did not want a federal employee to touch her breasts.
How many more places can you imagine this going on? Imagine trying to walk into Grand Central Station and an NYPD cop stops you and says, "I am going to have to feel your breasts and crotch before I let you in the building."
Don't worry. This sort of thing will not be happening for at least another few weeks. If it makes us feel a little safer, it's perfectly okay, right?
December 24, 2010
Sacramento Whistleblower Pilot Being Intimidated
A Sacramento pilot who used YouTube to expose serious security problems regarding the TSA is being intimidated by federal and local law enforcement. Click here to read the story from NEWS10 ABC.
December 23, 2010
United States Government Will Use Mexico Violence to Expand Gun Control
As the drug cartels continue to war with the Mexican government, a group of innocent people have found themselves in the crosshairs. The governments of the United States and Mexico are claiming that many of the weapons used by the cartels (maybe 80%) are being smuggled into Mexico from America.
The governments are alleging United States citizens who are using their clean records to purchase guns and transfer them to traffickers who smuggle guns into Mexico. Of course, many of these guns end up being used in crimes.
As you may have guessed, the governments of the United States and Mexico have decided to fix this problem by infringing on the Second Amendment. These governments want to put more intensive controls and supervision on gun purchases by innocent Americans. The U.S. government could go after the smugglers, but they are choosing to cast a wide net and go after general gun purchasers. Those who legally purchase two or more guns in a five-day period and live near Mexico are being placed under special scrutiny.
Instead our rights being violated, why can't Mexico do more to control their borders? We in America, have to deal with all of those drugs and aliens pouring across our borders. Why can't Mexico handle their own business and keep the guns out?
By the way, Mexico keeps complaining about how their cops are outgunned by the cartels, but we keep seeing these videos of Mexican government employees, destroying AK-47s, AR-15s, etc. that were seized from the cartels. If the Mexican cops are so outgunned, why don't they just use the weapons they seize from the raids on cartels? Better yet, why don't the Mexican cops just capture those weapons at the border and use the guns while they are all shiny and new?
The solutions are pretty obvious. It is insane that law-abiding U.S. citizens should be asked to sacrifice their Constitutional rights to make things easier on cops in a foreign country.
The governments are alleging United States citizens who are using their clean records to purchase guns and transfer them to traffickers who smuggle guns into Mexico. Of course, many of these guns end up being used in crimes.
As you may have guessed, the governments of the United States and Mexico have decided to fix this problem by infringing on the Second Amendment. These governments want to put more intensive controls and supervision on gun purchases by innocent Americans. The U.S. government could go after the smugglers, but they are choosing to cast a wide net and go after general gun purchasers. Those who legally purchase two or more guns in a five-day period and live near Mexico are being placed under special scrutiny.
Instead our rights being violated, why can't Mexico do more to control their borders? We in America, have to deal with all of those drugs and aliens pouring across our borders. Why can't Mexico handle their own business and keep the guns out?
By the way, Mexico keeps complaining about how their cops are outgunned by the cartels, but we keep seeing these videos of Mexican government employees, destroying AK-47s, AR-15s, etc. that were seized from the cartels. If the Mexican cops are so outgunned, why don't they just use the weapons they seize from the raids on cartels? Better yet, why don't the Mexican cops just capture those weapons at the border and use the guns while they are all shiny and new?
The solutions are pretty obvious. It is insane that law-abiding U.S. citizens should be asked to sacrifice their Constitutional rights to make things easier on cops in a foreign country.
December 22, 2010
DC Metro Bag Searches Are Unconstitutional
On December 21, 2010, random bag searches began for those wishing to board the DC Metro system. Passengers are selected at random to undergo searches of their private property. Those who choose not to be searched are not allowed to board a train. This is unconstitutional, and here is why.
The DC Metro, like all public transportation, is funded by the taxpayers; therefore, the DC Metro is public property, which belongs to the taxpayers. Barring innocent taxpayers from public property without just cause is a violation of civil rights and a misuse of public property.
Those who have already surrendered their rights to the TSA in order to get on a plane will cynically reply, "This is no different from the airport. We have surrendered our rights there, so we should surrender them on the DC Metro."
This is a flawed argument. Commercial airplanes are private property. Taxpayers do not own the airplanes, but they do own the trains. Yes, it is wrong that innocent people get violated when attempting to board planes, but the plans are private property, so the owners of the planes do not have to allow people to board. The DC Metro trains are different. The taxpayers own the trains, and they are intended for public use, so the taxpayers have a right to ride the trains. Making people subject to searches before being allowed to board a DC Metro train is barely different than making people subject to searches before allowing them to walk down a public sidewalk.
The DC Metro, like all public transportation, is funded by the taxpayers; therefore, the DC Metro is public property, which belongs to the taxpayers. Barring innocent taxpayers from public property without just cause is a violation of civil rights and a misuse of public property.
Those who have already surrendered their rights to the TSA in order to get on a plane will cynically reply, "This is no different from the airport. We have surrendered our rights there, so we should surrender them on the DC Metro."
This is a flawed argument. Commercial airplanes are private property. Taxpayers do not own the airplanes, but they do own the trains. Yes, it is wrong that innocent people get violated when attempting to board planes, but the plans are private property, so the owners of the planes do not have to allow people to board. The DC Metro trains are different. The taxpayers own the trains, and they are intended for public use, so the taxpayers have a right to ride the trains. Making people subject to searches before being allowed to board a DC Metro train is barely different than making people subject to searches before allowing them to walk down a public sidewalk.
December 21, 2010
Monitoring America
The Washington Post is running an excellent, in-depth article about extensive surveillance of ordinary Americans. The article, "Monitoring America," by Dana Priest and William M. Arkin details a vast network of databases, computers systems, and information-sharing programs used by law enforcement to watch and track virtually everyone in a broad variety of ways such as facial scans, license plate scans, cellphone tracking, civilian reports, undercover infiltrations of activists groups, FBI files, etc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)