Popehat On TSA Reaction To Corbett Nudie Scanner Video
Ken White and his taint blog at Popehat:
This post is not about whether Corbett is right about the scanners. My point is about the TSA's reaction. Today, Corbett reported that in the course of being interviewed by reporters about his claims, he learned that a TSA spokesperson "strongly cautioned" a reporter not to cover the story. He didn't identify the reporter. In the comments to his post, someone claiming to be a reporter from Smarter Travel asserted that they, too, were "strongly cautioned not to cover the story." The post asserted the TSA spokesperson in question was one Sari Koshetz.
He emailed her:
Dear Ms. Koshetz:I write for a modestly-trafficked blog that frequently discusses TSA issues.
I write to request a comment on a report regarding your conduct. Specifically, two reporters have now asserted that you "strongly cautioned" them against reporting on the allegations of litigant and blogger Jonathan Corbett regarding TSA scanners.
Specifically:
1. Did you (or other TSA spokespersons) in fact "caution" journalists against reporting on the story?
2. Was your caution meant to convey that journalists who report on the issue could face some sort of governmental action?
3. What was the legal or factual basis of your caution?
4. Is there any other comment you would like to make?
Thank you,
etc.
He got a prompt but brief response:
Any guidance provided is to caution reporters not to generalize that our technology doesn't work or print something without all the facts, based on an inconclusive YouTube video.
Ken admitted to being shocked by the response:
You know, if I were the spokesperson for a controversial and unpopular government agency frequently accused of infringing upon the civil rights of Americans, I think that I would go out of my way, when asked, to emphasize that I hadn't meant any threats against journalists and that I didn't intend anything I said to be threatening.Unless, of course, I meant to be threatening.
As I've said recently, ambiguity in threats is the hallmark of bullshit thuggery. Until I see a clarification from the TSA, that's how I interpret this incident: as a deliberate attempt by the TSA to chill journalists from writing about whether its intrusive full-body scanners are worthless.
So. Allow me to offer my response to the TSA and its spokespersons: snort my taint, thugs.
It's the hallmark of a police state -- the thugs are employed by the government. Don't say I didn't tell you so. Start taking notice, speaking up and standing up -- before it's too late.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated..."
Some jackass federal judge deciding these searches are not unreasonable only serves to demonstrate that many people who should know better...don't.
And, yes, if I were a spokesperson for some hypothetical gov't agency accused of something like this, I would be a little more forthcoming with an explanation.
DrCos at March 9, 2012 4:13 AM
I am a fan of civil disobedience but believe we are long past the point of the justice/security industry changing their policy based on feedback from the public. In other areas of contact with the law, standing up for yourself is a high risk maneuver. It is only a matter of time before before it is the same here. Make no mistake things are going to get much worse until someone figures out how to make more money not searching people than there is to be made searching them.
nuzltr2 at March 9, 2012 6:34 AM
"Nice little news agency you've got there. Be a shame if something happened to it. Not that we're threatening or anything, mind you, but accidents happen. You know what I mean?"
David L. Burkhead at March 9, 2012 7:43 AM
Technically my taint is only a guest blogger.
Ken at March 9, 2012 9:23 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/03/09/popehat_on_tsa.html#comment-3051197">comment from KenYou bitch! You just made me snort coffee on leg.
Amy Alkon
at March 9, 2012 9:55 AM
The trouble with civil disobedience in this case is that it will cost you at least the price of a wasted airline ticket per incident. TSA will steal your flight from you for giving them lip.
So just do as I do: boycott air travel completely, and write and tell your favorite airline why. Once TSA's existence is costing them a lot of money, and they know it, they'll find a way to get rid of the thugs.
John David Galt at March 16, 2012 5:57 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/03/09/popehat_on_tsa.html#comment-3076915">comment from John David GaltOnce TSA's existence is costing them a lot of money, and they know it, they'll find a way to get rid of the thugs.
Um, you don't think it's costing them yet? Clearly, this isn't a workable plan.
I'm planning more civil disobedience - just have to get through most of April. This is my busiest time. And when I say busy, I mean 5am to 9pm days, and then a little more work from 11 pm to midnight.
Amy Alkon
at March 16, 2012 6:45 PM
Leave a comment