POLICE STATE 2011: 6 year old girl groped then drug tested by TSA

[ax1]

NFL to ‘Enhance Public Safety’ by Implementing ‘Clear Bag’ policy

NFL claims Boston Marathon bombing partly inspired the move

Adan Salazar
June 18, 2013

Your belongings are permitted in one-gallon clear plastic freezer bags.

In an effort “to enhance public safety and improve stadium access for fans,” the National Football League is getting set to ban all bags or purses that are not see-through at all of its 32 stadiums across the U.S. “To provide a safer environment for the public and significantly expedite fan entry into stadiums, NFL teams will implement an NFL policy this year that limits the size and type of bags that may be brought into stadiums,” a memo from the league dictates.

Beginning with preseason games, “Fans carrying bags that do not meet the criteria will be turned away from the stadium well before they reach the gates,” the FAQ section from the NFL’s rally point for the bag ban, “NFL.com/AllClear,” explains. The cynical play on the military term, which represents the signal given when a threat of danger has passed, is all too obvious.

Fans carrying bags that could endanger the safety of other patrons should be spotted even before approaching entry gates by a “buffer area” of bag police, the memo states. “There will be a secondary perimeter around the stadium where security personnel will check for prohibited items or bags being carried toward the stadium so those situations can be corrected immediately.”

The ban outlaws bags sold on the NFL’s own store. Screen capture taken from nflshop.com

The FAQ stops just short of accusing those who would dream of bringing a seat cushion to a football game of being a terrorist:

Are seat cushions allowed to be carried into the stadium?
No, they are not due to the large size and because the way seat cushions are constructed would allow them to be used to conceal a potential explosive device.


​

In case you were left wondering if this is yet another scheme worked up by your friends at the DHS, you’re correct. NFL.com/allclear reassures the measure “also supports the Department of Homeland Security’s ‘If You See Something, Say Something’ campaign,” the tax-funded national snitch program encouraging citizen spies to report suspicious activity anywhere.

The National Football League also says their plan is partly in response to the Boston Marathon bombings, in which backpacks were supposedly used to carry pressure cooker bombs.

A few sports writers believe the move can backfire on the NFL, not because it represents an affront to liberty and personal privacy, but because it could deter woman from going to games.

“We certainly understand the need to establish effective security parameters, but at a time when the NFL is looking for more ways to keep fans going to stadiums as opposed to staying home and watching RedZone or watching games on their phones and tablets, the new policies seem a bit short-sighted — especially in the ways they seem to inconvenience and exclude female fans,” wrote Doug Farrar for Yahoo! Sports blog Shutdown Corner.

Sports Grid writer Rick Chandler concurs: “A lot of women I know won’t go anywhere without a proper purse, and asking them to leave them behind, or transfer the contents to a clear plastic tote, is pretty much out of the question. They don’t want you seeing what’s in there, and frankly I don’t want to see it either. But rest assured everything in there is pretty much essential for human survival. If the NFL is trying to make the league more accessible to women, this is the PR goof of the decade so far.”

This is just the latest in a series of efforts by the NFL to acclimatize the public to accept the disintegration of privacy and the Fourth Amendment, which is supposed to protect Americans against unreasonable searches.

However, as early as 2011, the NFL was already shredding the idea of privacy by forcing the public to submit to intrusive bag searches and invasive TSA-style pat downs. “Such in-your-face control is instrumental to the effort by the government to get us to accept ever increasing intrusive behavior by brutish police goons and other authorities. It is part of an ongoing effort to convince you that the dictates of the state and its phony war on manufactured terrorism negate your private space and personal liberty,” we wrote at the time.

Despite its stated goal of enhancing security, the bag ban measure represents another layer of security theater to protect from terrorist threats that don’t actually exist. Studies have shown, in fact, that people are more likely to die from a bee sting or drowning in the bath than from a terror related event.

Furthermore, it is another step in conditioning people to accept that everyone is guilty until proven innocent, and that giving up liberty can provide security.

If fans can’t bring bags into an American football game, doesn’t that mean the terrorists have already won?

 

[ax1]

Is Homeland Security Set to Arm TSA Agents?

DHS wants firing range within 20 miles of LaGuardia Airport

Paul Joseph Watson
July 2, 2013

The Transportation Security Administration’s plan to hire the use of a firing range within a 20 mile radius of LaGuardia Airport in order to train TSA workers has prompted concerns that the federal agency is planning to arm its agents as part of a massive expansion.

​

Image: Wikimedia Commons

A solicitation posted to the FedBizOpps website yesterday details Homeland Security’s “requirement for a firearms range to conduct mandatory quarterly qualifications and other firearms training.”

​

“The range shall be within a 20 mile radius of the New York LaGuardia Airport. Furthermore, the range must be in a location that can be accessed by vehicle from the New York LaGuardia Airport without crossing a bridge and/or incurring a toll,” states the solicitation.

​

The proposed indoor range must have 10-15 firing points and be available for block booking over time periods of 5-8 hours. It must also include, “a separate entrance/exit which will permit DHS personnel to enter/exit to the aforementioned 15 point area without interacting with the general public.”

​

DHS personnel will use the facility for 25 days out of every quarter and almost half a million rounds will be fired per year. A separate briefing rooms for students is also requested. Range rules must “allow shooters to draw and fire from the holster and from concealment” as well as permitting “tactical move and shoot drills”.

​

The deal to hire a facility is scheduled to be in place by September 1, 2013.

​

A Government Security News report confirms that the fring range will be used by the TSA to train “its employees and DHS personnel”.

​

Why would the TSA want to train its employees to use firearms at a facility close to a major airport when currently TSA agents working inside US airports are not armed?

​

Federal air marshals acting under the jurisdiction of the TSA are currently armed, but the scope of the firearms range the TSA is seeking to acquire clearly suggests it will be used on a much more widespread basis than simply for training air marshals.

​

The notion that the Department of Homeland Security is looking to arm TSA workers in the near future would also partly provide an answer as to why the federal agency has been acquiring bullets in such huge numbers over the course of the last 14 months.

​

An even more disturbing scenario would see armed TSA agents patrolling transport hubs in the US or even the streets of major cities, as Jesse Jackson called for earlier this year.

​

This would represent a massive expansion of the Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (VIPR) program, where teams of armed TSA officers patrol railroad stations, bus stations, ferries, car tunnels, ports, subways, truck weigh stations, rest areas, and special events.

​

VIPR teams currently conduct around 8,000 operations a year. As well as providing security at transport hubs, VIPR teams are now being used to keep tabs on fans at sporting events.

​

Some people may question the sanity of arming TSA agents given that a significant number of them have proven to be prone to criminal behaviorand ego-driven outbursts. The TSA has also repeatedly hired people with criminal records to work in security.

​

The federal agency launched another controversial policy over the weekend when it announced a new pilot program under which sniffer dogs would be used to screen passengers.​

 

[ax1]

Documents Expose Predator Drones Spying Extensively in U.S.

Predator drones used by multiple agencies in domestic airspace could be armed.

Kit Daniels
July 4, 2013

U.S. Customs and Border Protection is now lending Predator drones to a wide range of federal, state, and local agencies for domestic surveillance and possible “non-lethal” strikes, according to federal documents released by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.


Credit: Pat Dennis via Flickr

The FBI, the U.S. Marshals and even the Texas Department of Public Safety have used CBP Predator drones in U.S. airspace. In 2010, CBP reported that future drone payloads could include “non-lethal weapons designed to immobilize targets of interest.”

Last month, FBI Director Robert Mueller admitted that the FBI has used drones domestically.

The new documents expose the wide extent of domestic drone use. The EFF released the documents after a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.
CBP drone use by other agencies has increased over eight times from 2010 to 2012.

By 2016, CBP wants airborne drones in domestic airspace 24 hours a day, seven days a week to ensure a “layered security strategy.”

Predator drone mission data can be fused into an information sharing center for federal, state, and local agencies across the country.

This drone data center would operate like current Homeland Security fusion centers which have violated Americans’ civil liberties and privacy according to a two-year Senate investigation.

The General Atomics MQ-1 Predator drone, perhaps the most well-known unmanned aerial vehicle, is extensively used overseas by the U.S. Air Force and the CIA for armed drone strikes.

According to Policymic, in a four-year period drone strikes killed at least 800 innocent people in addition to 22 “suspected terrorists,” a civilian kill ratio of at least 36 to 1. Pakistani sources have claimed an even higher civilian kill ratio of 50 to 1.

In June, Brandon Bryant revealed his former career as an Air Force drone operator.

Bryant saw drone strikes kill people through a computer screen half-way across the world.

This method of killing is no doubt dehumanizing. Men, women, and children are reduced to pixelated targets for drone operators who grew up in arcades.

Near the end of his career, Bryant received a past mission “score card” showing over 1,600 deaths.

Bryant said he can still see the blood and gore when he closes his eyes. Doctors have diagnosed him with post-traumatic stress disorder.

Only time will tell when Predator drones will be used to kill Americans on U.S. soil, unless they have done so already.

Source Documents:
2010 “Concept of Operations” Report to Congress
2012 CPB UAS Mission Prioritization Process Presentation
2010 Daily Flight Logs
2011 Daily Flight Logs – Part 1
2011 Daily Flight Logs – Part 2
2012 Daily Flight Logs – Part 1
2012 Daily Flight Logs – Part 2
2012 Daily Flight Logs – Part 3

 

[ax1]

US Postal Service photographing 160 billion letters annually

RT.com
Published time: July 05, 2013 14:32

As Washington officials continue to grapple with the fallout from the NSA scandal, it has been revealed that the US Postal Service photographs the outside of every piece of mail it processes each year - around 160 billion pieces annually.

At the request of law enforcement agencies, postal workers take pictures of the letters and packages before they are delivered, the New York Times reported.

The information is then stored for an indefinite period of time in the event a law enforcement official requests it. Each year, tens of thousands of pieces of mail are subjected to further scrutiny.

Reading the contents of a letter requires a court-ordered warrant, but in the case of ‘mail cover’ requests, law enforcement agencies submit a letter to the Postal Service, which “rarely denies a request.”

Although the ‘mail covers’ program has been around for nearly a century, its updated successor, the Mail Isolation Control and Tracking (MICT) program, was created in the aftermath of the anthrax attacks in late 2001 that killed five people, including two postal workers.

MICT requests are separated into two categories: those related to possible criminal activity and those that are meant to protect national security. Requests based on suspected criminal activity average 15,000 to 20,000 per year, unnamed law enforcement officials told the Times.

The number of requests for mail covers related to the fight against terrorism has not been made public.

Although law enforcement officials must have warrants to open private correspondence, former President George W. Bush signed off on a document in 2007 that gave the federal government the authority to open mail without warrants in “emergencies or in foreign intelligence cases.”

The Federal Bureau of Investigations revealed the existence of MICT last month in the course of an investigation over ricin-laced letters mailed to President Barack Obama and New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg.

News of the US Postal Service’s surveillance program comes as Washington is facing heated criticism over a formerly covert surveillance program that gave the National Security Agency (NSA), in cooperation with nine of the world’s largest internet companies, sweeping powers to collect data on telephone calls and internet habits of billions of people both at home and abroad.

The information was made public after former NSA contractor, Edward Snowden, blew the whistle on the activities.

Officials in the Obama administration, meanwhile, are attempting to justify the NSA’s surveillance programs, saying the electronic monitoring amounts to the same thing as examining the outside of a letter. At the very least, the program shows that traditional mail is held up to the same kind of scrutiny that the NSA has given to phone calls, e-mail and internet services.

“It’s a treasure trove of information,” James J. Wedick, a former FBI agent told The New York Times. “Looking at just the outside of letters and other mail, I can see who you bank with, who you communicate with — all kinds of useful information that gives investigators leads that they can then follow up on with a subpoena.”

But, he added: “It can be easily abused because it’s so easy to use and you don’t have to go through a judge to get the information. You just fill out a form.”

Bruce Schneier, a computer security expert and an author, called the program an invasion of privacy.

“Basically they are doing the same thing as the other programs, collecting the information on the outside of your mail, the metadata, if you will, of names, addresses, return addresses and postmark locations, which gives the government a pretty good map of your contacts, even if they aren’t reading the contents,” he told the US newspaper.

The surveillance requests on mail covers are granted for about 30 days, and can be extended for up to 120 days.

http://rt.com/usa/us-nsa-mail-spying-706/

 

[ax1]

TSA Conducted Pat Downs On Family Members of Plane Crash Victims

Federal agency made life “more difficult” for both victims and loved ones

Paul Joseph Watson
July 8, 2013

Instead of helping both victims and their loved ones who were involved in the tragic Asiana Airlines plane crash at San Francisco International Airport, the TSA made life “more difficult” for both by delaying victims for hours and conducting pat downs on grief-stricken family members who were still unaware of whether their loved ones were dead or alive.

​

Image: NTSB

The L.A. Times reports:


​

“Some passengers were found wandering, dazed, near the wreckage. Others made a beeline for the international terminal, where they waited for as long as five hours to be reunited with panicked friends and family.”

​

The process was made more difficult, and slower, by a series of screenings conducted by the Transportation Security Administration, police said. Officials spent hours interviewing passengers inside the international departure gates.

​

To get into the boarding area to meet up with them, loved ones were interviewed, searched and vetted by TSA officials. The vetting included checking that family names matched up and that the passengers knew the people trying to get through the security area.

​

One by one, relatives walked through the glass doors that separate the terminal from the gates, hoping the children or spouses they had not heard from would be waiting inside.”


​

In many ways this represents the worst example of TSA abuse ever recorded, underscoring the depth to which the federal agency’s regulations are mindlessly enforced with no consideration for circumstances whatsoever.

​

Even the incredibly rare event of a plane crashing at an airport is not enough for the TSA to employ some semblence of common sense and basic human compassion.

​

Hundreds of family members in the throes of emotional trauma unlike anything they have ever experienced before rush to the airport not knowing whether their loved ones are dead, alive or critically injured, and the TSA’s first thought is to carry out grope downs on all of them, despite the fact that they are not even boarding a plane.

​

“Imagine your spouse, parent, child or sibling was on that plane but you had no idea whether your beloved was dead or alive, in one piece or several. And the TSA’s always tenderhearted, sensitive goons are standing between you and finding out,” writes Becky Akers.

​

Why not just let the passengers who were on the plane back through to the other side of the security area? This would have negated the need to screen anyone and saved hours of pointless harassment for those already laboring under emotional turmoil. It would also have eliminated any security concerns.

​

Unfortunately, the TSA has proven itself to be an agency that is immune to common sense, even under such extreme circumstances as a Boeing 777 crash landing at a major airport.​

 

[ax1]

TSA Harasses And Shames Yet Another Disabled Veteran

Medal adorned soldier was wearing “too much metal” for security officers

Steve Watson
July 9, 2013

A Purple Heart Marine was groped and swabbed by TSA agents recently at a California airport while on his way to a ceremony to honor him as veteran of the year in his district.

Cpl. Nathan Kemnitz sustained severe injuries from a IED detonation while on duty in Fallujah, Iraq in 2004. While traveling to Sacramento, to receive the award, TSA agents at Sacramento International Airport pulled Kemnitz aside for additional screening.

When the screeners ordered him to lift up his arms for a full body scan, the decorated veteran told the TSA goons that because of his injuries, he cannot lift up his right arm.

‘My right arm doesn’t work. It’s a lot of hassle for me to do that,’ Kemnitz told The Military Times.

The screeners then proceeded to probe underneath Kemnitz’s medals, while feeling under the Marine’s waistband and swabbing his shoes for explosives.
Disgusted with his treatment, Kemnitz’s escort Patricia Martin snapped photos of the search and made them public.

“At some places I’m treated like royalty and at some like a terrorist. There’s got to be something in the middle,” Kemnitz told reporters.
In the following video, taken from a 2012 speech, Kemnitz explains how he was injured:



The TSA issued a standard response yesterday denying any wrongdoing:

“As is standard procedure for all passengers, if travelers alarm when passing through a metal detector or an advanced imaging technology (AIT) unit, additional screening is required in order to resolve that anomaly.” said TSA spokesman Ross Feinstein.

To make matters even worse, when Kemnitz arrived for the ceremony at the state capitol building in Sacramento, he received even worse treatment at the hands of security guards.

Unhappy with the fact that Kemnitz was dressed in full uniform, the guards told him that he was wearing “too much metal” and ordered him to remove his dress blue blouse.

Kemnitz refused to do so and an argument broke out, leading Kemnitz to describe the security personnel as “rude and unapologetic”.
California state capitol officials are yet to respond to the incident.

“What does a uniform and heroism represent if our own citizens — in this case employees of the TSA and security personnel — have no regard for them?” wrote Kemnitz’s escort, Patricia Martin, to Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki following the incidents.

“I feel so strongly that you need to know just how shamefully even a Purple Heart recipient/disabled veteran can be treated by some TSA and security employees,” she said.

The TSA has been routinely flagged up for harassing disabled travelers, including veterans.

Back in March, a wounded Marine’s account of mistreatment at the hands of the TSA, led the agency to deny any wrong doing, with agents claiming that the wheelchair bound veteran made his own decision to attempt to get up and walk through a body scanner, and then to take off his prosthetic legs.

Eventually, following involvement from Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., the TSA announced that in response to the incident it had changed its rules to eliminate a requirement that injured troops remove their shoes, jackets or hats. However, in order to qualify for such treatment, the agency says that wounded veterans must forewarn officials before traveling.
—————————————————————-
Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.com, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham, and a Bachelor Of Arts Degree in Literature and Creative Writing from Nottingham Trent University.

 

[ax1]

House Votes to Continue Spying on Americans


David Alexander
Reuters
July 25, 2013

A U.S. spy program that sweeps up vast amounts of electronic communications survived a legislative challenge in the House of Representatives on Wednesday, the first attempt to curb the data gathering since former NSA contractor Edward Snowden revealed details of its scope.

The House of Representatives voted 217-205 to defeat an amendment to the defense appropriations bill that would have limited the National Security Agency’s ability to collect electronic information, including phone call records.

Opposition to government surveillance has created an unlikely alliance of libertarian Republicans and some Democrats in Congress, The House vote split the parties, with 94 Republicans in favor and 134 against, while 111 Democrats supported the amendment and 83 opposed it.

Read More

 

[ax1]

Security Consultant Heckles NSA Head: Shouts “Freedom!”; “Read The Constitution!”

Steve Watson
Aug 1, 2013

The NSA head General Keith Alexander faced a hostile crowd Wednesday while attempting to defend mass surveillance programs at the Black Hat security conference in Las Vegas.

Around 30 minutes into his speech, Alexander claimed that the NSA had “stopped thirteen terrorist related activities in the United States,” flashing up a slide that stated the NSA had prevented fifty-four worldwide terrorist events. “Our nation takes stopping terrorism as one of the most important things.” Alexander stated, prompting a man in the crowd to shout “Freedom!”

“Exactly,” Alexander replied. “We stand for freedom.”




Forbes reports that the security consultant, later identified as 30-year-old Jon McCoy, then fired back “Bull****!” to smatterings of applause from some of the crowd.

“Not bad,” Alexander responded, adding “But I think what you’re saying is that in these cases, what’s the distinction, where’s the discussion and what tools do we have to stop this.”

“No, I’m saying I don’t trust you!” McCoy shouted back.

Another person in the crowd then joined in, stating “You lied to Congress. Why would people believe you’re not lying to us right now?”

Looking stern and visibly annoyed, Alexander responded “I haven’t lied to Congress.”



“I do think it’s important for us to have this discussion.” he added, “Because in my opinion, what you believe is what’s written in the press without looking at the facts. This is the greatest technical center of gravity in the world. I ask that you all look at those facts.”

Alexander continued the speech, stating “We get all these allegations of what [NSA staff] could be doing. But when people check what the NSA is doing, they’ve found zero times that’s happened,” he said referring to any illegal use of spying powers.

“And that’s no bull****. Those are the facts.” Alexander stated, asking for the curse word to be stricken from the record.
“Read the Constitution” McCoy fired back in one last heckle.

“I have, so should you.” Alexander responded to loud applause from a crowd that was clearly siding with the NSA head.

According to Forbes reporter Andy Greenberg, McCoy told him afterwards that he felt Alexander’s speech was “pretty canned.” “It’s anything you can see on Fox News any day. We’re in danger, we have to get rid of your freedom to keep you safe.” the security consultant added.

“Everyone’s thinking this, but no one’s saying it public, so everyone thinks they’re alone,” he said. “Ninety-eight percent of society has issues with this…But no one speaks up.”

Throughout the speech Alexander repeatedly suggested that revealing further details of NSA’s operations would “jeopardize the future of our defense.”

The NSA head also claimed several times that the spy agency is not collecting information on everyone’s internet activities, despite a report Wednesday in the Guardian, via Ed Snowden’s leaks, revealing another previously unknown mass surveillance program.

Documents published by the newspaper detail the NSA program, known as XKeyScore, revealing it to be another tool that allows the broad search of millions of individuals’ emails and browsing history. An NSA slide from the documents, showing the logos of Facebook, Google, Twitter and Yahoo, suggests that the agency is “interested in HTTP… because nearly everything a typical user does on the internet uses HTTP.”
—————————————————————-
Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.com, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham, and a Bachelor Of Arts Degree in Literature and Creative Writing from Nottingham Trent University.

 

[ax1]

FBI Taps Hacker Tactics to Spy on Suspects

Law-Enforcement Officials Expand Use of Tools Such as Spyware as People Under Investigation 'Go Dark,' Evading Wiretaps

By
JENNIFER VALENTINO-DEVRIES
and
DANNY YADRON
8/1/2013
Wall Street Journal

A view of the J. Edgar Hoover Building, the headquarters for the Federal Bureau of Investigation in Washington, DC.

Law-enforcement officials in the U.S. are expanding the use of tools routinely used by computer hackers to gather information on suspects, bringing the criminal wiretap into the cyber age.

Federal agencies have largely kept quiet about these capabilities, but court documents and interviews with people involved in the programs provide new details about the hacking tools, including spyware delivered to computers and phones through email or Web links—techniques more commonly associated with attacks by criminals.

People familiar with the Federal Bureau of Investigation's programs say that the use of hacking tools under court orders has grown as agents seek to keep up with suspects who use new communications technology, including some types of online chat and encryption tools. The use of such communications, which can't be wiretapped like a phone, is called "going dark" among law enforcement.

A spokeswoman for the FBI declined to comment.

The FBI develops some hacking tools internally and purchases others from the private sector. With such technology, the bureau can remotely activate the microphones in phones running Google Inc.'s GOOG +1.82% Android software to record conversations, one former U.S. official said. It can do the same to microphones in laptops without the user knowing, the person said. Google declined to comment.

Rest of story: http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424127887323997004578641993388259674-lMyQjAxMTAzMDAwMTEwNDEyWj.html

 

[ax1]

A map of New York City's 500,000 annual stop-and-frisks

By Russell Brandom on August 26, 2013 09:00 pm
Don't miss stories Follow The Verge

What do half a million police stops look like? As part of a project for Columbia Journalism School, students were tasked with mapping all of the 532,911 stop-and-frisks performed by the NYPD in 2012. The result is the map below, built in RStudio with geolocation data from the New York Civil Liberties Union. It's also coded by race, with blue dots representing African American suspects, red standing in for caucasian stops, and green for asian or Pacific islander. Damien Spleeters, a student who published the results on Twitter, found the results surprising. "I didn't expect to get such a clear depiction," Spleeters says. "That was brilliant." A federal judge ruled the impromptu searches unconstitutional earlier this month.

http://www.theverge.com/2013/8/26/4661380/a-map-of-new-york-citys-500000-annual-stop-and-frisks

 

[ax1]

President Obama's NSA review panel isn't the change we need

Questionable appointments and a vast scope could make real progress unlikely

By Adi Robertson on August 29, 2013
Don't miss stories Follow The Verge

On Tuesday, President Barack Obama officially announced the five men in charge of reviewing the secretive and powerful US intelligence apparatus: Richard A. Clarke, Michael Morell, Cass Sunstein, Geoffrey Stone, and Peter Swire. The group — which includes three former White House advisors and one former CIA deputy director — will be given the task of restoring public trust in a much-maligned program, using what Obama has called "new thinking for a new era." But how much new thinking can be done in a few months, and how motivated are the panelists to make real changes?

The panel was created in response to leaks by Edward Snowden, particularly regarding the PRISM internet surveillance program and a database that pulls in huge amounts of telephone metadata. But its actual scope is broad and nonspecific. Obama announced in early August that the panel would "review our entire intelligence and communications technologies," a wording that could mean anything from examining precisely how the NSA stores phone and email records to taking a high-level look at virtually every agency that deals in surveillance. This work must be done quickly: an interim briefing is due in a mere 60 days and a full report by the end of the year. The former will be submitted to the president through his director of national intelligence, James Clapper, despite promises that the man who gave Congress false information would be minimally involved in the process.

In this week’s announcement, the White House said it hoped the group would give advice on using technology "in a way that optimally protects our national security and advances our foreign policy while respecting our commitment to privacy and civil liberties, recognizing our need to maintain the public trust, and reducing the risk of unauthorized disclosure." The panel’s composition and its vast purview, however, could suggest that it’s more focused on public relations than actually making change.

Peter Swire, center, on a 2009 antitrust policy panel. (Image credit: Center for American Progress)

Since all but one of the panel names were leaked last week, public response has ranged from a tepid shrug to infuriation. The Electronic Frontier Foundation called the committee "illusory," saying that "a task force led by General Clapper full of insiders — and not directed to look at the extensive abuse — will never get at the bottom of the unconstitutional spying."

"It's a distinguished group of people to be sure, but I don't know if it satisfies the test of being independent and objective," Marc Rotenberg of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) tells The Verge. "I'm not going to quite bash it as a group of Washington insiders … but I think the White House could have done a better job in getting fresh eyes to look at some of the problems." Some critics have also pointed out that none of the members have technical expertise. "Lawyers argue about surveillance law, while a technologist demolishes the ‘it's not sensitive, just phone numbers’ argument. We need both," writes Christopher Soghoian of the ACLU on Twitter. The White House did not respond to questions about the makeup of the panel.

Almost all of the members raise red flags to people who want a rigorous review of privacy issues. Michael Morell has spent almost his entire career at the CIA; he stepped down as deputy director only a few months ago. Former Obama regulatory czar Cass Sunstein has drawn some of the greatest outrage because of a 2008 paper called "Conspiracy Theories," in which he and co-author Adrian Vermeule suggested that government officials quietly enter conspiracy chatrooms or forums and attempt to undermine users’ arguments. Richard A. Clarke, previously the National Security Council’s counterterrorism advisor, has demonstrated a willingness to improve cybersecurity by any means necessary, suggesting that Obama allow the Department of Homeland security to "inspect what enters and exits the United States in cyberspace" and scan web traffic outside the US to stop industrial espionage.

Geoffrey Stone, a University of Chicago law professor whose name was not leaked before the announcement, sits on the board of the American Civil Liberties Union, and he harshly criticized the Bush administration’s wiretapping program. But he believes that collecting phone metadata is entirely different. "There is, so far as I can tell from everything that's been revealed, absolutely nothing illegal or criminal about these programs," he says in an interview with Democracy Now. "They may be terrible public policy — I'm not sure I approve of it at all — but the fact is the claim that they're unconstitutional and illegal is wildly premature." Edward Snowden, he says, is "most certainly a criminal who deserves serious punishment."

Michael Morell, left, and former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta at the CIA. (Image credit: Chuck Hagel)

Of all the members, Peter Swire seems most likely to push for greater transparency and limits on NSA spying, although he’s also a well-established White House insider. As chief counselor for privacy under President Clinton, he chaired a working group updating wiretap laws for the internet age. Though it produced several provisions that would be rolled into the 2001 Patriot Act, he criticized the final law, which he said "contained none of the privacy-enhancing amendments that we thought were needed to update the 1984 ECPA." He’s also spoken out against national security letters: "We citizens have no way to learn whether the government now has a file on us in its large and growing data centers," he said in 2007 Senate testimony. "Some of us in this room may be in the database, because we once received a phone call or an email from someone else whose records were caught in an investigation."
Regardless of its makeup, does the group have teeth?

But the question isn’t just whether the panel is composed of people who are willing to take a hard look at the NSA’s surveillance programs. It’s what they’ll actually end up reviewing, how seriously the White House will take their proposals, and whether we’ll see both concrete technological changes and a holistic rethinking of how privacy concerns should be weighed against national security ones. The NSA has been criticized internally before, but the resulting changes have been relatively small — after the FISA court found parts of one program unconstitutional, it shortened the duration of record-keeping and told analysts to be more careful at weeding out purely domestic communications.

Obama has said that the panel will let his administration "move forward with a better understanding" of privacy and security concerns, and he’s promised other changes that will prioritize civil liberties, but there’s no guarantee that this committee has any real teeth. "The problem people seem to be avoiding is the fact that it's simply not legal for the NSA to be collecting all the telephone records of US telephone customers," Rotenberg says. "Are we going to see an outcome in which that program is ended? For us that's pretty much the whole story."

http://www.theverge.com/2013/8/29/4671922/can-the-nsa-review-panel-really-change-privacy-policy

 

[ax1]

Well, a TSA agent has been shot and killed today at LAX. My thoughts to him and his family.

This may now set the stage to finalize getting TSA armed at the airports.

 

[Blergs]

SCREW TSA!

 

[ax1]

Well, a TSA agent has been shot and killed today at LAX. My thoughts to him and his family.

This may now set the stage to finalize getting TSA armed at the airports.

As predicted...the debate has started on mainstream news this morning. The headline on CNN was if I remember off the top of my head, "Time to arm the TSA?"

In other news...the shooter was first reported to be an off duty TSA agent. Then, he was reported not to be followed by, "he may have had anti-goverment news, and had anti-goverment material with him." Right...so the shooter had anti-government views and made sure to grab his "anti-government material" with him along with his gun???

Also...as usually and very common with these events over-hyped and over-dramatized by the media, drills were ran with the same excact scenario shortly before, this being admitted 3 weeks before by LAPD Chief.

“We practiced to this not more than 3 weeks ago,” said Gannon at a press conference hours after the shooting. “We took every one of our patrol officers and a couple hundred officers from the Los Angeles Police Department and we practiced the exact scenario we played out today.”


So anyways, lets see how this plays out. Its interesting every-time people get shot the debate on the media leans towards lets disarm the people. When some TSA agent gets shot, lets arm them all.

 

[AE14]

I will be at the philly airport on Wednesday. Kinda interested to see if anything changes. Highly doubtful

 

[ax1]

I will be at the philly airport on Wednesday. Kinda interested to see if anything changes. Highly doubtful

Usually there is an initial response of heightened security due a worry of copycat crimes...maybe there will be some extra national guard patrolling the airports or something.

You should go to China where they actually dont naked body scan you or grope your genitals at the airports, and they have their own issues with "domestic terrorism" all the time. Just strange how China in some ways respects human rights in ways the USA gov. doesnt.

 

[ax1]

TSA Sought Firing Range for Firearms Training Two Weeks Prior to LAX Shooting

Agency now has the resources to potentially arm airport screeners

Kit Daniels
November 5, 2013

Two weeks prior to the LAX airport shooting on Friday, the Transportation Security Administration was searching for a firing range to conduct ongoing “firearms training” using an estimated half-million rounds of ammunition annually.
ms training at a range in Georgia.

On Oct. 18, the TSA posted a solicitation on the FedBizOpps web site seeking “a firearms range to conduct mandatory quarterly qualifications and other firearms training” near Seattle, Washington.

“The range must be able to accommodate the following: 9mm, .40, .357 caliber, 12 gauge and 556 frangible ammunition,” the request states.
The solicitation also estimated that 500,000 rounds will be fired by TSA personnel at the range per year.

This isn’t the first time the TSA requested a firing range.

Back in July, the agency sought a firing range “within a 20 mile radius” of LaGuardia Airport in New York.

The solicitation for this range also estimated that nearly a half-million rounds will be shot annually in the range during training.

The TSA already arms federal air marshals as well as “armed security officers” employed or contracted by the agency who meet “qualifications established by TSA, in coordination with the Federal Air Marshal Service.”

Yet these solicitations and the Department of Homeland Security’s stockpile of two billion rounds of ammunition suggest that these firing ranges will be used to provide firearms training to TSA workers who are not yet armed.

Yesterday, a union for government employees demanded that more TSA workers should be armed and even given arrest powers.

“The sad truth is that our TSA officers are subject to daily verbal assaults and far too frequent physical attacks,” Jeffrey David Cox Sr., president of the American Federation of Government Employees, said to the L.A. Times. “We feel a larger and more consistent armed presence in screening areas would be a positive step.”

If the TSA is moving to arm its airport screeners, the agency already has the training facilities and ammunition to do so.

 

[Blergs]

Thats scary!

 

[ax1]

TSA screening works only 'a little better than chance,' according to government report

By Russell Brandom on November 13, 2013
The Verge

The Transportation Safety Administration has long relied on singling out airline passengers that agents believe are behaving suspiciously, even as outside groups like the General Accounting Office maintain that these behavioral indicators are unreliable. But today, the GAO has science on their side, with a new report giving a comprehensive look at the TSA's the Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques or SPOT program. And the results aren't pretty.

The most damning info comes from a broad analysis of the program in 2011 and 2012, which found wildly different techniques and rates of success. The report also highlights the extensive scientific literature on the human ability to identify deceptive behavior. Summarizing 400 studies over the past 60 years, the report concludes that humans perform only "the same as or slightly better than chance." Given that the TSA has spent almost a billion dollars on the program, that's a pretty poor record. As a result, the GAO is requesting that both Congress and the president withhold funding from the program until the TSA can demonstrate its effectiveness.

 

[ax1]

Making you feel like a prisoner who cannot leave

TSA Rolls Out ‘Detention Pods’ at Airport Terminal Exits

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
November 18, 2013

The TSA is funding the rollout of exit pods at major airport terminals across the country that temporarily detain passengers before they are allowed to leave, another example critics say of how the federal agency’s policies treat travelers as prisoners.

Travelers are forced to be bottlenecked through the pods as they leave the airport terminal. A robotic voice gives instructions to wait inside the pod until a green light is shown and the door opens.

​

The pods have already been installed at Syracuse International Airport as part of a $60 million dollar renovation and are likely to make their way into other major airports soon. Once travelers exit the pods, they are unable to re-enter the terminal.

​

Some of the passengers exiting through the pods at Syracuse thought the machines were performing x-ray body scans, according to CNY Central.​

“It was odd, I was like – where did they come up with this?” asked Patricia Goodrich.

​

“We need to be vigilant and maintain high security protocol at all times. These portals were designed and approved by TSA which is important,” said Syracuse Airport Commissioner Christina Callahan.

​

The justification for installing the pods is that they replace police or security guards who would normally stand at the exit, therefore saving money, something which the TSA isn’t normally concerned about given how it is now selling abandoned naked body scanners to prisons for 10 per cent of their value.

​

According to Karen De Coster, the pods are a way “to remind you that you are a captive” and are “meant to make you feel like a prisoner who cannot leave.”

​

The prison inmate feel of the devices compliments numerous other TSA policies which critics have charged serve little other purpose than making travelers feel like they are under constant suspicion.

​

Last week, a Government Accountability Office investigation revealed that the TSA’s $1 billion dollar “chat down” program has been a complete failure in that it is “no better than chance” at identifying genuine security threats.

​

While threatening to arrest passengers who make jokes about airport security, the federal agency has also instituted a ludicrous “freeze” policy whereby travelers are ordered to stand in place like statues while TSA agents resolve some unexplained security threat.

​

Another policy that has provoked questions is the TSA’s random testing of passengers’ drinks for explosives after they have already passed through security and purchased beverages inside the secure area of the airport.​

 

[ax1]

TSA ‘Detention Pods’ Have Biometric, Object Detection Capabilities

Promo video shows user scanning fingerprint to leave containment area

Paul Joseph Watson
November 19, 2013

TSA ‘detention pods’ currently being rolled out at major airports across the U.S. have biometric and object-detecting capabilities, according to promotional material from Eagle Security Group, the company that manufactures the devices.

As we reported yesterday, the pods, which critics have likened to cattle grids, are currently in place at Syracuse International Airport as well as Atlantic City International Airport terminal exits.

​

Travelers enter the pod where they are briefly detained before a green light shows and they are allowed to leave the terminal.

​

People who suspected the devices may be performing some kind of x-ray scan may not be far off the mark. Although such procedures are not currently in place, the pods do have the capability to incorporate “human/threat object detection/containment,” according to the official brochurefor the ‘Access Control & Exit Lane Breach Control Systems’. The brochure also brags that the devices can detect “threat objects as small as a dime.”

​

The pods can also function as biometric scanners. A video demonstration shows a user biometrically scanning his fingerprint before he is allowed to leave the containment area.

​

“The identity of the user is guaranteed via fingerprint, iris or facial recognition scans before they are allowed to complete their passage from non-secure to secure areas. The Eagle ACP (Access Control Portal) with integrated biometrics of your choice is a complete solution,” statesthe company’s website.

​

The pods can also be monitored by HD surveillance cameras which “can be configured and accessed remotely, enabling multiple, authorized users to view live and recorded video at any time and from virtually any networked location in the world.”

​

Critics complain that the pods are just another expensive attempt by the TSA to treat the traveling public like prisoners. According to Karen De Coster, the pods are a way “to remind you that you are a captive” and are “meant to make you feel like a prisoner who cannot leave.”

​

Watch a video breakdown below of the system’s capabilities by blogger Linc Austin.


​

 

[ax1]

TSA ‘Detention Pods’ Have Biometric, Object Detection Capabilities

Promo video shows user scanning fingerprint to leave containment area

Paul Joseph Watson
November 19, 2013

TSA ‘detention pods’ currently being rolled out at major airports across the U.S. have biometric and object-detecting capabilities, according to promotional material from Eagle Security Group, the company that manufactures the devices.

As we reported yesterday, the pods, which critics have likened to cattle grids, are currently in place at Syracuse International Airport as well as Atlantic City International Airport terminal exits.

​

Travelers enter the pod where they are briefly detained before a green light shows and they are allowed to leave the terminal.

​

People who suspected the devices may be performing some kind of x-ray scan may not be far off the mark. Although such procedures are not currently in place, the pods do have the capability to incorporate “human/threat object detection/containment,” according to the official brochurefor the ‘Access Control & Exit Lane Breach Control Systems’. The brochure also brags that the devices can detect “threat objects as small as a dime.”

​

The pods can also function as biometric scanners. A video demonstration shows a user biometrically scanning his fingerprint before he is allowed to leave the containment area.

​

“The identity of the user is guaranteed via fingerprint, iris or facial recognition scans before they are allowed to complete their passage from non-secure to secure areas. The Eagle ACP (Access Control Portal) with integrated biometrics of your choice is a complete solution,” statesthe company’s website.

​

The pods can also be monitored by HD surveillance cameras which “can be configured and accessed remotely, enabling multiple, authorized users to view live and recorded video at any time and from virtually any networked location in the world.”

​

Critics complain that the pods are just another expensive attempt by the TSA to treat the traveling public like prisoners. According to Karen De Coster, the pods are a way “to remind you that you are a captive” and are “meant to make you feel like a prisoner who cannot leave.”

​

Watch a video breakdown below of the system’s capabilities by blogger Linc Austin.


​

More Airports Set to Install TSA ‘Detention Pods’

Devices that critics liken to cattle grids have biometric capabilities

Paul Joseph Watson
December 6, 2013

A new Transportation Security Administration directive that mandates airports provide security for terminal exits is likely to lead to the installation of more ‘detention pods’ which have the capability of subjecting travelers to biometric scans.

“Airports across the country have sued to block a new Transportation Security Administration directive that requires them, starting Jan. 1, to begin guarding exit security doors, as passengers leave flights and head for baggage claims,” reports the Associated Press.

​

The article notes that in order to comply with the regulation and save hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in staffing, airports may follow the example set by Atlantic City International, which has “installed five cylinder-shaped glass exit portals since 2009.”

​

These ‘detention pods’, which temporarily hold a traveler inside the portal until a green light and a voice command signals that the person can leave, have been compared to cattle grids by critics who see them as another way in which travelers are treated as prisoners inside the airport. According to Karen De Coster, the pods are a way “to remind you that you are a captive” and are “meant to make you feel like a prisoner who cannot leave.”

​

The detention pods, which are also in place at Syracuse International Airport, “were designed and approved by TSA,” according to Syracuse Airport Commissioner Christina Callahan.

​

Travelers have expressed confusion at the necessity of the pods. “I don’t understand those doors,” Cindy Katz, of Jupiter, Fla. told the Boston Globe. “What are they supposed to do? It slows everyone down.” The article also notes how some are concerned about “being scanned somehow while closed inside.”

​

Mindy Carpenter, who was waiting for friends to arrive at the airport complained, “It just took so long for the four of them to come through.”

​

The report adds that the detention pods “could be the wave of things to come,” and that their manufacturer, Eagle Security Group, is currently in talks with other airports.

​

As we previously highlighted, although the devices currently in use do not (at least publicly) utilize any kind of scanning technology, the pods do have biometric and object-detecting capabilities, meaning in the future Americans could face yet another stifling level of security simply to leave the airport.​

A video demonstration of the devices shows a user biometrically scanning his fingerprint before he is allowed to leave the containment area.
​

“The identity of the user is guaranteed via fingerprint, iris or facial recognition scans before they are allowed to complete their passage from non-secure to secure areas. The Eagle ACP (Access Control Portal) with integrated biometrics of your choice is a complete solution,” states the company’s website.
​

 

[ax1]

Real-Life 'RoboCop' May Be Coming to a Street Near You

By By Jill Scharr, Staff writer 20 hours ago

A bullet-shaped robot that stands about 5 feet (1.5 meters) tall, the K5 "security guard" looks …


Robot security guards are staples of most futuristic sci-fi movies, video games and TV shows. They exist in real life as well, though the sight of a security robot patrolling the streets is far from common.

The K5 Beta, a just-unveiled prototype from California-based company Knightscope, might change all that.

A bullet-shaped robot that stands about 5 feet (1.5 meters) tall, the K5 looks a lot like the droid R2-D2 from the "Star Wars" films. The K5 might not have all the features of its counterpart from a galaxy far, far away. But what it does have, Knightscope representatives said, is an onboard sensor array that can see, hear, touch and smell its surroundings. [5 Reasons to Fear Robots]

The K5 can also combine that sensory data with "existing raw business, government and crowdsourced social data sets, and subsequently assigns an alert level that determines when a business, community or authorities should be notified of a concern," according to Knightscope's press release.

In other words, the K5 is supposed to combine its observations with public data on the social and financial statistics of its surroundings, and use the information to predict if, when and where a crime is likely to occur.

If the K5 does detect that an "incident" is occurring, it makes all of its sensor data publicly available via Wi-Fi, "to allow the entire community to review the information transparently and contribute additional relevant, real-time information," Knightscope representatives said.

Crowdsourced crime investigations have their pros and cons, as anyone who followed the immediate aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing knows well. Using Twitter, Boston residents were able to inform others about the events surrounding the attack and help identify the alleged bomber, but not before an innocent person was publicly named as a suspect. Presumably, the K5's software will be able to sift through crowdsourced data to find the most valuable information.

The company was founded in response to another deadly incident that gained national attention: the shooting massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., in December 2012.

"Our long-term goal is to show that, with a combination of hardware, software and community involvement, we will, together, be able to cut crime," Knightscope CEO William Santana Li said in a statement.

Many people aren't comfortable with the idea of human police officers carrying video cameras or amassing a private database of footage, so it's unlikely that the public would approve of camera-toting robots. The K5's ability to make its collected data publicly available is intended, in part, to assuage those concerns, as Li told The New York Times. The idea is that people will feel more comfortable if the data the K5 collects is in everyone's hands, and not just the police or a private group.

What's more, Knightscope representatives said the K5 will be able to save money. The robot operates at a cost of about $6.25 per hour, the New York Times reports — more than a dollar below the U.S. minimum hourly wage.

The K5 has just reached beta testing, with no word on when it might become commercially available. However, "initial test deployments" are scheduled for 2014, so the sight of a robotic security guard rolling through a school, mall, museum or city street might not be that far off.

Email [email protected] or follow her @JillScharr and Google+. Follow LiveScience @livescience, Facebook & Google+. Original article on LiveScience.

http://news.yahoo.com/real-life-39-robocop-39-may-coming-street-012810134.html

 

[ax1]

Well, a TSA agent has been shot and killed today at LAX. My thoughts to him and his family.

This may now set the stage to finalize getting TSA armed at the airports.

As I predicted, problem, reaction, solution...

This is where it all starts incrementally. Get them armed during some of the busy hours to break the ice and take it from there. Get people slowly accustomed to the police state control grid.

TSA recommends airports use armed guards during peak hours

By Adrianne Jeffries on March 26, 2014 03:35 pm
Don't miss stories Follow The Verge

(Dan Paluska / Flickr)

Airports should station armed guards at security checkpoints during peak hours, according to new recommendations from the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).

The TSA conducted a nationwide security review after a gunman opened fire at Los Angeles International Airport last fall, killing a TSA officer. Rather than arming its own officers, the agency is recommending that airports bring in more armed law enforcement to high-traffic areas during busy times.

"Among the issues warranting review following the LAX shooting was whether the agency could improve officer safety and security by enhancing law enforcement presence and response to checkpoints," the TSA says in its review. "The recommended standards are intended to provide visible deterrence and quicker incident response time and apply to those airports not currently utilizing a fixed post plan."

The TSA will also be requiring "active shooter training" for its officers, improving the emergency alarm system, and extending the temporary use of the agency's roaming armed forces, the Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response team. Additional recommendations for airports include enhanced training as well as coordination between security cameras and emergency alerts.

 

[ax1]

Video: TSA Agents Pat Down 2 & 6 Year Old Children

Infants allegedly targeted because mother’s name was on a watchlist

Paul Joseph Watson
April 22, 2014

Disturbing new video footage shows TSA agents performing full body pat downs on two infants aged just 2 and 6 years old, illustrating how the federal agency still targets children despite a partial rollback of the policy in 2011.

The clip begins with the two year old instinctively moving away from a blue-gloved TSA screener who starts performing a full body pat down on the nervous toddler while he is held in place by his mother.

​

The video then shows a 6-year-old girl receiving the same treatment as a female TSA agent touches her backside, the inside of her thighs and around her chest. The child appears to say something like, “I need to go” and is clearly uncomfortable with the pat down.

​

After both pat downs, the TSA agents announce they they will check their hands for signs of explosives before the family is allowed through security.

​

The description underneath the video suggests that the children were selected for a pat down because their mother’s name was on a watchlist. “Can they do that,” she asks.

​

In response to a huge backlash, the TSA amended its policy in 2011 to massively reduce pat downs of children under the age of 12. Infants are allowed to pass through x-ray or body scanners multiple times if there is any anomaly in order to prevent the need for a physical search. However, on its official website the TSA says that the change only “reduces the likelihood of a pat-down,” and doesn’t eliminate it altogether.

​

However, during a recent controversy involving actor Alec Baldwin’s 5 month old daughter allegedly receiving a TSA pat down (the pat down was actually not conducted by TSA agents), reports about the incident cited a DHS official who said that, “The TSA does not pat down children under 12.”

​

The video description clearly suggests that the children were given a pat down without first being allowed to pass repeatedly through x-ray scanners to clear the issue, and in fact that there was no issue with the children at all because it was the mother’s name appearing on a watchlist that prompted the pat down. If this is the case, it represents a violation of the TSA’s own policy.

​

In a more general context, the video serves as yet another reminder of the numerous idiotic policies employed by the TSA which do nothing to target potential terrorists and everything to harass and inconvenience innocent travelers.

​

The clip will also stoke concerns that the entire concept of children being taught not to allow strangers to touch them is being violated by the actions of the TSA.​

 

[ax1]

Police to Get X-Ray Scanner For Vehicle Inspections & “Public Safety”

Handheld version of 'roving street scanner' to snoop on contents of cars

by Paul Joseph Watson |
June 23, 2014

A new portable backscatter device designed to perform x-rays of objects is set to be used by police departments to inspect vehicles as well as for “public safety,” according to the company behind the new scanner.

The video for the handheld MINI Z Backscatter imaging scanner, developed by American Science and Engineering Inc (AS&E), brags that it will “allow operators to see more than ever in more places than ever.”

​

The scanner will be used by “law enforcement, first responders, border control, event security, maritime police and general aviation security,” in order to search for currency, drugs and explosives. Police will use the device to inspect “vehicle bumpers, tires, panels and interiors” and to detect IEDs.

​

According to AS&E, the scanner represents a “game changer” for law enforcement and border patrol and will be used to ensure “public safety.” However, the company admits that the device “is not designed to scan people” because it emits radiation.

​

The technology is based on a previous larger incarnation of x-ray scanner that was deployed via trucks to conduct roving scans of other vehicles on American streets and highways.

​

In 2010 it emerged that American Science & Engineering had sold many of the larger devices to U.S. law enforcement agencies, who were already using them on the streets for “security” purposes.

​

The company’s founder, Joe Reiss, told Forbes that more than 500 backscatter x-ray devices were already being used domestically by U.S. authorities and were being, “driven past neighboring vehicles to see their contents.”

​

Commenting on the roving x-ray vans, EPIC’s Marc Rotenberg warned, “Without a warrant, the government doesn’t have a right to peer beneath your clothes without probable cause. Even airport scans are typically used only as a secondary security measure. If the scans can only be used in exceptional cases in airports, the idea that they can be used routinely on city streets is a very hard argument to make.”

​

We previously noted how the ultimate end use of body scanners would not be limited to airports, and that they were going to be rolled out on the streets as mobile units that would scan vehicles at checkpoints as well as individuals and crowds attending public events.

​

Dutch police later announced that they were developing a mobile scanner that would “see through people’s clothing and look for concealed weapons” and that it would be used “as an alternative to random body searches in high risk areas”.

​

The device would also be used from a distance on groups of people “and mass scans on crowds at events such as football matches.”

​

The plans mirrored leaked documents out of the UK Home Office three years prior, which revealed that authorities in the UK were working on proposals to fit lamp posts with CCTV cameras that would X-ray scan passers-by and “undress them” in order to “trap terror suspects”.​