TSA: Exploratory Surgery Before Boarding?
It seems they'll be expanding the duties of those unskilled workers they hire to man the TSA checkpoints, increasing their duties to cutting you open to make sure you aren't packin'. Via MSNBC:
Western intelligence agencies believe that al-Qaida doctors have been trained to implant bombs inside the bodies of suicide bombers, Britain's Sunday Times reported.The doctors, thought to have been trained by a man who worked with the top bomb-maker for al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), have the ability to put explosive compounds in breasts and abdomens of suicide bombers, the newspaper reported without citing its sources.
The lead doctor was thought to have been killed in a drone attack earlier this year and likely worked with the master bomber-maker, Ibrahim al-Asiri, according to the newspaper.
...Experts said explosive compounds such as pentaerythritol tetranitrate (PETN) could be surgically implanted in an aspiring suicide bomber, who would them allow the wounds to heal, according to the newspaper. Body scanners in most airports around the world would not be able to detect the device, which could be detonated by injection, the newspaper added.
Oh, and there's this:
The CIA want to track down the group of doctors, the newspaper reported.
So...when we aren't pretending to have security which is actually a jobs program and a way to shovel cash into the pockets of the well connected (in addition to priming us to give up our rights quietly and politely), we have highly trained intelligence officers doing the actually meaningful intelligence work.
Comments
All of the recent terrorist plots have been discovered by double agents? There was an article about this (that I unfortunately can't seem to find again), that pointed out that the double agents seem to actually initiate the plots: persuade their targets to carry out an attack, provide the equipment, and then arrest them.
After all, the best way to raise your count of "terror plots stopped" is to initiate the plots yourself.
Posted by: a_random_guy at May 14, 2012 2:34 AM
Oh no! She's reaching critical breast mass!
I seriously doubt this. It's obviously the next logical step from shoe and underwear bombs and effectively search-proof, given the prevalence of implants. But the technical problems, like having to detonate a very small amount of explosives against the skin of the plane remain.
Of course, it is possible that Al Qaida are that stupid.
The good news is we can rate bombs in bra calibers now - "don't worry, that's only a B cup, will never penetrate the armor" "Watch out, DD at six o'clock!"
Posted by: Ltw at May 14, 2012 5:42 AM
Bullshit on stilts. PETN is way too unstable to be used this way. Any explosive that could be detonated without a blasting cap is.
And it would be kind of obvious if you had an electrical interface on your chest to trigger the C4.
That's not even counting the fact that most explosives are toxic.
The only way this works is if they shove it up their ass.
Posted by: brian at May 14, 2012 8:13 AM
"Hello, Department of Security Theatre. How may I destroy your Constitution today?"
*Yeah, this is Bob over in Public Humiliation and Perversion. We need something to justify more intrusive searches. Any ideas?*
"Well, I saw 'The Dark Knight', and there was a scene with a guy that had a cell phone detonator and plastic explosives sewn into his body. You could say that Al Qaeda has suddenly developed advanced surgical skills to implant bombs in people ..."
*Holy crap. That's so stupid the public just might buy it! Thanks!*
Posted by: Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at May 14, 2012 8:27 AM
This sounds like reasoning to force people to go through the scanners.
Of course, the newspaper reported without citing its sources.
Regardless of whether the scanners are damaging to bodies or insulin pumps, they are damaging to our rights.
Posted by: Jazzhands at May 14, 2012 10:23 AM
If you want to scream about your Fourth Amendment rights, go right ahead. The courts will not listen to you. If you don't wish to be searched, don't fly. Period. End of discussion.
You do not have a "right to fly," therefore TSA searches are done "by consent." That's the reasoning they use, and that's what the courts are upholding.
If you want TSA gone, boycott.
But if you're going to have hissy fits claiming your rights have been violated, I hate to break it to you, but you sound like idiots. You're no different from the internet trolls who get banned from message boards who whine, "What happened to our first amendment rights of free speeeeeeeeeeeeeeech? Waaaaaah!"
The First Amendment means that the government cannot curtail your freedom of speech. Private companies certainly can. Same deal with the Fourth Amendment.
I hate TSA as much the rest of you. However, kicking and screaming and holding your breath about the Fourth Amendment will get you nowhere. I can't make it any clearer than that.
Posted by: Patrick at May 14, 2012 1:42 PM
As Earl Pitts posted here:
First, the right to travel has been upheld in the courts. There isn't a restriction on the means
He continues:
Secondly, TSA is getting its paws into bus, train, and car travel, thanks to VIPR teams hitting up local and Greyhound stations, harassing people on Metros and Amtrak, and even working with a road block outside of Atlanta. Are you going to assert that the only right to travel is by what we can do with our own two feet?Driving may be a privilege, but that's because I'm asking to operate a motor vehicle on a public road. There is no restriction on me riding as a passenger in a car, other than being permitted by the owner of the vehicle.
Posted by: Amy Alkon 
at May 14, 2012 2:11 PM
Here's another:
http://objectivistindividualist.blogspot.com/2010/11/right-to-travel-and-illegimate-tsa.html
Is flying a privilege? Does an individual have a right to travel or not? If he has a right to travel, is there some reason why that right does not extend to air travel? As the title implies, I argue that the individual has the right to travel and that right surely extends to travel by air.To live, man must use his mind to survive and to flourish. He must be able to produce clothing, housing, food, and many other goods and services to survive and to flourish in life. This is not an easy enterprise and it is hugely aided if a man can associate freely with others and trade goods and services and other values in his life with them on a voluntary basis. His life is more secure and enhanced when he can travel to trade goods and services, to visit friends and relatives, or to gather knowledge and trade ideas with others. Travel has proven to be extremely important as a contributor to man's increasing body of knowledge, not to mention as a means to trade with people who have resources or the means to make products which were not found in other locales. Adam Smith in the Wealth of Nations understood this well.
Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, John Adams, Robert R. Livingston, and Roger Sherman of the draft committee to write the Declaration of Independence understood this. When that document stated that legitimate government was limited to the purpose of protecting the equal, sovereign right of the individual to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, they definitely believed that man had a right to travel. If I am denied the right to travel by plane from Maryland to Oklahoma to see my mother periodically, my pursuit of happiness is greatly impaired. My right to earn a living is certainly impaired if I am not allowed to fly to Connecticut to testify as an expert witness in a trial on intellectual theft. My right to earn a living is also impaired if a customer with a critical materials development issue, or a materials process control issue, or a dubious materials vendor cannot visit my laboratory from Utah or California to participate in the analysis of his materials. These are not matters of privilege which a legitimate government is free to deny or allow. These are essential rights of mine by virtue of my requirements to live my life in a state of liberty and for the purpose of my happiness. It is precisely to secure these equal, sovereign rights that We the People of the United States ordained and established the Constitution for the United States of America and the government it set up and controls.
Posted by: Amy Alkon
at May 14, 2012 2:13 PM
Sorry, Amy, but the courts have already ruled, and you're wrong. A right to travel does not mean a right to fly. It means you have a right to get from point A to point B. The constitution, nor any court, has ever averred that the right to travel implies a right to fly.
If you need to go across country and don't wish to be searched, there's Amtrak and there's road-tripping it.
If you wish to go to Paris..."Every night, in my dreams...I see you...I feel you...that is how I know you go on..."
Amy, you're arguing against what the courts have already ruled. As far as that direction is concerned, it is "Game Over."
Posted by: Patrick at May 14, 2012 2:21 PM
Is flying a privilege?
Yes. It is extended to those who can afford it.
Posted by: Patrick at May 14, 2012 2:23 PM
Patrick - TSA has extended their searches to both of the modes of transit you mention.
A gentleman was stopped in CT last week. Seems that the radioactive dye he was injected with for some test set off a sensor in a cop car, and he was pulled over and searched, despite the fact that he had a note from the doctor detailing precisely what had been done.
Fourth amendment or no, this is ridiculous.
Where does it end? Walking to the corner store for a sandwich is probable cause for a cavity search?
Posted by: brian at May 14, 2012 3:05 PM
Well, since the courts aren't helping us -- we've tried Fourth Amendment rights, and lost -- time to hit them in the pocket. Amy has the right idea with the sick, perverted TSA agent who penetrated her manually.
Posted by: Patrick at May 14, 2012 3:26 PM
This is clearly anything but security we have at airports. It's basically big pieces of taxpayer-financed meat impeding your path to the plane.
Posted by: Amy Alkon
at May 14, 2012 3:27 PM
Patrick, you have been cheated of an education. Travel by flight is Federally controlled. It is NOT a simple contract between a provider and a customer.
Question: why are you so determined to preserve being presumed guilty for wanting to fly - and to preserve the slippery slope enabling the expansion of Federally-approved police?
Where do YOU want them to stop?
Posted by: Radwaste at May 14, 2012 5:43 PM
Radwaste, you have been cheated of brains. The courts have ruled that you do not have a right to fly and that all searches are considered voluntary. If you do not wish to be searched, don't fly.
It is not ME arguing this point. It is what the courts have ruled. Do you not understand this concept? Your arguments have been tried at a court of law and found wanting...are you going to continue to argue your indefensible position because your too embarrassed to admit you don't know what you're talking about and the courts have already ruled against you?
Or can you get this concept to sink in without me having to get out the hammer?
Posted by: Patrick at May 15, 2012 8:32 AM
Answer the question, Patrick: where do you want them to stop?
Posted by: Radwaste at May 16, 2012 5:43 PM
