Sample letter to Congress and Airlines (scanners/pat-downs)

[Deborah K]

I recommend using a variation of this and not verbatim. They get too many of the exact same thing and they just start tossing them cuz they know it's a seminar.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/trav...i-body-scanner-letters-congress-airlines.html

Dear Sir or Madam,

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has implemented the installation of whole body imaging (WBI) scanners. These are the devices that have the ability to "look" through clothing and "see" if there is anything concealed under the clothing. When the machines were introduced, we were told they would not be used for primary screening. However, they are now being installed on the front lines of airport security queues nationwide. It's apparent through your continued silence that our Congressional representatives support what is being done in the name of increased security. I urge you to reconsider your support.

I have three specific concerns. First, there is no good information on the radiation exposure or the safety testing of the technology. I have researched whether these machines pose a risk and I can find little except the testimony of the DHS. Unfortunately, it appears the committee that examined the scanners and has assured the public of their safety is comprised chiefly of these machines’ manufacturers (“Are Scanners Worth the Risk?,” New York Times, September 7, 2010.)

Second, the machines present a rather detailed image of the nude body to an off site observer. I am not a prude but I have an objection to this process especially for children and the disabled. This virtual strip search should not be done just because law-abiding Americans want to get on a plane, unless there is cause to believe that they are concealing something. Courts have repeatedly upheld the legal standard of reasonable suspicion (Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)); this standard is currently being violated by the TSA.

Additionally, the public has been assured these machines do not save images of naked Americans accused of no crimes, but tens of thousands of images were saved in courthouses in Florida and Washington (“Feds Found Storing Checkpoint Body Scan Images,” CBSNews.com, August 4, 2010.) It would be easy for government to link the images with identifying information - since ID must be provided to enter these facilities - for database compilation purposes.

Allegedly, the individual has the right to ‘opt out’ of the WBI scanners; according to the TSA there are signs posted at each WBI station informing travelers of that right. However, I have personally not seen even one of these signs despite having flown through three airports with WBI scanners in the last couple of months. Anecdotal evidence indicates the signs, when present, are very small with nearly illegible type and are placed in a secure area that is difficult to exit – doing so requires abandoning one’s possessions on the X-ray machine near the WBI.

Finally, and most important, if there are problems found on the image, or someone exercises their right to opt out of the WBI machine, the TSA will perform a ‘pat down’ at the checkpoint. Having been subject to one of these ‘pat downs,’ I can testify that these searches are more akin to friskings that accused criminals receive upon arrest. New, enhanced procedures have just been introduced that include touching of the genitalia by TSA officers. Evidence is mounting that these friskings would be more accurately described as sexual assaults in any other context. As a law-abiding American without so much as a speeding ticket to my name, I resent the repeated insistence by government that I should allow this intrusive infringement upon my rights and privacy simply to travel to another part of the country.

It would appear that terrorism-related incidents occur in miniscule numbers compared to the millions of people whose right to privacy has now been violated by these TSA procedures. I’m personally not against a reasonable search for terrorist equipment or activity, but it’s my considered opinion that current processes are beyond what ought to be considered lawful by our elected representatives. This is especially true given the fact that foreign companies are allowed to ship cargo on U.S. passenger planes that hasn’t even been disassembled or X-rayed (“TSA will not meet air cargo screening deadline,” Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, July 17, 2010.) Why are these companies totally exempt from even basic security measures, while I personally have to decide between two grossly invasive procedures every time I visit the airport?

I am concerned that this expansion of the administrative search has been done without any Congressional authority and has not been vetted through the courts. Every day thousands of travelers are subjected to these searches and if they resist or question the process, the TSA will threaten to not allow them to fly. This coercive measure usually succeeds as many travelers have a significant amount of time and resources invested in the need to travel.

There are other problems with these machines as well (they are slow; expensive; travelers are denied access and line of sight to their possessions) but the issues listed above are most urgent.

Thank you for your time. The Constitution guarantees all Americans freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, and an invasive procedure which clearly violates the spirit of this cherished document should not be implemented lightly. I would appreciate it if you or your staff would look into what is going on with security at our airports. I agree that security is important, but our basic right to be secure in our person and effects should not be easily overridden by a Federal agency acting outside of its defined powers.

Sincerely,

(put your signature here)

Your Name
Your Address
Your City and State
Your Phone Number
Your voting district, if you choose to include that information

The following is a list of contact info for the major U.S. airlines - PM me if I've forgotten any. I'll also be glad to add info for major metro transit authorities or other relevant offices. I've included links to the airlines' online complaint forms (most of the airlines don't have general email addresses, although I'm posting each executive email address when I can find one that appears legitimate. Note: These addresses are publicly available on the Web, so I don't think I'm violating anyone's legal rights by re-posting them here.) I'm personally going to print and mail letters to these folks.

American Airlines, Inc.
Gerard J. Arpey, President and CEO
4333 Amon Carter Blvd
Fort Worth, TX 76155-2605
Phone: 817-963-1234
Fax: 817-967-2841
Online complaint form

Gerard J. Arpey
President and CEO
(817) 963-1234
[email protected]

Delta Airlines, Inc.
Daniel Carp, Chairman
Richard Anderson, CEO and Director
1030 Delta Blvd.
Atlanta, GA 30320
Phone: 404-715-2600
Fax: 404-715-5042
Online complaint form

Richard Anderson
CEO and Director
[email protected]

Frontier Airlines, Inc.
Bryan Bedford, Chairman, President & CEO
7001 Tower Road
Denver, CO 80249
Phone: 720-374-4200
Fax: 720-374-4375
Online complaint form

[email protected] (?)

Southwest Airlines Company
Gary Kelly, Chairman, President & CEO
2072 Love Field Dr.
Dallas, TX 75235
Phone: 214-792-4000
Fax: 214-792-5015

Here's another good letter to Southwest Airlines from Ink, and one from flapping arms - both of these are short enough to fit into Southwest's online comment page, which limits to 2500 char. (Go to 'email us')

Gary Kelly, Chairman, President & CEO
[email protected]

Jim Ruppel
Vice President, Customer Relations
(214) 792-4223
[email protected]

US Airways Group, Inc.
W. Douglas Parker, Chairman, President & CEO
111 W. Rio Salado Pkwy.
Tempe, AZ 85281
Phone: 480-693-0800
Online complaint form

W. Douglas Parker, Chairman, President & CEO
(480) 693-6775
[email protected]

United Continental Holdings
Glenn F. Tilton, Chairman
Jeffery Smisek, President, CEO and Director
77 W. Wacker Dr.
Chicago, IL 60601
Phone: 312-997-8000
Email: [email protected] (include your contact info and your Mileage Plus number if you have one)

Glenn F. Tilton, Chairman
(877) 228-1327
[email protected]

Here's some verbiage to start off those who'd like to direct missives to them. Again, feel free to copy and use if you're trying to fight the WBIs, although you might want to make some edits. You also should consider attaching whatever you've already sent to your elected reps. FTer flapping arms included his status as shareholder in his letter to WN, which is also GREAT information to use.

Another official you may consider, who's been talking in the press about all the anti-WBI mail he's been getting:

Geoff Freeman, Executive Vice President
U.S. Travel Association
1100 New York Avenue, NW
Suite 450
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 408-8422
fax: (202) 408-1255
[email protected]

 

[jmdrake]

Thanks for posting this. I just have one objection.

Finally, and most important, if there are problems found on the image, or someone exercises their right to opt out of the WBI machine, the TSA will perform a ‘pat down’ at the checkpoint. Having been subject to one of these ‘pat downs,’ I can testify that these searches are more akin to friskings that accused criminals receive upon arrest. New, enhanced procedures have just been introduced that include touching of the genitalia by TSA officers. Evidence is mounting that these friskings would be more accurately described as sexual assaults in any other context. As a law-abiding American without so much as a speeding ticket to my name, I resent the repeated insistence by government that I should allow this intrusive infringement upon my rights and privacy simply to travel to another part of the country.

Having been arrested once (traffic violation) I can attest to the fact that my genitals were not touched. In other words they are treating travelers WORSE than someone who's been arrested! But again thanks for posting this. It's a good starting off point. We also need to start making reigning in the TSA a subject of every so called "town hall meeting" from now until this whole mess is done away with.

 

[Deborah K]

I read that, and having never been arrested, I didn't know if it was accurate or not. I think the TSA needs to hear from us as well.

 

[Melissa]

Thankls Deb. I have to fly next month really really hoping they get something done before i have to fly really freaking me out that they might touch my junk

 

[Deborah K]

Melissa, sew some lead-letters into your bra and panties with a message for the TSA.

 

[Noob]

End 'virtual strip searches' by TSA.


http://superstore.wnd.com/SPECIALTY-ITEMS/STOP-AIRPORT-HUMILIATION-NOW_2

 

[Noob]

sample letter

Oppose the SAFE AIR Act of 2010, S. 3536

The Transportation Security Administration recently introduced new "enhanced" airport screening procedures that are so objectionable, invasive and repugnant to travelers that widespread anger and rebellion are the result including from the world's largest pilots union representing 12,000 pilots.

Under the new screening protocols, passengers are subjected to a virtual "strip search" by being required to undergo a humiliating full-body scan, resulting in the display of a graphic image of their naked body to be scrutinized by a TSA agent.

If they choose to "opt out" of the full-body scan, they are forced instead to undergo the same kind of aggressive ("enhanced") pat-down that criminals and drug-dealers get, including direct manual contact with their breasts and genitalia. Children are not exempt.

Jeffrey Goldberg at the Atlantic reported that a TSA agent told him the pat-down procedure, which involves the touching of breasts and genitals, was simply a bullying technique meant to get passengers inside the full body scanner.

While such degrading and invasive searches certainly violate passengers' Fourth Amendment guarantee to be "secure in their persons against unreasonable searches and seizures," the generation of naked images of passengers arguably amounts to the creation of illegal pornography.

First off on the TSA's blog (http://blog.tsa.gov/) - they claim: "As we've stated from the beginning, TSA has not, will not and the machines cannot store images of passengers at airports."

Note: *cannot*

However; if you go to the manufacturer's page - it states the *exact opposite*.

http://www.brijot.com/products-and-technology/gen-2/gen-2-key-capabilities-64.html

"Reporting capabilities
Based on each organization's specific policies and procedures, GEN 2 offers the ability to turn on or off its recording features. In recording mode, up to 40,000 events can be recorded and stored by date and time, along with a snapshot image of the subject that shows the detection boxes, as well as the correlating millimeter wave images, for easy recall of event details. The system also offers the ability to manually initiate a video capturing session, used independently from the detection engine, such as to record the search of a specific individual for future reference. "

Futhermore For the last few years, federal agencies have defended body scanning by insisting that all images will be discarded as soon as they're viewed. The Transportation Security Administration claimed last summer, for instance, that "scanned images cannot be stored or recorded."

Now it turns out that some police agencies are storing the controversial images after all. The U.S. Marshals Service admitted this week that it had surreptitiously saved tens of thousands of images recorded with a millimeter wave system at the security checkpoint of a single Florida courthouse.

This follows an earlier disclosure (PDF) by the TSA that it requires all airport body scanners it purchases to be able to store and transmit images for "testing, training, and evaluation purposes." The agency says, however, that those capabilities are not normally activated when the devices are installed at airports.

Body scanners penetrate clothing to provide a highly detailed image so accurate that critics have likened it to a virtual strip search. Technologies vary, with millimeter wave systems capturing fuzzier images, and backscatter X-ray machines able to show precise anatomical detail.

The U.S. government likes the idea because body scanners can detect concealed weapons better than traditional magnetometers. Tis privacy debate, which has been simmering since the days of the Bush administration, came to a boil two weeks ago when Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced that scanners would soon appear at virtually every major airport. The updated list includes airports in New York City, Dallas, Washington, Miami, San Francisco, Seattle, and Philadelphia.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center, a Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group, has filed a lawsuit asking a federal judge to grant an immediate injunction pulling the plug on TSA's body scanning program. In a separate lawsuit, EPIC obtained a letter (PDF) from the Marshals Service, part of the Justice Department, and released it on Tuesday afternoon.

These "devices are designed and deployed in a way that allows the images to be routinely stored and recorded, which is exactly what the Marshals Service is doing

William Bordley, an associate general counsel with the Marshals Service, acknowledged in the letter that "approximately 35,314 images...have been stored on the Brijot Gen2 machine" used in the Orlando, Fla. federal courthouse. In addition, Bordley wrote, a Millivision machine was tested in the Washington, D.C. federal courthouse but it was sent back to the manufacturer, which now apparently possesses the image database.

The Gen 2 machine, manufactured by Brijot of Lake Mary, Fla., uses a millimeter wave radiometer and accompanying video camera to store up to 40,000 images and records. Brijot boasts that it can even be operated remotely: "The Gen 2 detection engine capability eliminates the need for constant user observation and local operation for effective monitoring. Using our APIs, instantly connect to your units from a remote location via the Brijot Client interface."

This trickle of disclosures about the true capabilities of body scanners--and how they're being used in practice--is probably what alarms privacy advocates more than anything else.

Moreover, backscatter X-ray technology is known to produce radiation that is potentially harmful to frequent fliers and airline crew members, which is why the American Pilots Association, representing about 12,000 pilots (including almost all of American Airlines' pilots) has strongly warned its members to refuse the full-body scanning.

This humiliating and degrading new program is already massively unpopular, and obviously subject to horrific abuse. As such, it is certain to result in a significant decline in air travel by Americans at a time when neither the airline industry nor the country can afford another economic crisis.

Therefore, I call for the immediate and indefinite suspension of these "enhanced security screening procedures," as well as an apology to the American public by Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano for her ill-advised decision to implement it.

Oppose the SAFE AIR Act of 2010, S. 3536, that would install full-body scanning machines in every airport in the nation.

These virtual strip search machines subject victims to dangerous radiation levels, invade personal privacy in direct opposition to the Fourth Amendment, and even facilitate the recording and transfer of nude images of adults and children, which would in the case of the children, constitute the crime of child pornography.

Enforcement of full-body scanning at airports is a direct assault against the personal integrity of the flying public. The demoralization such a practice inflicts and the loss of liberty is what strikes real terror in the hearts of a once-free society, innocent under the law of the land until proven guilty.

Help protect the freedoms established under the Constitution and the Bill of Rights by dismissing this legislation for what it is, a government-approved and -mandated strip search.