Defending People

the tao of criminal-defense trial lawyering

TSA: Anonymity Breeds Contempt">TSA: Anonymity Breeds Contempt

I don’t, as a gen­eral prin­ci­ple, allow anony­mous com­ments here. Chief among the rea­sons is that the more anony­mous peo­ple are, the worse they behave. Peo­ple do things behind tinted glass on the free­way that they would never do on the side­walk. They say things from the cover of dark­ness that they would never say in the light of day.

Why do TSA goons steal? They steal because they can. They steal from your checked lug­gage because when you get to Chicago and your cuf­flinks are miss­ing, there is no way for you to track down the guy in the Atlanta air­port who stole them. If TSA wanted to stop its employ­ees steal­ing from checked lug­gage, there’d be a sim­ple solu­tion: any TSA employee who opens a bag puts his name in it.

But that would cre­ate account­abil­ity, and the secu­rity state can­not oper­ate if its func­tionar­ies are account­able. If screen­ers knew that their moth­ers were likely to read on the inter­net about what they were doing on the job, they would be on much bet­ter behav­ior, which would not aid in the government’s avowed pro­gram of unques­tion­ing com­pli­ance.

If We the Peo­ple don’t cre­ate account­abil­ity, they will never change their ways.

One of the weapons the Peo­ple can law­fully use to cre­ate account­abil­ity is pub­li­ca­tion of the truth: “nam­ing and sham­ing.” While a com­plaint through offi­cial chan­nels goes nowhere (we have inves­ti­gated and found that ze agent vas chust follovink orders), pub­li­ca­tion of an offend­ing TSA employee’s name gets her atten­tion. Some day she might want to get a real job, or rent an apart­ment, or date a decent human being; the fact that she once abused author­ity in the name of safety might get in the way of any of those projects. (As, I would argue, it should: any TSA employee or for­mer employee who has not pub­licly denounced the agency should feel more ostracism than that with which our soci­ety treats sex offend­ers who don’t work for TSA.)

A blog­ger who has been vig­or­ous in pro­mot­ing TSA account­abil­ity by nam­ing and sham­ing its crim­i­nals (see Thedala Magee and Tiffany Apple­white) is “Advice God­dess” Amy Alkon. Thanks to Alkon, when you google Thedala Magee’s name Sim­ple Jus­tice pops up—an unen­vi­able posi­tion for a gov­ern­ment bully. We know that the nam­ing and sham­ing is work­ing because Thedala Magee lawyered up and made a hol­low threat to sue Alkon.

Alkon seems to be a fre­quent tar­get for TSA abuse, whether because of her fig­ure (“It is odd that I, like many large-breasted women am always chosen—always by men at the metal detectors—to go for fur­ther screen­ing. Every time I fly.”) or because she is an out­spo­ken critic of the agency’s secu­rity the­atre (buxom rev­o­lu­tion­ar­ies, beware!).

Most recently at JFK Ter­mi­nal 2:

The light-skinned black woman who screened me, last name “Moore,” was wear­ing her photo ID upside down so her first name could not be read. After she ran her hands, most dis­gust­ingly, all over my body, graz­ing my labia and touch­ing my breasts and inside my turtle­neck on my bare skin, I told her I needed her first name. She refused to give it to me.

Moore’s super­vi­sor, Roger Grant, also refused to give Alkon Moore’s first name; he also refused to give her a com­plaint form.

Even­tu­ally the world will learn who Ms. Moore is. It may hap­pen because TSA’s flack answers Alkon’s ques­tions; more likely it will hap­pen because one of Alkon’s read­ers pass­ing through JFK gets Moore’s first name, snaps a photo, and sends it to Alkon. In any case, Alkon will do a follow-up post. And when she does, woe betide Ms. Moore if her name is as googleable as Thedala Magee’s.

I would like to make this lit­tle con­tri­bu­tion to the rev­o­lu­tion: Good on Alkin for demand­ing names (and for hav­ing the will to pub­lish them and the read­er­ship to make a dif­fer­ence) but she’s doing so at the wrong time.

I don’t fly out of US air­ports any­more, but if I did I would ask to see ID—including first and last name—before allow­ing the grope­down to begin. If Alkon started demand­ing names before being touched, she would be much more likely to get them (it’s not an unrea­son­able request that she know who is touch­ing her before the fes­tiv­i­ties begin); the per­son giv­ing her name would be more likely to be cir­cum­spect (I assume that a less-offensive encounter is one of Alkon’s objec­tives); and in the likely event that she did behave in a way that Alkon thought inap­pro­pri­ate or exces­sive, Alkon would imme­di­ately have a name to share with the world.

Share

About The Author

Mark Bennett got his letter of marque from the Supreme Court of Texas in May 1995. He is famous for having no sense of humor when it comes to totalitarianism.

Comments

14 Responses to “TSA: Anonymity Breeds Contempt”

  1. Thomas Stephenson says:

    A lot of the prob­lem with TSA is that it’s largely pri­va­tized. It’s much harder to hold private-sector employ­ees account­able than gov­ern­ment employees.

    Plus, the extra prob­lem with pri­va­ti­za­tion is that even when it’s highly unpop­u­lar it’s much harder to get rid of. If this were an agency strictly run by the gov­ern­ment, that’s one thing; but when peo­ple are actu­ally prof­it­ing, get­ting rid of it is that much harder.

    • Thomas, can you pro­vide a link for your asser­tion that TSA is largely pri­va­tized? (I think you’ve got the rel­a­tive ease of hold­ing account­able private-sector and gov­ern­ment employ­ees wrong.)

      • mark ash says:

        Pub­lic employ­ees are much harder to hold account­able than gov­ern­ment ones. Air­port secu­rity should be made pri­vate. Air­lines could be sued if either

        1. secu­rity offi­cers abused their power and authority

        or

        2. secu­rity offi­cers failed in their duties and dam­ages resulted.

        True, pri­vate would not be per­fect (humans are not per­fect), but way much bet­ter than the air­port secu­rity that TSA deliv­ers now.

  2. dean cameron says:

    It’s much eas­ier to change gov­ern­ment poli­cies. For the cit­i­zens of Backwards-Land. :)

    I admire Alkon for going pub­lic with her com­plaint yet a com­mon charge stated has to do with “min­i­mum wage work­ers” or com­par­ing them to peo­ple who have entry level jobs.

    There’s no way any­one doing that job could do it well. It’s point­less. They are only there to play roles in Secu­rity Theater.

    The fun thing to do is carry a Bill of Rights — Secu­rity Edition.

    As I mar­ket them, I won’t post a link. That would be bad form.

    The TSA is a valu­able asset in our eter­nal war on ter­ror. In Backwards-Land.

  3. Mr. B., this post­ing has inspired me to cre­ate the “TSA Shuf­fle” — it’s got a good beat but you can’t dance to it due to being in your sck­ives & socks. Free Mole checks & dis­counted pim­ple pops while you wait is job cre­ation with a dab of secu­rity on the side. Or, sim­ply speak out in favor of doc­u­ment­ing (film­ing) all searches of peo­ple & prop­erty & manda­tory psych exams for touchers.

    No, not the one where face­less folks side step their way from point A to all points in between await­ing to be waived through or waived over to either a machine or a pair of
    Brickle Berry gloved hands. This one has the customer(s) antic­i­pat­ing two or three moves ahead of time inorder to facil­i­ate the process in a timely man­ner. *(any­one that’s been to jail / prison can appri­ci­ate the men­tal pic­ture {guilty or not} of stand­ing in line ‘naked’ while hold­ing out your clothes and boots to be shook out prior to bend­ing over and lift­ing this and that — rain, sleet or snow.)

    Since it’s not against the law to sin­gle out and fin­ger pay­ing cus­tomers, they should have no prob­lem with every­one pre-complying in mass. At some point they are going to order every­one to put their clothes back on and move along. And since you can get name tags at garage sales, or put your co-worker’s on by acci­dent we’ll prob­a­bly never really know who the cherry pick­ers’ are unless they are orderd to com­ply.
    Thanks Al Quada

  4. Peter Papps says:

    I alway carry the phone num­bers for the TSA, Home­land Secu­rity and Dept. of Trans­porta­tion and other rel­e­vant inspec­tors general,soI can make the call right there. I haven’t had to do it yet, but I’m always ready. And take it from me, a for­mer fed­eral prosecutor-those folks at the var­i­ous IG offices are just sit­ting at the edges of their seats, just wait­ing to go into action.

  5. Amy Alkon says:

    Thank you so much for post­ing this. It is so impor­tant that we all do what we can. Another thing the TSA does that I believe is meant to pun­ish us for opt­ing out of the scan­ners is leave our stuff where it can be stolen.

    They told me this time — and have told me time and time again — that they just don’t have per­son­nel to watch it. Wait — you can grope my body, entirely sans prob­a­ble cause, but where there’s a real risk, a proven risk, espe­cially vis a vis the thieves pop­u­lat­ing the TSA, I am left unpro­tected? My lap­top, my iPad, all my stuff is left out for the stealing?

    I fully believe that the TSA’s mis­sion (besides pro­vid­ing a jobs pro­gram with a gov­ern­ment pen­sion for those who’d oth­er­wise be work­ing as ham­burger clerks) is obe­di­ence train­ing for the Amer­i­can pub­lic to go qui­etly as our rights are yanked from us.

    • Michael Stuart says:

      @Amy:
      TSA’s mis­sion …is obe­di­ence training…

      Absolutely. It’s incul­ca­tion to a prison planet; slave-training for future gulag occupants.

      I’m begin­ning to think my “prin­ci­pled” stand to refuse fly­ing is fool­ish; because they can expand, and are expand­ing, to bus sta­tions, cruise ships…hell, even high-school prom nights. Will I even­tu­ally cower in my house and whis­per bravely “They bet­ter not come in HERE!”

      Last week’s opt-out and film event attracted more peo­ple than the Thanskgiving-day event two years ago. Per­haps the solu­tion is active civil dis­obe­di­ence; book cheap tick­ets for five or ten peo­ple, and bring another five or ten to film. All opt out, all demand names…

      …and ALL sue per­son­ally for sex­ual assault.

      Does TSA have the despi­ca­ble qual­i­fied immunity?

  6. Michelle Loret says:

    Oh, how I despise the The­ater if Secu­rity, as wit­nessed by my last search (9x out of 10 I am searched, to no avail). New machines at Hobby, the ones where they have to blur my pica-chu and are­ola because it is the bible belt, after all, and I came pre­pared: dress, bra­zier and thong panties only. “Ma’am, can you step aside?” “Why?” “We have to inves­ti­gate fur­ther.” “For what?” “You have areas that have come up.” “What kind of areas?” (I’ve become more surely since read­ing your blog, thx Mark, lol) She points to the dead man out­line on the screen behind me. My head swivels around like Car­rie. It has two cir­cles, one on each thigh, and one on pos­si­bly an under­wire on my bra (the girls need sup­port, what can I say?) I reply, “No way, this is ridicu­lous.” I then pro­ceed to embrace the ridicu­lous­ness (can’t beat em, join em) and lift up my dress to reveal my less than flat­ter­ing thighs. “Ma’am, PUT DOWN YOUR DRESS!” “Why? TSA is obvi­ously check­ing for cel­lulite and I have plenty. Just try­ing to share with 200 of my clos­est strangers and demys­tify for the author­i­ties since I have ONE piece of cloth­ing and TWO under­gar­ments on!” I was quickly escorted through. Not my finest moment, but I am so tired of it and it was 6am and I hadn’t had my morn­ing cof­fee so…game on.

  7. Amy Alkon says:

    I think your advice to demand names before being touched is wise. I would have to keep quiet about my rights before then, and remain calm — which is some­times hard because they do this thing to intim­i­date you (I believe): leav­ing your stuff out on the belt for any­one to take.

    I travel with my work life — my com­puter, my iPad, an iPad key­board (all of which were gifts from my boyfriend and thus have more mean­ing for me than they would as sim­ple use­ful elec­tron­ics). Yes, I have the mate­r­ial on them backed up, but I don’t want them stolen. It would be a huge deal for me, and an expen­sive one.

    They say they don’t have per­son­nel to watch it. Mean­while, they’ve put bil­lions — wasted bil­lions — into worth­less “secu­rity” measures.

  8. Amy Alkon says:

    Actu­ally, on sec­ond thought, these scum­bags are wear­ing their name badges upside down — they don’t want to give their name and are pur­pose­fully hid­ing it. I guess if I asked sweetly — “What’s your name?” — I might get it. It’s hard to hide the con­tempt I feel for them (earn­ing a liv­ing vio­lat­ing our rights) and the process.

Leave a non-anonymous Reply