Begin forwarded message:
From: Dan Lynch <dan@lynch.com>
Date: July 10, 2009 10:43:47 AM EDT
To: Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>, <ChrisSavage@dwt.com>
Subject: Re: [IP] Re: A provokative pov -- screening gets slammed by federal judge
It sounds good until you see the HUGE delays the Israeli procedures entail. Three interrogators per traveler for a few minutes each. Yes, they are very effective, but at a huge cost. You would see lines stretching out to the freeways. Or no real air travel. One only goes to Israel for a good reason. One goes to Seattle/Vegas/New York for fun mostly. Anyway, I’m not faulting the Israeli techniques; just that they do not scale well.
Dan
On 7/9/09 8:09 AM, "Dave Farber" <dave@farber.net> wrote:
Tel. 707-967-0203 Cell 650-776-7313
My assistant is Dori Kirk Tel. 707-255-7094 dori@lynch.com
Dan
On 7/9/09 8:09 AM, "Dave Farber" <dave@farber.net> wrote:
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Savage, Christopher" <ChrisSavage@dwt.com>
Date: July 9, 2009 10:56:51 AM EDT
To: <dave@farber.net>
Subject: RE: [IP] Re: A provokative pov -- screening gets slammed by federal judge
If the TSA asked reasonable questions and used the answers as a basis for deciding who has to stand in line, take their shoes off, etc., that might make sense. The way they (we) have chosen to deal with this issue creates enormous burdens on society/the economy in terms of lost time and hassle on the part of millions of people per day. If the Israelis have a more efficient way to achieve the objective (no terrorists on airplanes) than we have, let’s go for it. But I think that that would suggest a complete re-engineering of our airport security processes, not just adding additional stuff to the existing process.
Chris S.From: David Farber [mailto:dave@farber.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 7:42 PM
To: ip
Subject: [IP] Re: A provokative pov -- screening gets slammed by federal judge
Begin forwarded message:
From: Stewart Baker <stewart.baker@gmail.com>
Date: July 8, 2009 6:41:50 PM EDT
To: dave@farber.net
Cc: ip <ip@v2.listbox.com>
Subject: Re: [IP] Re: A provokative pov -- screening gets slammed by federal judge
For a long time it was conventional wisdom, probably including on this list, that TSA wasn't as good at security as the Israelis because TSA looked for weapons while the Israelis looked for terrorists. That's probably true.
So how do the Israelis look for terrorists instead of just weapons? By asking reasonable questions and listening for answers that don't add up. Which is what the TSA has begun doing, thank goodness.
Only a monomaniac (or the ACLU) would think that TSA could do a good job by failing to look for and react to unusual or suspicious behavior and instead just looking for bomb equipment.
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 5:53 PM, David Farber <dave@farber.net> wrote:
Begin forwarded message:
From: Robert Siegel <rob@casasiegel.com>
Date: July 8, 2009 3:57:46 PM EDT
To: Dave Farber <dave@FARBER.NET>
Subject: Re: [IP] TSA screening gets slammed by federal judge
Dave,
Dumb question to you and the list:
If a TSA member caught people using fake passports, isn't that a good thing
for the citizenry? I've listened to the audio tape from Mr. Bierfeldt's
experience, and I agree that the TSA representatives behaved incorrectly in
that instance, but if these folks can catch people who might be smuggling
drugs or people illegally (into prostitution, slavery, etc.), shouldn't we
be happy about that?
While I grant that "increasing scope" on negative things is a real pain,
what about when they do things that are good for us? Personally, I'm
psyched someone caught some bad guys smuggling fake passports.
Best,
Rob
On 7/8/09 7:01 AM, "Dave Farber" <dave@farber.net> wrote:
Begin forwarded message:
From: Richard Forno <rforno@infowarrior.org>
Date: July 8, 2009 9:20:26 AM EDT
To: Undisclosed-recipients: <>;
Cc: Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>
Subject: TSA screening gets slammed by federal judge
JULY 7, 2009, 11:14 P.M. ET
Is Tougher Airport Screening Going Too Far?
By SCOTT MCCARTNEY
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204556804574261940842372518.html
The Transportation Security Administration has moved beyond just
checking for weapons and explosives. It’s now training airport
screeners to spot anything suspicious, and then honoring them when
searches lead to arrests for crimes like drug possession and credit-
card fraud.
But two court cases in the past month question whether TSA searches—
which the agency says have broadened to allow screeners to use more
judgment—have been going too far.
A federal judge in June threw out seizure of three fake passports from
a traveler, saying that TSA screeners violated his Fourth Amendment
rights against unreasonable search and seizure. Congress authorizes
TSA to search travelers for weapons and explosives; beyond that, the
agency is overstepping its bounds, U.S. District Court Judge Algenon
L. Marbley said.
Two recent court cases question whether TSA searches have been going
too far.
“The extent of the search went beyond the permissible purpose of
detecting weapons and explosives and was instead motivated by a desire
to uncover contraband evidencing ordinary criminal wrongdoing,” Judge
Marbley wrote.
In the second case, Steven Bierfeldt, treasurer for the Campaign for
Liberty, a political organization launched from Ron Paul’s
presidential run, was detained at the St. Louis airport because he was
carrying $4,700 in a lock box from the sale of tickets, T-shirts,
bumper stickers and campaign paraphernalia. TSA screeners quizzed him
about the cash, his employment and the purpose of his trip to St.
Louis, then summoned local police and threatened him with arrest
because he responded to their questions with a question of his own:
What were his rights and could TSA legally require him to answer?
Mr. Bierfeldt recorded the encounter on his iPhone and the American
Civil Liberties Union filed suit in June against Homeland Security
Secretary Janet Napolitano, claiming in part that Mr. Bierfeldt’s
experience at the airport was not an anomaly.
“Whether as a matter of formal policy or widespread practice, TSA now
operates on the belief that airport security screening provides a
convenient opportunity to fish for evidence of criminal conduct far
removed from the agency’s mandate of ensuring flight safety,” the ACLU
said in its suit.
‘Mission Creep’?
TSA said in a statement on the Bierfeldt incident that travelers are
required to cooperate with screeners, and while it is legal to carry
any amount of money when flying domestically, the agency believes
cooperation includes answering questions about property. As a result
of the recording, however, TSA determined that “the tone and language
used by the TSA employee was inappropriate and proper disciplinary
action was taken.”
The cases will likely inflame TSA critics and frequent travelers who
believe screeners take a heavy-handed approach and worsen the hassle
of getting through airports with layers of rules and sometimes
inconsistent policies between different cities.
“TSA agents don’t get to play cops,” says Ben Wizner, an attorney who
filed Mr. Bierfeldt’s suit. The ACLU has heard an increasing number of
reports of TSA agents involved in what he called “mission creep,” he
says.
snip
-------------------------------------------
Archives: RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com <http://www.listbox.com/>
-------------------------------------------
Archives:
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com <http://www.listbox.com/>
Tel. 707-967-0203 Cell 650-776-7313
My assistant is Dori Kirk Tel. 707-255-7094 dori@lynch.com