Part I presented evidence that the TSA's naked scans and genital touching are coercive, denials notwithstanding.
Part II pointed out that these activities cross lines deeply rooted in the human psyche and constitute systematic humilation, with a sexual compenent.
Part III made the case that creepy parallels with the (much worse in degree) abuses at Abu Ghraib (naked photos, transgressive touching, authorization by federal officials, and excuses based on dubious security needs) are very far from coincidental. Also that ordinary travelers are being put through treatment that would be questionable for prisoners of war, absent proof that it was truly essential for security.
Part IV will wrap up Part III's last portion, "With The Best of Intentions"; report on one less-intrusive scanning machine; and mention a few recent developments.
With the Best of Intentions-- Section 2
If a warped mind-set – no matter whose -- is part of the picture, I suspect that typical bureaucratic mindlessness is the complementary angle.
An "underpants bomber" tried to blow up a plane. On Napolitano’s watch.
Therefore, bureaucratic thinking goes, that ONE SPECIFIC thing must NEVER, NEVER be allowed to happen again, no matter WHAT the price.
Cost-benefit analysis does not apply. If that particular thing happens again, it will rebound on the bureaucrat (whether career or political).
If something else (even something far more likely) happens, the bureaucrat can claim ignorance or need for more funding. If that specific thing happens again, though...the end of the world, bureaucratically (or politically) speaking.
That is why we are always trying to prevent the last accident, stop the last plot, and fight the last war.
Now, the underpants bomber.
A fair number of people have commented on DKos and elsewhere that they believe he was involved in some kind of false flag operation designed to get Americans to accept virtual strip searches as a routine part of airport security. These thoughts had crossed my mind, and at first I tried to put them aside.
It is true that the incident might have been almost tailor made for that purpose. Almost. I was getting the story a bit muddled and had to look it up.
Luckily, Wikipedia on this subject happens to be well footnoted:
His family became concerned in August 2009...Abdulmutallab's father made a report to two CIA officers at the U.S. Embassy in Abuja, Nigeria, on November 19 regarding his son's "extreme religious views"...the suspect's name was added in November 2009 to the U.S..'s 550,000-name Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment...It was not added, however, to the FBI's 400,000-name Terrorist Screening Database, the terror watch list that feeds both the 14,000-name Secondary Screening Selectee list and the U.S.'s 4,000-name No Fly List...
U.S. State Department officials said in Congressional testimony that the State Department had wanted to revoke Abdulmutallab's visa, but U.S. intelligence officials requested that his visa not be revoked. The intelligence officials' stated reason was that revoking Abdulmutallab's visa could have foiled a larger investigation into al-Qaida.
So, if the State Department, FBI and/or TSA had just been permitted to do their existing job, the underpants bomber probably would not even have been on the plane.
Tne other wrinkle that I remembered incompletely:
A Michigan couple on the Detroit-bound flight that was almost blown up Christmas Day say they saw the Nigerian terror suspect trying to board without a passport. Kurt and Lori Haskell, both bankruptcy lawyers...they saw a sharply dressed Indian man in his 50s - who did not get on the flight - trying to talk an Amsterdam gate agent into letting the suspect board...without his passport...
The Indian man said, 'He is from Sudan, we do this all the time,'" said Lori Haskell...
"He was dressed all kind of poor," she said, while the Indian man was wearing a "more expensive suit than we would wear to court."
The gate agent said they would have to talk with a supervisor and took them away.
Lori Haskell said she thought the well-dressed man was trying to pass off the bomber as a refugee. Authorities later stated that the underpants bomber did have a passport with him. This incident has never been explained and may add little of real value to our knowledge, but it is often mentioned, so it seemed worth quoting a contemporary report.
The attempt itself was almost incredibly amateurish. The underpants bomber didn’t nearly manage to kill even himself.
Abdulmutallab spent about 20 minutes in the bathroom as it approached Detroit, and then covered himself with a blanket after returning to his seat. Other passengers then heard popping noises, smelled a foul odor, and some saw Abdulmutallab’s trouser leg and the wall of the plane on fire.
Fellow passenger Jasper Schuringa...jumped on Abdulmutallab and subdued him as flight attendants used fire extinguishers to douse the flames...
Two days after the attack, Abdulmutallab was released from a hospital where he had been treated for first and second degree burns to his hands, and second degree burns to his right inner thigh and genitalia...
Not even a third-degree burn? Can you imagine any terrorist trying that tactic again? And for this, thousands of travelers have to be virtually strip searched daily? This is what they're telling us we must have our testicles or labia fingered to prevent? When serious terrorists, alas, have a virtually infinite number of other options?
It's true that at the time of the incident a bill amendment to prohibit reliance on x-ray scanners for primary security had passed one house of Congress (in June), and then went nowhere.
Still, there is no real evidence of a spoof or false flag. Absent that, the reaction makes sense in light of a paranoically ass-covering bureaucracy and/or officials who wanted this anyway and seized on the opportunity –- much as George W. Bush seized the opportunity offered by 9-11 to invade Iraq.
Scanners
For the x-ray backscatter scan machines in question indeed appear to be the very Cadillac of automated security. I can well see why a myopic technician or bureaucrat would pick them. Or a warped mind, for that matter.
From the specs:
The Secure Single Pose generates a front and back scan simultaneously, which eliminates blind spots and potential opportunities for concealment, thereby increasing checkpoint security...
The Secure 1000 Single Pose can detect small objects...It can detect organic and inorganic threats, metals and non-metallic objects...liquids, ceramics, weapons, plastic explosives, narcotics, metals, contraband, currency etc...
Because the Secure 1000 Single Pose requires only one pose with no additional movement by the passenger [unlike the same company’s less intrusive scanner], a full scan can be completed in seconds, thereby streamlining checkpoint operations and improving passenger satisfaction.
"Improving passenger satisfaction." Now that’s a larf. One that any decision maker should have been able to see right through – without needing an x-ray scanner to do it.
Apparently even a rubber band won’t get past TSA screeners without being noted. And as amply reported in the past few days, they certainly do expose sanitary napkins, tampons, adult diapers, colostomy and ursostomy bags, breast and other prosthetics, any unusual physical traits, penis size, etc. Reportedly the things can detect amounts of substance smaller than a match head. This really is a virtual strip search.
Yet a less explicit and arguably safer model is apparently made by the selfsame company. The Rapiscan WaveScan 200 uses "millimeter wave technology." Go to the link, click on the data sheet at the top of the page (PDF), see what I mean. So if you really, really need to put some people through a scan, this would at least allow a shred of human dignity.
Some Final Thoughts
HSA secretary Janet Napolitano and TSA chief John S. Pistole have at different times admitted springing more intrusive searches on travelers in an effort to confuse potential terrorists. The trouble is, since there are about 99.99999999999999% more innocent travelers than terrorists, they compounded intrusion with confusion.
They left abused and shaken travelers to try and deconstruct just what the hell the authorities think they are doing. Step by step, that is happening.
From another blog:
In addition to wrinkled clothing and blurry groins, it's also being asserted that you can get a pat-down by leaving any object in your pockets for the scan.
Certainly they seem to be singling out people with prostheses, joint replacements, and other medical apparatus for body searches, even if the person is willing to show the scar and has medical ID or a doctor's letter.
Basically, is appears there is a single, extremely intrusive body search protocol indiscriminately applied to anyone who catches their attention for a suspicious or non-suspicious reason, to x-ray refuseniks, and to some plucked randomly out of line.
As a prior step to groping the genitals, reports are that the screener's hands encircle the victim's neck, as if in a prelude to strangling.
How much more can they do to make it a symbolic rape? One commenter reported screeners also ran their hands over bare arms.
Apparently, the screener's rubber gloves at least in some cases go straight into a chemical analyzer, which seems to make an instant test for chemical residues. It is just possible that TSA considers this a nice, reasonable alternative to a cavity search. For which the American public is not QUITE ready yet. So we should all be grateful, I guess.
At this point, the good news is, we HAVE got their attention. So far, the President has had to speak to the issue at a news conference. Administrator Pistole has given us some meaningless verbiage, and made it clear that no change is planned in the short run. Vice President Biden has weighed in. So far they are still advising us to "relax and enjoy it."
Clearly, our elected officials still don't Get It. But this is just one of the necessary stages in making sure they do.
Sometimes I think if President Obama were just a few years older, he would Get certain things a bit more immediately. Still, perhaps this reference is not too dated:
Mr. President, this is a case of "destroying the community in order to save it."
Please order TSA back in line.