I Want to Thank the TSA for Keeping John Tyner off the Airplane

The big news is that a John Tyner who goes by the blog name of “Johnny Edge” was ejected from a San Diego area airport for refusing a pat down by TSA Agents.

Good.

In the first of three videos (there’s no real image, you just want them for the sound) Johnny goes through the security line and starts asking if he still has to take his shoes off. Uh, yeah Johnny, there are probably signs everywhere saying you have to remove your shoes, there’s probably someone in front of you removing their shoes. Take your shoes off Johnny.

Johnny is then told he is going to have a pat down, and is “obnoxious”. The TSA agent explains the procedure of a pat down, and then John Tyner says, “If you touch my junk I’m going to have you arrested.” On what planet do you threaten to have someone arrested who is being perfectly professional, and then expect them to change all the rules for you? How self centered and delusional can one man be?

The video goes on for 12 long minutes, there’s a second video where John’s father in law steps in and tries to get the TSA to change their procedures as well.

Let me just say one thing, John Tyner is a belligerent asshole. No one cares to “touch your junk” John. It’s clear to me that you were begging for an incident like this by both your manner and the fact that you ran a video camera the entire time.

Someone please explain to me how a public pat down with the back of the hands is a sexual assault (John Tyner’s words not mine). I’m sure real victims of sexual assault would beg to differ.

Of course we all recognize that the TSA has some silly procedures. I’m not saying the the TSA is some sort of folk hero, but try for a moment to imagine a day full of John Tyners. Imagine long lines of entitled conspiracy theorists who threaten legal action if you “touch my junk”.

Who does that?

Imagine John Tyner on your flight with a drink in him plus some altitude. I know, it would be awful.

Here are the videos. The Assholery starts in the first minute on video one.

I really can’t wait to read what Blogger Bob comes up with for this one.

Facebook Comments

Comments 64

  1. Thank you! He went into that situation with a bad attitude, intending to make trouble. Why else would he have the video recording from the second he steps in line? Every single time I fly, my bra sets off the detectors and I’m pulled aside for a pat down. I don’t really feel like I’m letting every TSA agent from NYC to LA get to second base because they put the back of their hand between my cleavage.

  2. Dear dumbass: The new procedures do NOT have the agent use the back of their hands…they use the front of their hands, and fingers, and they DO actually touch your genitals.
    You and your children can avoid being groped by having naked pictures of you and your children sent to a guy in a booth (who has his own camera phone in case he likes what he sees).
    And who are these people who get to grope your children, and who get to sit, alone, in booth with their naked pictures? Well, turns out, not surprisingly, pedophiles are finding their way into the ranks (like pedophiles found their way into the ranks of Priests). http://www.disclose.tv/forum/child-rape-charge-rocks-tsa-pedo-on-the-scanner-already-t17921.html
    Gee. I wonder why?

    Look, idiot: Europe has already banned the use of the naked scanners on children because they violate child pornography laws. The violate US pornography laws as well, but since the scanners are being sold by Bush’s secretary of homeland security, it is more important to see that he gets paid than to give a crap about the children of this country. http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2010/01/02/group_slams_chertoff_on_scanner_promotion/

    What’s your story? Why are you supporting these totally ineffective devices? Are you a pedophile, or are you on the take? Maybe just stupid?

    Please, help us out. Which is it?

  3. Perhaps you should read this and reconsider your comment “I’m sure real victims of sexual assault would beg to differ”:

    http://pncminnesota.wordpress.com/2010/11/08/rape-survivor-devasted-by-tsa-enhanced-pat-down/

    Taking shoes off, taking laptops out, being patted down etc. does *nothing* for our security. It’s all security theatre to make us think we’re safe. Read up on how Israel does security at their airports (hint: they profile people based on behaviour and race, the only real way to do it.) I also suggest you read Bruce Schnier’s blog (http://www.schneier.com/), perhaps the world’s foremost expert on security. He correctly points out that since 9/11, the *only* enhancement in security has been the fact that passengers now know that if someone hijacks your plane, fight and take them down.

  4. Pingback: Tweets that mention I Want to Thank the TSA for Keeping John Tyner off the Airplane — Jessica Gottlieb -- Topsy.com

  5. Dear incredibly dumbass person:

    Your ignorance about how the scanners and gropedowns work is breathtaking.
    Your ignorance about the kinds of people and behaviour within the TSA is breathtaking.
    Your ignorance about the fact that the naked scanners and gropedowns have been banned across the entire EU is a sign of how truly narrow minded and provincial you are.

    Read up: http://www.petitiononline.com/StopScan/

  6. We’re of two different minds on this one, so I’m not even going to begin to argue. I’m totally not cool with it, but the reality is that I need to get from one place to another quickly.

    Here’s what I wondered when this stuff went into place – kids are pulled aside during screenings. If your kid is pulled through, do you pick the backscatter photo or the personal patdown?

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2010/11/new-thorough-pat-down-procedure-expands-nationwide.html

  7. You are so dumb, you think that valid email addresses are invalid…..without actually checking to see if they are valid.

    Dumb, da-dumb, dumb. DUMB!

  8. TSA is doing a lot more than “silly” things. They’re completely violating our fundamental rights to privacy, and as obnoxious as this guy may be, I wish there were more people like him taking TSA to task for procedures that are invasive and ill-conceived.

    1. Post
      Author
      1. “Would I want to be on an airplane with this man?”

        Let’s see. This man is:
        -Opposed to being touched inappropriately by strangers
        -Aware of his constitutional rights to be free from unwarranted search/seizure
        -Willing to ask questions calmly to those in authority, seeking alternatives without becoming belligerent or violent

        -Oh, he threatened to have a person arrested who calmly informed him of his impending molestation? Yeah, I might have done the same thing.

        Yeah, I’d be fine flying with this guy. Not a bit concerned for safety. In fact, I feel safer flying next to him than next to someone who complies with whatever authority figure happens to be present.

        If he was kvetching like this over, say, not getting his latte foam extra-hot, then yeah, I’d say he’s a douchebag. But given the ‘choice’ to be felt up–no matter how professionally–I’d sure as heck decline as well.
        Perhaps a guy

      2. PS. I don’t think the guy is being an asshole. I think he’s being stubborn about not wanting to have someone else touch his junk. For all the pressure put on him by people in uniforms, he resists and does not cave in to the pressure. (And if you think that pressure is no-small-thing, consider the Milgram experiments: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment .)

      3. I’d much prefer being on an airplane with someone who is concerned to keep some small shred of his rights and dignity than to be on an airplane with someone who is apparently prepared to bend over on demand for Big Sister (and to pour scorn upon those who remember what civil liberties are, in the bargain).

        Clear enough for you?

    2. Dear Virgin: I totally agree with you. This guy was matter-of-fact, calm, and determined. In my book, this is exactly the kind of guy I want to fly with. This is the kind of guy who didn’t simply sit in his seat when the 9/11 hijackers were flying his plane to crash it into the White House. This is the kind of guy who realizes that not everything is okay because some guy in “authority” says it’s okay.
      I wish more people would not simply get in line and do as they’re told just because a guy is wearing a uniform. I would have thought that Jessica Gottlieb, of all people,
      would understand why.
      I’ve sent her a link with a picture that explains why. She can post it or not, as she chooses.

  9. The only “asshole” here is the author of this ridiculous blog. Pretending that the TSA is professional, let alone effective at stopping and preventing terrorism is ludicrous. Go on and keep living in your fantasy world, where groping random mens’ genitals will foil terrorists’ plots. Whatever makes you sleep better at night, right?

    There aren’t NEARLY enough people standing up for their personal rights and freedoms and Tyner should be applauded for not putting up with clear bullying and unreasonable procedures.

    There’s only one thing left to say to Jessica Gottlieb: BAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!

    1. Post
      Author
      1. “Folks like this present a very clear danger on an airplane.”
        [citation needed]

        Can you please define “folks like this”?
        Do you mean those who would not like to give up their personal comfort for something that you imply has no impact on security?
        Do you mean people who are not complacent in the face of authority?
        Do you mean people who use the word ‘junk’?
        Do you mean people who are opposed to getting felt up, no matter how ‘professional’ the process?

        Also, can you spell out a bit of the ‘very clear danger’ that this man presents?
        Do you believe that, once past security, this man would become violent (especially given his lack of violence at any point in the videos)?

  10. Agreed, he’s being ridiculous. I trust that the TSA does what they do for my benefit. While I’m not in love with any of them, none of their procedures bother me. And I feel I must say, having been the victim of sexual assault, I feel I am qualified to say that the TSA pat down is not at all in that category.
    Thanks, Jessica, love reading your thoughts! Press on! xo

    1. No offense to you, especially given what you’ve described as your history, but you really, really need to read what the TSA is actually doing: They are pulling younger women out of line to get them to go through the naked scanner, while radioing their buddy in the scanner room that “You’ve got a cutie coming your way.”
      This is not my account, this is account of a pilot who had that happen to his 19 year old daughter.
      http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travel-safety-security/1147497-tso-saying-heads-up-got-cutie-you.html

      “Why would they do that?” you ask. I don’t know, but I am of the opinion that it involves the use of a cellphone camera to snap a picture.

      The scanners are NOT effective: http://www.digitalcommunitiesblogs.com/international_beat/2010/05/opposition-to-body-scanners-ge.php

      The scanners have been banned in Europe because they violate child pornography laws: http://www.consumertraveler.com/today/full-body-scanners-banned-for-kids-in-u-k-likened-to-child-porn/

      The ineffective, privacy violating, expensive scanners just have a really effective lobbyist: George Bush’s head of Homeland Security: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2010/01/02/group_slams_chertoff_on_scanner_promotion/

      Sign the petition: Stop the scanners: http://www.petitiononline.com/StopScan/

      This petition group got the airline passenger bill of rights passed.

      They are effective.

  11. Jessica, and others who would criticize the principled actions of this guy…here is a reminder:

    The 4th Amerndment o f the Bill of Rights says you have the following right:

    “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

    Jessica GOTTLIEB of all people, should understand why this is important. If she doesn’t she should ask her Grandmother.

  12. Please someone give me an example of the TSA making a difference. All the sotries I have seen in the news depict a good citizen seeing somthing out of the ordinary and notifying the police. Or the terrorist does something really stupid that results in citizens tackling him. The 4th Amendment of the Constitution (you know the supreme law of the land) clearly states that there must be probable cause and that it must be brought before a judge before a search or seizure can take place. There is one exception, under Terry v. Ohio 392 U.S. 1 (1968), law enforcement officers are permitted to conduct a limited warrantless search on a level of suspicion less than probable cause under certain circumstances. In Terry, the Supreme Court ruled that when a police officer witnesses “unusual conduct” that leads that officer to reasonably believe “that criminal activity may be afoot”, that the suspicious person has a weapon and that the person is presently dangerous to the officer or others, the officer may conduct a “pat-down search” (or “frisk”) to determine whether the person is carrying a weapon. To conduct a frisk, officers must be able to point to specific and articulatory facts which, taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant their actions. A vague hunch will not do. Such a search must be temporary and questioning must be limited to the purpose of the stop (i.e., officers who stop a person because they have reasonable suspicion to believe that the person was driving a stolen car, cannot, after confirming that it is not stolen, compel the person to answer questions about anything else, such as the possession of contraband).

    The fact is that the TSA has been ineffective as well as expensive to the tax payers. They don’t protect us at Football games or Schools or Malls etc… Does that make us less safe? Don’t you all still go to these places without fear. It is the government who has taken the charge to put fear into us so that they can have more power over us. It is time to stand up and take back our government.

    The Fourth Amendment was written to protect us an individuals from an overreaching government. So are we going to just throw that out the window because of a few terrorists who got lucky? Is the trade off to give all the power to the government so they can tax and spend our hard earned money in the name of safety.

    The TSA is an ineffective knee jerk reaction to a terrorist organization. The only Hero’s on 911 were state and local Firefighters, Police and citizens. Not one was a federal employee or TSA agent. Yet that is were we send out money.

    God bless America and help us to recognize why our forefathers fought against the tyranny called the King of England.

  13. Wow Jessica, it looks like you have found a couple of very smart trolls- how very special. I hate flying for any number of reasons. I find the security measures to be oppressive and I am not convinced that we are handling it in the best manner possible. I would be perfectly happy to do it as Israel does- whenever I go there I fly El-AL.

    But we have to work with the system we have in place and protesting at the airport isn’t the smart way to affect change. It is dumb, obnoxious and deserving of ridicule. Flying isn’t a right. You don’t have to do it.

    Let me repeat, Tyner and those who use his methods are dumb. You don’t have to fly. Take a bus, take a train, walk, bike or ship yourself in a box. The current system may not be the right way to do it but it is what we have right now.

    Tyner knew well in advance what was happening and he intentionally created an issue. So sorry that he doesn’t want someone to touch his “junk.” Maybe in the future he can be like many men and come up with a more manly name for his “junk” like “Willie the Prick.”

    What a peach.

    1. Dearest Jack,
      ….That’s right, never complain when the former head of Homeland Security personally profits by getting taxpayers to fund 1/2 BILLION DOLLARS to implement a series of ineffective, privacy violating machines that are opposed by the Pilot’s union, the entire EU, Brazil, and a bunch of MD’s who say that the TSA has lied about the amount of radiation they deliver. That would be after the TSA lied about whether the machines have the ability to save and transmit the naked images they capture (they do).
      …No, definitely, people who complain should just GET OFF ,they are DISRUPTING IT FOR THE REST OF US.
      Riding the Bus is a PRIVILEGE, not a RIGHT, Rosa Parks. Now move your butt to back and be quiet, or just don’t ride that bus. Chertoff needs another gold plated toupee, and we all know money doesn’t grow on trees now, does it. No, we need TAXPAYERS for that. Line ’em up, get em naked on film (especially the young women), and grope ’em.

      Schmuck.

      1. series of ineffective, privacy violating machines

        You know the great thing about studies is that for everyone that you throw up there is one that disputes it. So Einstein keep carping because you haven’t done much other than cry about privacy violations.

        that are opposed by the Pilot’s union, the entire EU, Brazil, and a bunch of MD’s who say that the TSA has lied about the amount of radiation they deliver.

        Why are they opposed by the pilot’s union. And now we should get excited because you say that the EU and Brazil oppose them. You don’t cite why they do or provide a reason why that is significant. You don’t even provide proof, just rabid foaming at the mouth. Sure, yell loudly and people will notice but it doesn’t mean that they will respect you.

        As for the MDs, well we can go back and forth about this. I know MDs who advocate selling marijuana in supermarkets and others who hold views that many people find “curious.” Just calling someone doctor is not enough to lend credence to specious claims.

        Riding the Bus is a PRIVILEGE, not a RIGHT, Rosa Parks. Now move your butt to back and be quiet, or just don’t ride that bus.

        You argue based upon emotion but it is not real effective. Planes are buses are not the same which is a big part of why it is a thousand more times difficult to obtain a commercial pilot’s license than to become a city bus driver.

        You don’t have to fly. You simply don’t. It is not a right, it is a privilege and if you can’t understand that you have some things to work on.

        1. Dear Jack,
          I didn’t cite links in my reply because I thought you might be able to use those little keys with the arrows on the side of your keyboard. Read the info from The Boston Globe, The Guardian, The Washington Post, and even *sigh* Fox News Boston that are posted juuuuust a little scroll key away from here.
          Then get back to me.
          Here, I’ll get you started: http://tinyurl.com/2wxpnut

          1. I didn’t cite links in my reply because

            Let me help you out. You didn’t cite links because you don’t have a firm grasp of the situation. You argue based upon emotion and hope that others will support you. When they question the validity and veracity of your claims you insult them and hope that they back down.

            You get upset when someone laughs at Wikipedia links because they are known to be riddled with errors. You get upset because people don’t accept your specious claim that this is a violation of the 4th Amendment.

            It is not unlike those people who think that the First Amendment provides protection over all speech. It doesn’t. You can’t yell fire in a crowded theater or advocate the violent overthrow of the government. Go check out Gitlow Versus New York.

            But before we go there let’s go back to your non response to my comment regarding the poor analogy between buses and flying. You ignored it just as you ignore anything that challenges your claim.

            I dislike flying. I didn’t enjoy getting patted down but I did it because for the time being that is the system that we have in place. I am not an arrogant, selfish and pretentious asshole who misunderstands my rights like yourself or Tyner.

            I want to see changes implemented and am doing something about it. But for the time being I am willing to work with the system we have at hand. And FWIW, you can claim that it is not effective but we haven’t had a successful attack since 911.

            That is not solely due to luck.

  14. “…John Tyner is a belligerent asshole… Imagine John Tyner on your flight with a drink in him plus some altitude. I know, it would be awful…”

    Just for the record, John Tyner has been one of my best friends since we were 13. He is one of the kindest, most considerate people I know. He’s actually a quite soft-spoken fellow most of the time. He’s usually a pretty polite fellow, and he doesn’t drink alcohol.

    He is, however, a man of conviction and felt strongly about the injustices (from his perspective) being thrown at him. He stood up for himself and for many who agree with him.

    You may disagree with his protestations, and you’ve a right to. However, you presume incorrectly about the man he really is.

    Also, for the record, I totally agree with his actions and the words of many who do.

    1. lol, could have fooled me.

      He acted like a grade A Asshole in that video

      Of course you have to check near peoples junk…

      ever heard of “crotch the weed” ?

      The employees acted with nothing but professionalism

  15. Gottlieb you princess fascist. A bit ironic that with a name like yours you are actually defending a totalitarian state’s right to humiliate its citizenry.

  16. I couldn’t agree more with you Jessica. Personally, had I been there, the man would have been rendered unconscious for acting like a terrorist and held down for a strip search and cavity search. His, and everyone elses rights stop at my safety.

    And for the person to scared to use a real name, or provide real email addresses, yet has the courage to call people names from behind a computer screen:

    You have no idea what The Constitution says do you? The Bill of Rights protection of the 4th amendment does NOT extend to VOLUNTARY forms of travel. In fact, it specifically says HOUSES.

    Your comments about people calling out “cuties” has no bearing here either. I saw that at the McDonald’s drive through yesterday. In fact, the whole crew stopped in the middle of taking my order to look out the window at the chick in her convertible. Different levels of professionalism will be your retort, I know, so explain why it happens everywhere from Wall Street to Senate Floor? It is called human nature.

    Now for your unresearched comments about the scanners. These scanners are x-ray. This is a technology over a century old now. How it works is by bombarding the target area with doses of radiation. On the other side is a receptor that turns this into an image based off densities and the amount of radiation making it to the receptor. What you refused to go look up is that #1 Not 1 person, place, or thing has ever died from the radiation exposure from an x-ray machine. #2 x-ray machines CANNOT be tuned enough to look ONLY through someone’s clothing. You sir or ma’am are only helping to contribute to purposeful spreading of lies and misinformation. You sir or ma’am are an idiot.

    1. Having paid more attention to your links, I have noticed that all of them are chat, blog, or wiki sites. Do you have anything substantive as proof? Say the location of the law if the European Union (LOL, not a governing body BTW, an economic conglomerate) banning them? Because on my searches, there is no actual ban located in any European country. Just similar cry babies like yourself screaming about them without having any knowledge of them. In fact, according to the London Times, they are being installed in the UK, which is what your specific link refers to.

      You really don’t have any clue what you are talking about do you? Let me guess, you are one of the “No Blood for Oil types” that never ACTUALLY looked at the Bush family finances or import/export records to see that not only was there not 1 barrel more of oil that was imported than the normal limits set by opec, or that the Bush family SPENT more money than they made during the Bush presidency, proving that they didn’t sell things for more oil rights from the Middle East. You seem to me to be nothing more than one of the sheep you ridiculing others for being, but what is worse is that you are too stupid to realize it.

      1. Dear Brandon the Dumb,
        In two brief posts, you’ve misused the word “too”, asked a rhetorical question which you then answered incorrectly, gone wildly off topic with a rant about OPEC, demonstrated your ignorance of the 4th amendment and its application to ALL illegal and unreasonable search (not just your house, pumpkin….or do the police in your neighborhood open your trunk every time you get a speeding ticket?), and admitted that you didn’t even read the info I posted before you responded to it.
        Then, after reading the links, you call “The Boston Globe” a “chat or wiki” site.

        Nope, dear Brandon the dumb, I won’t be doing your Googling for you. You are welcome to have your wife or daughters be specifically called out of line for the privilege of naked scanning by a prurient TSA (you can look up the word “prurient”, btw..it’s on the Internets), that’s your choice. Hey, if they want to put their fingers in your duaghter’s groin, it’s just human nature, right? Just like pedophilia, right?

        For others: here are two stories of TSA and Homeland Security people recently arrested as Pedophiles. Both these clown were directly related to the naked scanner debate…one as a screener, the other as THE PRIMARY SPOKESMAN FOR TSA and HOMELAND SECURITY ADVOCATING THE USE OF THESE MACHINES.

        Sean Shanahan
        http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/local/tsa-screnner-charged-with-raping-14-year-old-girl-25-apx-20100310

        Brian Doyle
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/06/AR2006040601876.html

        World’s largest Pilot’s unions boycotting naked scanner usage (TSA lies about radiation dosage): http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/09/pilots_oppose_backscatter_scanners/

        TSA screeners deliberately pulling younger women out of line to put them through naked scanners….radioing buddy in back room “Got a cutie for you” (From a longstanding Pilot’s forum) http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travel-safety-security/1147497-tso-saying-heads-up-got-cutie-you.html

        Stop the scanners. At a minimum, sign the petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/StopScan/

        Or take a stand like John Tyner has done.

    2. Dear Sir,
      I would like to disagree with you civilly. Allow me to address your points.

      “His, and everyone else’s rights, stop at my safety.”
      -While certainly not a full counter-point, Ben Franklin once said, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” I believe that the measures for security are overly-costly, overly-invasive, and largely ineffective at preventing terrorist actions.

      ‘No idea bout the 4th Amendment.’
      The 4th Amendment reads:
      “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
      Secure in their persons = their body and immediate possessions (pockets/clothes/etc). This extends beyond the house, and a cop cannot simply strip search a person on the street.

      ‘Calling out Cuties at McDonalds’
      -No doubt this happens. The difference is that the burger-flippers do not have the technology at their disposal to look at a naked image of the girl in the Corvette. TSA agents do. To select for screening based on titillation rather than security is ineffective for security and dishonest at best, and detrimental, perverted, and near-criminal at worst. I agree with you–ogling happens at all levels of society. But very few people have the means to go beyond “I wonder what s/he looks like naked” and actually find out.

      -X-ray safety
      Yes, X-rays are generally safe. But they do carry risk. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray#Risks_of_medical_diagnostic_X-rays –wikipedia isn’t the end-all of research, but it’s easily accessible.) X-ray backscatter devices, along with millimeter wave devices, use similar radiation to peer through clothes. This may NOT have long-term effects, but we don’t know yet. Particularly for pregnant women. And tests have shown that there is no ‘non-harmful’ amount of x-ray radiation. Perhaps it is less harmful with the technologies used by TSA. But it hasn’t been studied enough, IMO, and it’s still not certain.

      ‘X-Ray machines cannot be tuned to only look through someone’s clothing.’
      -Um, that’s the whole point of the x-ray backscatter devices. They peer THROUGH your clothing to see any objects beneath them. If there’s no objects, they see your skin and anatomy. For examples: http://www.google.com/images?q=x+ray+backscatter+image&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=l1h&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=iv&source=lnms&tbs=isch:1&ei=7V_hTKCvDI-jnQegncWsDw&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&ved=0CAsQ_AU&biw=1246&bih=598 (Google Image Search).

      Ultimately, it is my belief that the ‘enhanced pat down’ and ‘backscatter device’ are an infringement upon protected liberties that is not outweighed by improved security. Further, I’d even say that any security measure that infringes upon the constitutionally-protected rights of citizens should not be allowed, no matter how much it improves security.

      1. Dear Sir,
        I would like to disagree with you civilly. Allow me to address your points.

        Well recieved.

        “His, and everyone else’s rights, stop at my safety.”
        -While certainly not a full counter-point, Ben Franklin once said, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” I believe that the measures for security are overly-costly, overly-invasive, and largely ineffective at preventing terrorist actions.

        While a very well educated man and someone to definately be venerated for his wisdom, Ben did not have religious fundamentalists attacking his country without warning. While there is definately provocation, there was no warning. While a staunch believer in rights and freedoms, Ben was above all else a patriot and would have returned the attacks on our people with vehemence and insisted on his country being protected. You cannot use a quote from the 18th century to describe a 21st century issue.

        ‘No idea bout the 4th Amendment.’
        The 4th Amendment reads:
        “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
        Secure in their persons = their body and immediate possessions (pockets/clothes/etc). This extends beyond the house, and a cop cannot simply strip search a person on the street.

        Yes, they can, ESPECIALLY when you behave suspiciously as this person was. Watch the videos he shot. The entire thing was staged from the get go, his verbage, his attitude was confrontational and suspicious from the beginning. For starters, look into the decisions concerning Miranda Rights by the Supreme court and other civil liberty cases. The Supreme Court is the law, above and beyond our interpretations of The Constitution. The court has said the protection of the 4th amendment does not apply to travel relating to airline security, and since our founding fathers could not have forseen this, all we have to go by is their decision.

        ‘Calling out Cuties at McDonalds’
        -No doubt this happens. The difference is that the burger-flippers do not have the technology at their disposal to look at a naked image of the girl in the Corvette. TSA agents do. To select for screening based on titillation rather than security is ineffective for security and dishonest at best, and detrimental, perverted, and near-criminal at worst. I agree with you–ogling happens at all levels of society. But very few people have the means to go beyond “I wonder what s/he looks like naked” and actually find out.

        Once again, they don’t. This is an x-ray machine. And before you flame, I URGE you to go to medical information before you turn to google images about what these machines can and cannot see. I went and looked at the google images link you provided, and they look nothing like, save 3 of them, the images available for full body scanners from medical information sites.

        -X-ray safety
        Yes, X-rays are generally safe. But they do carry risk. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray#Risks_of_medical_diagnostic_X-rays –wikipedia isn’t the end-all of research, but it’s easily accessible.) X-ray backscatter devices, along with millimeter wave devices, use similar radiation to peer through clothes. This may NOT have long-term effects, but we don’t know yet. Particularly for pregnant women. And tests have shown that there is no ‘non-harmful’ amount of x-ray radiation. Perhaps it is less harmful with the technologies used by TSA. But it hasn’t been studied enough, IMO, and it’s still not certain.

        Yes, we do know. 100 years of study has proven no ill effects.

        ‘X-Ray machines cannot be tuned to only look through someone’s clothing.’
        -Um, that’s the whole point of the x-ray backscatter devices. They peer THROUGH your clothing to see any objects beneath them. If there’s no objects, they see your skin and anatomy. For examples: http://www.google.com/images?q=x+ray+backscatter+image&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=l1h&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=iv&source=lnms&tbs=isch:1&ei=7V_hTKCvDI-jnQegncWsDw&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&ved=0CAsQ_AU&biw=1246&bih=598 (Google Image Search).

        Once again, you are incorrect here. They see differing densities of materials, and based on this differing density of material, render an image based on radiation levels at the receptor. This mechanism alone precludes any capability of tuning to the point of “seeing people naked.” It just simply isn’t possible. What I will concede to is that it is capable of producing highly detailed profiles of people, and if such people are turned sideways, then could be used pervertedly, but in all sited cases, none of the complaintants were standing sideways.

        Ultimately, it is my belief that the ‘enhanced pat down’ and ‘backscatter device’ are an infringement upon protected liberties that is not outweighed by improved security. Further, I’d even say that any security measure that infringes upon the constitutionally-protected rights of citizens should not be allowed, no matter how much it improves security.

        Not saying I think they are saving lives either. What I am saying is that this man acted out of turn, was rude and irresponsible and should be in jail at the very least. In my opinion, these proceedures should be mandatory for everyone, as it is the ONLY way to make sure they are working. And no, I would not be happy about it, but after watching over 3000 people die on 9/11/01 due to people able to sneak onboard airplanes, and having a man try to get on with a bomb sewn into his underwear, then yes, scan me, and everyone around me to keep that nut off my plane.

  17. Pingback: Potential passenger refused TSA Txray, refused pat-down. | pressured speech

  18. Thank you Jess for posting this! These procedures are put in place by the TSA to protect everyone who is going to be boarding a plane. It’s not done to inconvenience people or try to make your day a living hell, because to me living hell would be what the people aboard the planes went through on 9/11!

    The TSA wasn’t put in place to take away civil liberties but to protect the populace from attack from someone who wants to cause harm. Yes, it’s not a perfect solution but if someone out on the internet has one, that is actually feasible and not sci-fi puffery, then come forth! We’re lucky that we don’t go through an interrogation, pat down and other procedures like they have in Israel, where by the way, terrorism out of their airports is almost null. But the procedures were put in place because of the terrorism that the country has faced and continues to face on a daily basis.

  19. Wow Jessica. That guy might be an asshole but you are totally misinformed. When they pat you down, they are now allowed to use the front of the hand and touch your genitals. I think you would feel different if they did one of those full pat downs on your daughter, which actually could happen. The TSA is out of control and we need a proper system for detecting terrorists which does not include humiliating and sexually harassing the rest of the public.

    Do your homework, Jessica but good job on stirring up a controversy.

  20. I think both this guy and TSA are wrong. I think there are serious questions regarding the TSA policies that need to be addressed by the courts, but I also think in the meantime that if we want to fly, we have to follow the rules. (Which I guess will make me an idiot to everyone!)

  21. 1. The Ineffectiveness Issue

    Especially for Brandon, and Jack: http://tinyurl.com/2blvt69

    a. How ineffective is the TSA in using the scanners to prevent terrorists from getting explosives on a plane? Utterly ineffective. So ineffective, you have to ask yourself “why are they using them?”. There are literally thousands of failures by TSA to stop explosives from getting on planes. Watch the very first link if you’re only going to look at one link. http://is.gd/haSm3 http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10446.pdf http://is.gd/haJWV http://is.gd/haL3t http://is.gd/haTk9

    2. The Privacy Issue

    a.Do the scanners actually render naked images? Yes, for the clueless guys above: The images DO show “naked people”. http://is.gd/haE8Z

    b.Is it possible to save those images and render them in full, natural color? Yes, in fact, with ease, the reversed black and white images can be “un-reversed”, and rendered in full, living, naked color (this will shock you) : http://is.gd/haEHL

    c. Can the naked scanners save images? Have image s been saved by the government using these machines? Yes, and yes. 35,000 images that we know of:
    http://is.gd/haIku Well, 35,000 and one (movie star): http://is.gd/haJsT

    d. Are TSA dudes radioing their buddies in the naked scanner room when a hot girl goes through and gets a nude image presented to him? Are they pulling young women out of line and specifically selecting them for naked scanning? Oh yes, according to this longstanding professional pilot’s forum: http://is.gd/hbanv

    e. Are the high school graduate TSA “agents” who get to see the naked pictures of children, women, and young girls snapping copies with their cell phones? Don’t know…but if they did, they can easily turn them into full color nude photos: http://is.gd/haEHL

    The Credibility Issue

    a. Has the TSA lied habitually and repeatedly about the effectiveness, safety, and privacy of their procedures? Oh, hell yes. http://is.gd/haVjk http://is.gd/haVvM http://is.gd/haXy2

    b. Has the TSA hired pedophiles, some of whom have been fired from previous employment positions due to pornography issues, which would have been easily known if the TSA was actually performing background checks as it claims it does? Yup. Brian Doyle
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/06/AR2006040601876.html
    Sean Shanahan
    http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/local/tsa-screnner-charged-with-raping-14-year-old-girl-25-apx-20100310

    c. Have other professionals inside and outside of the TSA spoken out about the TSA’s fraudulent and incompetent management and organization? Oh yes. The Air Marshals: http://is.gd/haZbU http://is.gd/haZnm The Pilot’s Unions: http://is.gd/haXy2 The GAO: http://is.gd/hb0jN http://is.gd/hb0xy the lists goes on.

    d. Have any highly placed government officials profited personally by pushing the adoption of specific technologies, despite widespread objections to the effectiveness and safety of those technologies? Why yes, the reptilian eyed former HEAD of Homeland Security, Richard Chertoff http://is.gd/hb5S4

    Other Countries’ Reactions

    Are many, many other countries testing and then rejecting the use of the naked scanners as ineffective, unsafe, or unduly intrusive Absolutely.

    a. Naked scanner banned for 18 and under in the England and Scotland http://is.gd/hb7d4
    b. Naked Scanner tested and rejected by Italy http://is.gd/hb6Zc
    c. Naked Scanner rejected by Dubai http://is.gd/hb7d4
    d. Naked Scanner Rejected by all of Central and South America including Brazil http://is.gd/hb7d4

    The Safety Issue

    a. The effects of using this type of radiation HAVE NOT BEEN STUDIED for populations the size of the US. Because the machines are not the same as simple X-ray machines their effect is problematic because they concentrate the radiation at the skin level, unlike regular X-Ray machines . Since one in twenty of us have a gene that predisposes us to the extremely serious skin cancer, it is a virtual certainty that the machines will cause skin cancer in a percentage of the traveling population http://is.gd/haXy2

    What can you do?

    a. Opt out and get groped, let your children get groped even though you’ve tried to teach them that letting strange men touch their genitals is a bad thing. As long as the strange man is a high school graduate wearing a TSA hat, it’s all good.

    b. Insist on your rights as an American who is protected by the 4th Amendment against unreasonable search…especially when that search doesn’t make anyone safer, probably endangers your health, may be done by pedophiles or just creeps, and is in place because a high level govt official is personally making money through the sale of these scanners. Taxpayer bill for the scanners so far? One Half Billion Dollars.

    c. SIGN THE PETITION TO STOP THE SCANNERS http://www.petitiononline.com/StopScan/

    1. Post
      Author

      To reiterate.

      I’m not saying the TSA is right or wrong with their searches or with their scans, but I am saying that this guy clearly posed a hazard and I wouldn’t want to fly with him. For that alone I want to thank the TSA.

      1. Gotcha. Most of the points in this last summary are for the benefit of the dudes above who keep claiming that there is no real information underlying the backlash against the TSA and the naked scanners.

        We are going to have to agree to firmly disagree about John Tyner. I like the dude.

        You said, “Imagine John Tyner on your flight with a drink in him plus some altitude. I know, it would be awful.”

        Well, John Tyner doesn’t drink, so no worries there. Not only that, he is a husband, and a father. He is very well spoken, and was very articulate and non-combative during the entire episode.

        Me? I seriously admire this guy. I admire his presence of mind to record this idiocy, and I admire his moxie in refusing to be intimidated EVEN WHEN THE TSA THREATENED TO SUE HIM if he tried to leave the airport without being groped or scanned.

        Want a better feel for what he’s like? Interview with him here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYykxMupiT0 Also some opinions by attorneys in same clip.

        It’s been a pleasure discussing this with you. Keep on blogging.

        1. I admire his presence of mind to record this idiocy,

          Right, because he didn’t have the intent to do this. It never occurred to him to try and create an incident.

          Not only that, he is a husband, and a father. Sure, I can provide with a list of murderers, rapists and ignorant thugs who have the same credentials.

          None of this changes the reality that flying is a privilege and not a right. None of this changes his boorish manner and unreasonable actions. If you want to create change this is not the way to do it.

  22. Last point. Watch the first BBC video I posted above which shows you how extraordinarily easy it is to, under current TSA rules, technology, searches, and procedures……….blow up a plane. (link again: http://is.gd/haSm3 )

    Knowing that, in fact, that the TSA is choosing to allocate the majority of its 2010 and 2011 equipment budget (over one half billion dollars) to deploy naked scanning machines which don’t, in any way, shape, or form stop a terrorist from blowing a plane out of the sky as shown in the video you have to ask yourself: Are they making us safer?

    The answer is absolutely NO.

    Next question: Why would they allocate ONE HALF BILLION DOLLARS to buy machines that are completely ineffective, and why is our government continuing down this road even in the face of the clear evidence that it is a violation of our privacy and a waste of our money at the risk of our lives?

    I think the answer to that one is super easy: Michael Chertoff’s consulting company which markets the naked scanners.

    John Tyner’s refusal to be denuded and groped may (just possibly) make you safer by raising awareness of this travesty.

    You should send him a thank you note.

    I’m out! Peace!

  23. Post
    Author

    8,800 words, 52,000 characters with spaces, and we have no resolution.

    Except maybe, possibly that I am not an asshole. And that maybe possibly John Tyner created this controversy to suit his own needs.

    In the middle are people who are deeply about privacy, who will be heard when they speak rationally.
    And we’re all taking parallel paths to the same end game.

    1. “Except maybe, possibly that I am not an asshole.”

      That part is pretty definite.

      “And that maybe possibly John Tyner created this controversy to suit his own needs.”

      You mean his own needs of helping to publicize the molestation and sexual deviancy of the TSA? Yes, what a horrible person he is! *rolls eyes* These polices have no purpose but to try to force people to accept complete and utter government control over every aspect of your life, including who gets to see you naked and who gets to touch your genitals.

      “In the middle are people who are deeply about privacy, who will be heard when they speak rationally.”

      Well we already know from your post that you don’t care in the slightest about privacy or people’s rights. When did John not speak rationally?

      “And we’re all taking parallel paths to the same end game.”

      No, no we’re not. People like me, John, and countless others are taking a path to restore our freedom and get rid of government-endorsed sexual assault. You are on the path of supporting government-endorsed sexual assault and vilifying anyone who dares to speak out against it. It’s bad enough for TSA scum to take such policies – but for a citizen to support them makes [comment edited becuase you don’t get to name-call my readers]

      1. Totenglocke – I would have more respect for your post if, instead of trying to protect me (American public), you actually went to help the young children in the U.S. that are abused, physically and sexually, each year. Funny that you can be inspired by this cause, but not truly horrific causes happening right now in your own local town. Get off your privacy soapbox and do something that people actually need you to do. But that would take a heap of courage and the ability to not hide behind a made up name on a blog site.

  24. Pingback: John Tyner Utters Those Immortal Words “Don’t Touch My Junk!” | Tasithoughts's Weblog

  25. Pingback: What is Your Comment Policy? — Jessica Gottlieb

  26. I am glad that Congress has passed legislation HR 6416, the “American Traveler Dignity Act,” will subject TSA personnel to the same laws ordinary Americans must obey. It establishes that airport security screeners are not immune from any US law regarding physical contact with another person, making images of another person, or causing physical harm through the use of radiation-emitting machinery on another person. It means they are subject to the same laws as the rest of us.

    Ron Paul stand up and say WE ARE NOT CATTLE!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-N5adYM7Kw

    I want to thank to God that everybody is not like Jessica Gottlieb

  27. I am totally in agreement with Jessica on this one. Whether or not the TSA is right or wrong John Tyner obviously wanted attention and was being an ass. And no i would definitely not want to be next in line or in the next seat to John.

  28. Surely, a topic to arouse the emotions. It would have been better if you had read John Tyner’s blog before posting your own. In fact, I doubt that any of us could have asked for a better advocate for our right to privacy. In his blog, he patiently, and considerately, addresses the issues you mention, including why he decided to videotape his encounter with TSA. From my own experience and that of others, I would have to say that anyone who does not videotape or, at least, record, a potential conflict with a government agency, is quite naive.

    Last week, I e-mailed a friend who is traveling to Florida to visit her mother for the holidays. I warned her to watch out for the TSA “pat-down.” This morning she responded, “Actually I ‘got naked’ in the TSA scan and then they patted me down.” I read this too quickly and thought she was joking that she had stripped naked before receiving a pat-down, something she could probably pull off. While I finally realized that wasn’t what she was saying, I think this is a brilliant idea and might just force the TSA to take a second look at their ridiculous policy of invasive pat-downs. Anyone want to go first?

    [To ward off angry e-mails. let me say that I am joking and that I am very disturbed by the way the TSA implemented their invasive pat-down policy; and, further, that I cancelled a trip to New York this weekend because I’m at very high risk for skin cancer and wouldn’t be willing to undergo such unwarranted physical scrutiny and invasion of my privacy. Common sense dictates that the agency should prove that this is the only available means to protect us – and I can think of several others that would be more effective – PRIOR TO adopting such draconian measures.]

  29. Jessica needs to get laid!! The TSA is out of control via the Jews who run the security via our airports because of 9/11 which was an inside job perpetrated by none other than the Jewish Elite (not the everyday Jewish citizen) like the mafia was associated with Italians. What’s the difference between a conspiracy or strategy?

    DUMB BLONDE KNOWS 9/11 WAS AN (INSIDE JOB)…
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtlkIfSnyDk

    Rockefeller Reveals 9/11 FRAUD to Aaron Russo
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nD7dbkkBIA

    The President who told the truth
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaH-lG

    “The LAW that never was.” There is LITERALLY NO LAW you(we) have to pay income taxes it’s a SCAM!! watch…
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?doc

  30. The incredible misinformation that is going around the Internet about TSA agents touching people’s “junk” is astounding. First, why do people object to the body scans? Because their ghostly image is going to be sold on porn sites? This has been one objection that I have heard. Radiation? Really? I am quite certain that the majority (high majority) of people engage in questionable activity daily (unhealthy eating) that is far more detrimental to their body than the small amount of radiation. Tyner is a crybaby. Let me go to Iraq or Afghanistan to see what our soldiers endure daily at the hands of terrorists. Better yet, go visit some U.S. school districts where each child must walk through a metal detector, they are searched without regard to rights and nearly each week police officers do a surprise drug search with dogs. Personally, I wonder if Tyner was hiding something in his “junk,” otherwise why the cowardly exit. Civil disobedience is one thing. Making a case for terrorists as to why we sissy-coddled Americans can’t be touched is quite another. Go through the body scanner and move on. There are bigger issues (MUCH BIGGER) in America and the world. Don’t get distracted by the little things while the elephant gets right by you.

  31. I have to be honest: I enjoy your blog most of the time. I think you’re way off here. As others have mentioned, sexual assault victims have expressed extreme discomfort with these procedures. People with disabilities continue to be humiliated with every pat down. I haven’t been a victim of violent sexual assault, but I’ve had people touch me without my consent, and the thought of flying for Christmas makes me want to cry. (I always get pulled over for extra screening, you see.) I can understand others’ discomfort with the scanners, both for health and privacy reasons. Not everyone talks about their Brazilian waxes on the Internet; some people are considerably more modest. They can’t be THAT safe, because my pregnant sister can’t be scanned, yet she is allowed to fly. Seems… like that radiation claim might not be completely accurate?

    Many people (myself, a Veteran of the Armed Forces, included) do not appreciate being treated like a criminal in order to fly. There’s been a lot of talk about how we all have a role to play in keeping this country safe. I’m not bringing a bomb or any weapons on the plane. Problem solved. That’s my role. I shouldn’t have to be given a near-cavity search to get on a plane the way violent criminals are when they’re brought into prison. It just shouldn’t be that way. It isn’t making us safer.

    My favorite quote, which has been oft-mentioned in this debacle, is from Ben Franklin (most people seem to agree he wasn’t an idiot): “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” This is true. And when you cede your rights without a fuss, you tell the government I should be happy to cede the rights for which I and my fellow service members have fought to keep in place. I’m not happy to be molested (and it is molesting) to make the plane “safer.” I’m not the criminal, so by molesting me, you’re not making the plane safer. The more innocent people you traumatize and humiliate, the more the safety argument fails.

    If this were about safety, then the people who strip at security should be allowed to pass. A visual inspection confirms they do not have contraband. Why is the TSA telling them to put their clothes back on so they can confirm there is no contraband by intimately touching these people?

  32. Pingback: What an American hero is « MjNet

  33. Since tax payer dollars funded the bailout of numerous airlines, I would say that flying is a right, not a privilege. If your dollars funded it, it means you have part ownership, duh! Whoever came up with this misnomer needs to be reminded of the fact that the tax payers bailed out the airlines. Let’s see here folks, can you think of other corporations that were bailed out by your tax dollars and try to figure out what your privileges and rights are??? Hello??? Is this thing on??????????

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *