Pilot to TSA: 'No Groping Me and No Naked Photos'

Rocky

Well-Known Member
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig11/roberts-m1.1.1.html

[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]october 15, 2010 – my name is michael roberts, and i am a pilot for expressjet airlines, inc., based in houston (that is, i still am for the time being). This morning as i attempted to pass through the security line for my commute to work i was denied access to the secured area of the terminal building at memphis international airport. I have passed through the same line roughly once per week for the past four and a half years without incident. Today, however, the transportation security administration (tsa) agents at this checkpoint were using one of the new advanced imaging technology (ait) systems that are currently being deployed at airports across the nation. These are the controversial devices featured by the media in recent months, albeit sparingly, which enable screeners to see beneath people’s clothing to an extremely graphic and intrusive level of detail (virtual strip searching). Travelers refusing this indignity may instead be physically frisked by a government security agent until the agent is satisfied to release them on their way in what is being touted as an "alternative option" to ait. The following is a somewhat hastily drafted account of my experience this morning. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]as i loaded my bags onto the x-ray scanner belt, an agent told me to remove my shoes and send them through as well, which i’ve not normally been required to do when passing through the standard metal detectors in uniform. When i questioned her, she said it was necessary to remove my shoes for the ait scanner. I explained that i did not wish to participate in the ait program, so she told me i could keep my shoes and directed me through the metal detector that had been roped off. She then called somewhat urgently to the agents on the other side: "we got an opt-out!" and also reported the "opt-out" into her handheld radio. On the other side i was stopped by another agent and informed that because i had "opted out" of ait screening, i would have to go through secondary screening. I asked for clarification to be sure he was talking about frisking me, which he confirmed, and i declined. At this point he and another agent explained the tsa’s latest decree, saying i would not be permitted to pass without showing them my naked body, and how my refusal to do so had now given them cause to put their hands on me as i evidently posed a threat to air transportation security (this, of course, is my nutshell synopsis of the exchange). I asked whether they did in fact suspect i was concealing something after i had passed through the metal detector, or whether they believed that i had made any threats or given other indications of malicious designs to warrant treating me, a law-abiding fellow citizen, so rudely. None of that was relevant, i was told. They were just doing their job. [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]eventually the airport police were summoned. Several officers showed up and we essentially repeated the conversation above. When it became clear that we had reached an impasse, one of the more sensible officers and i agreed that any further conversation would be pointless at this time. I then asked whether i was free to go. I was not. Another officer wanted to see my driver’s license. When i asked why, he said they needed information for their report on this "incident" – my name, address, phone number, etc. I recited my information for him, until he asked for my supervisor’s name and number at the airline. Why did he need that, i asked. For the report, he answered. I had already given him the primary phone number at my company’s headquarters. When i asked him what the chief pilot in houston had to do with any of this, he either refused or was simply unable to provide a meaningful explanation. I chose not to divulge my supervisor’s name as i preferred to be the first to inform him of the situation myself. In any event, after a brief huddle with several other officers, my interrogator told me i was free to go. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]as i approached the airport exit, however, i was stopped again by a man whom i believe to be the airport police chief, though i can’t say for sure. He said i still needed to speak with an investigator who was on his way over. I asked what sort of investigator. A tsa investigator, he said. As i was by this time looking eagerly forward to leaving the airport, i had little patience for the additional vexation. I’d been denied access to my workplace and had no other business keeping me there. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]"am i under arrest?" i asked. [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]"no, he just needs to ask you some more questions." [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]"but i was told i’m free to go. So… am i being detained now, or what?" [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]"we just need to hold you here so he can…" [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]"hold me in what capacity?" i insisted. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]"detain you while we…" [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]okay, so now they were detaining me as i was leaving the airport facility. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]we stood there awkwardly, waiting for the investigator while he kept an eye on me. Being chatty by nature, i asked his opinion of what new procedures might be implemented if someday someone were to smuggle an explosive device in his or her rectum or a similar orifice. Ever since would-be terrorist richard reid set his shoes on fire, travelers have been required to remove their footwear in the security line. And the tsa has repeatedly attempted to justify these latest measures by citing northwest flight 253, on which umar farouk abdulmutallab scorched his genitalia. Where, then, would the evolution of these policies lead next? [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]"do you want them to board your plane?" he asked. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]"no, but i understand there are other, better ways to keep them off. Besides, at this point i’m more concerned with the greater threat to our rights and liberties as a free society." [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]"yeah, i know," he said. And then, to my amazement, he continued, "but somebody’s already taken those away." [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]"maybe they have," i conceded, watching the throng of passengers waiting their turn to get virtually naked for the federal security guards. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]as a side note, i cannot refrain here from expressing my dismay and heartbreak over a civil servant’s personal resignation to the loss of civil liberty among the people by whom he is employed to protect and serve. If he no longer affirms the rights and freedom of his fellow citizens, one can only wonder exactly what he has in view as the purpose of his profession. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]the tsa investigator arrived and asked for my account of the situation. I explained that the agents weren’t allowing me to pass through the checkpoint. He told me he had been advised that i was refusing security screening, to which i replied that i had willingly walked through the metal detector with no alarms, the same way i always do when commuting to work. He then briefed me on the recent screening policy changes and, apparently confused, asked whether they would be a problem for me. I stated that i did indeed have a problem with the infringement of my civil rights and liberty. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]his reply: "that’s irrelevant." [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]it wasn’t irrelevant to me. We continued briefly in the conversation until i recognized that we were essentially repeating the same discussion i’d already had with the other officers and agents standing by. With that realization, i told him i did not wish to keep going around and around with them and asked whether he had anything else to say to me. Yes, he said he did, marching indignantly over to a table nearby with an air as though he were about to do something drastic. [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]"i need to get your information for my report," he demanded. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]"the officer over there just took my information for his report. I’m sure you could just get it from him." [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]"no, i have to document everything separately and send it to tsoc. That’s the transportation security operations center where we report…" [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]"i’m familiar with tsoc," i assured him. "in fact, i’ve actually taught the tsa mandated security portion of our training program at the airline." [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]"well, if you’re an instructor, then you should know better," he barked. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]"really? What do you mean i ‘should know better’? Are you scolding me? Have i done something wrong?" [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]"i’m not saying you’ve done something wrong. But you have to go through security screening if you want to enter the facility." [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]"understood. I’ve been going through security screening right here in this line for five years and never blown up an airplane, broken any laws, made any threats, or had a government agent call my boss in houston. And you guys have never tried to touch me or see me naked that whole time. But, if that’s what it’s come to now, i don’t want to enter the facility that badly." [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]finishing up, he asked me to confirm that i had been offered secondary screening as an alternative "option" to ats, and that i had refused it. I confirmed. Then he asked whether i’d "had words" with any of the agents. I asked what he meant by that and he said he wanted to know whether there had been "any exchange of words." i told him that yes, we spoke. He then turned to the crowd of officers and asked whether i had been abusive toward any of them when they wanted to create images of my naked body and touch me in an unwelcome manner. I didn’t hear what they said in reply, but he returned and finally told me i was free to leave the airport. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]as it turned out, they did reach the chief pilot’s office in houston before i was able to. Shortly after i got home, my boss called and said they had been contacted by the tsa. I suppose my employment status at this point can best be described as on hold. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]it’s probably fairly obvious here that i am outraged. This took place today (now yesterday, when i wrote all this down), 15 october 2010. Anyone who reads this is welcome to contact me for confirmation of the details or any additional information i can provide. The dialog above is quoted according to my best recollection, without embellishment or significant alteration except for the sake of clarity. I would greatly appreciate any recommendations for legal counsel – preferably a firm with a libertarian bent and experience resisting this kind of tyrannical madness. This is not a left or right, red or blue state issue. The very bedrock of our way of life in this country is under attack from within. Please don’t let it be taken from us without a fight.[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]michael s. Roberts
3794 douglass ave.
Memphis, tn 38111
901.237.6308
fedupflyers@nonpartisan.com
[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman, times, serif]

:clap:
[/FONT]
 
just follow the rules, save your job, 30 minutes of typing and my self 30 minutes of reading.
 
I'm betting this is already on Snopes but I hope it's true. We never should have given up our liberties and it will take a great deal of civil disobedience to get them back.
 
He was following the established rules. You are allowed to opt-out of the image screening if you like, (which everyone should, but I digress). The IAH TSA went ballistic for no reason here it seems, and now the guys job is in jeopardy. They took his civil rights and flushed them there it seems, and good on him for standing up to them. Lots of people would fold after that much pressure on them.
 
It sucks it came to that but the sad fact of the matter is there is sometimes no ryme or reason as to why TSA does some of the things it does. Everytime I take food in from outside security it irritates me so cadly that they make be put it on the belt. I just don't wanna X Ray anything 10 minutes before I eat it. It just can't be safe.
 
Good on him.

It's a real shame CREWPass hasn't exploded in access across the industry, would have saved this guy (and many more like him) this ridiculous headache.

That said, my own personal thing is quite simple: If AIT is there, I'm declining. I'll take the secondary screening and be just as peaceful as I ever could. But they're not going to touch my body either. They can wand me during the standard secondary screening.

If no AIT, I don't take off my shoes so if I beep more than twice, I request secondary screening so as to not keep the line backed up. Once again, they wand me, and I'm on my way.

It's the smallest thing I can do. I'm going to work, not prison.

I can hop on that plane naked and still kill people, so it's ridiculous any of us have to do the song and dance for the simple sake of appearence.

The TSA lacks real HUMINT skills, so screw em'
 
Heaven forbid any uniformed, badged pilot gain access to the cockpit and control of the aircraft...........




CREW PASS NOW!!
 
We never should have given up our liberties and it will take a great deal of civil disobedience to get them back.

He was following the established rules. You are allowed to opt-out of the image screening if you like, (which everyone should, but I digress). The IAH TSA went ballistic for no reason here it seems, and now the guys job is in jeopardy. They took his civil rights and flushed them there it seems, and good on him for standing up to them. Lots of people would fold after that much pressure on them.
Exactly! Whether people like naked body scanners or not or TSA violating us or not, if people only take one thing from this story I hope it's this...That, agree with him or not, he felt like his civil liberties were being violated and he stood up and showed his backbone to the point that he will probably loose his job over it, where most other people, myself included, would have folded under the pressure. If we don't stand up and use our freedoms we will lose them. So well done to this model American.
 
So is this guy suspended from work now or is he just going to try again next week and hope this scenario doesn't play out the same way?
 
I don't really disagree with anything this guy has done, but it would be nice if he capitalized consistently and properly punctuate quotations.
 
Does TSA even know that most airliners have a crash axe in the cockpit, that can take out any pilot or damage any airplane?
 
just follow the rules, save your job, 30 minutes of typing and my self 30 minutes of reading.

Congratulations, it looks like the TSA and the others have won you over. You didn't have to read this either.

"We'll make it difficult so people like you will just give in."

He was following the established rules. You are allowed to opt-out of the image screening if you like, (which everyone should, but I digress). The IAH TSA went ballistic for no reason here it seems, and now the guys job is in jeopardy. They took his civil rights and flushed them there it seems, and good on him for standing up to them. Lots of people would fold after that much pressure on them.

:yeahthat:

Good on him.

It's a real shame CREWPass hasn't exploded in access across the industry, would have saved this guy (and many more like him) this ridiculous headache.

That said, my own personal thing is quite simple: If AIT is there, I'm declining. I'll take the secondary screening and be just as peaceful as I ever could. But they're not going to touch my body either. They can wand me during the standard secondary screening.

If no AIT, I don't take off my shoes so if I beep more than twice, I request secondary screening so as to not keep the line backed up. Once again, they wand me, and I'm on my way.

It's the smallest thing I can do. I'm going to work, not prison.

I can hop on that plane naked and still kill people, so it's ridiculous any of us have to do the song and dance for the simple sake of appearence.

The TSA lacks real HUMINT skills, so screw em'

:yeahthat: :clap:
 
This is incomprehensible. I am hoping that he is only under some type of standard "paid leave of absence" that is company policy whenever anything happens.

With that said if he looses his job over this then I would hope that others would cry foul in forms of petitions, letter writing etc... and certainly I would hope that his first item of business would be to get the ACLU on his side.

He did absolutely nothing wrong and it gets me really PO'd hearing about this.

In terms of legal help are if this guy is an AOPA member I would start there. They have aviation lawyers available to members. If not Google around for some.

I think if he really looses his job over this there will be way too much outcry and support of him. He did nothing wrong and pilots are a close-knit brotherhood. I would be surprised if no one cared.
 
This might be the unpopular opinion around here, but its probably the most pragmatic.

He elected to not go through screening, therefore he missed his commute, and got a missed trip. And he deserved the missed trip. Had that been the end of discussion, and he not aired all his dirty laundry ALL OVER the internet, with his companies name featured prominently in the discussion, he'd have the chance to go through the same TSA checkpoint next week, where EVERYONE knows his name and game. Of course will he ever go through the MEM checkpoint without secondary screening ever again? nope.

Opt out of the neeked person peep-o-matic all you want, but the alternative has ALWAYS been a pat down. He had to have known that, and it seems like he wanted it to happen just to make a scene. I mean check out his e-mail address, He wanted whatever he will get out of this. What do I say, go through the security theater, however much it pains you, and go through the proper channels to get reform (crewpass) to happen. Congratulations Michael, you just fell on the sword for what? your 15 minutes and a pink slip.
 
Thousands of
Sorry assed
Apparatchik

Apparatchik (Russian: аппара́тчик, Russian pronunciation: [ɐpɐˈratɕɪk] plural apparatchiki) is a Russian colloquial term for a full-time, professional functionary of the Communist Party or government; i.e., an agent of the governmental or party "apparat" (apparatus) that held any position of bureaucratic or political responsibility, with the exception of the higher ranks of management. James Billington describes one as "a man not of grand plans, but of a hundred carefully executed details."[1] It often is considered a derogatory term.[2]
Members of the "apparat" were frequently transferred between different areas of responsibility, usually with little or no actual training for their new areas of responsibility. Thus, the term apparatchik, or "agent of the apparatus" was usually the best possible description of the person's profession and occupation.[3]
Not all apparatchiks held lifelong positions. Many only entered such positions in middle age.[4]
Today this term is also used in contexts other than Soviet Union. For example, it is often used to describe people who cause bureaucratic bottlenecks in otherwise efficient organizations.[citation needed] It is also frequently used to describe individuals, appointed to positions in any government, on the basis of ideological or political loyalty rather than competence.[citation needed]
 
Back
Top