The Nation: TSAstroturf: The Washington Lobbyists and Koch-Funded Libertarians Behind TSA Scandal

[OregonBlue]

Does anyone else sense something strange is going on with the apparently spontaneous revolt against the TSA? This past week, the media turned an "ordinary guy," 31-year-old Californian John Tyner, who blogs under the pseudonym "Johnny Edge," into a national hero after he posted a cell phone video of himself defending his liberty against the evil government oppressors in charge of airport security.

While this issue is certainly important—and offensive—to Americans, we are nonetheless skeptical about how and why this story turned into a national movement. In fact, this whole campaign feels a bit like déjà-vu: As the first reporters to expose the Tea Party as an Astroturf PR campaign funded by FreedomWorks and Koch-related front groups back in February, 2009, we see many of the same elements driving the current "rebellion" against the TSA: Koch-related libertarians, Washington lobbyists and PR operatives posing as "ordinary citizens," and suspicious fake-grassroots outrage relentlessly promoted in the same old right-wing echo chamber.

Meg McLain almost became a national celebrity as the first victim of the body scanner/TSA molesters. On November 8, McLain was preparing to fly out of the Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, airport, when she claimed to have been the victim of invasive TSA molestation. According to McLain, when she refused to have her body scanned, the TSA agents supposedly started screaming "Opt out! Opt out!" and pulled her aside and "molested" her—specifically, they "squeezed and twisted" her breasts so hard that "it hurt." ("OptOut" is the name of a "grassroots" protest movement designed to tie up airports during the holidays—more on that later.) As she described it, "It's getting to the point where I feel more physically molested than if some random guy actually came up and molested me. It's more intrusive than that." McLain also claimed that she was made to stand in an open area next to the metal detector, where every passenger could look at her while a TSA agent "screamed" at her, until, finally, she was handcuffed to a chair by a "dozen cops." McLain immediately called into the Keene libertarian radio show to tell her awful story, which was posted on YouTube, and spread virally after it was promoted on Drudge Report.

There was only one problem with McLain's story: she made it up. The TSA released video evidence showing that McLain wasn't molested, wasn't screamed at and wasn't attacked by a dozen cops and half a dozen TSA agents. In fact, other passengers don't seem to notice her, although a TSA agent does seem to be trying to comfort McLain, offering her tissues as the libertarian rebel breaks out crying.

http://www.thenation.com/article/156647/tsastroturf-washington-lobbyists-and-koch-funded-libertarians-behind-tsa-scandal

Long article we all should read. As I have mentioned several times today, I started reading DU and had to check to make sure I hadn't accidentally gone to FreedomWorks instead.

[Frances]

1. Thanks for your post.

I have been thinking the same thing as you, especially since I travelled across country in October. I made a second cross country trip in November. The security was the same as it has always been for me and for everyone else I saw.

I don't like standing in a line, taking off my shoes, etc., but I understand why I have to do this.

I also know that the Republicans are looking for any and everything they can find to chip away at Obama's base. It seems to me that they have been successful at chipping away at Obama's support on DU.

[OHdem10]

2. Underlying all the screeching and screaming---excuse to further

damage unions and privatize TSA. The GOP never miss
an opportunity to exploit upset people and take a
"crisis" amd use it promote their agenda.

[Andy823]

3. Yep...

The right wing trolls have been doing a great job of trying to divide everyone on DU. I also think this whole "rebellion" over the scanners is a put up job by the right so they can cause more problem for the president. Polls show that the vast majority of americans support what is being done to protect those flying, so this whole thing should make anyone stop and think about "WHY" it's happening.

All the right wants is for president Obama to "change" some procedures and then when we do get hit again by a terrorist they will use it against him to say he is "weak" on protecting this country. I just wish that so many on the left wouldn't fall for this BS every time the right does something like this!

[sabrina 1]

43. This rebellion has been a Democratic issue for six years.

Were you on Bush's side during all those years when the ACLU and the Civil Liberties Union and every Democrat who knew about the encroaching totalitarianism under the guise of 'security' was fighting, successfully, to keep these abusive tactics based on fear, these grotesque machines and
'enhance pat-downs' out of our lives? Did you know they tried these 'enhanced patdowns' in 2004 and had to abandon them because of outrage from the left? When did we switch sides again?

This truly is amazing to see. The amnesia about the fight against Bush. Suddenly people are being manipulated into forgetting how hard people have fought to protect our Constitutional rights against Big Business, because that is and always was the reason for these machines. We KNEW that back then. Were you supportive of Chertoff and Giuliani turning our fears into profits by pushing these abuses of Constitutional rights?

The fact that some on the right are now realizing that their support for everything Bush did, has resulted in Democrats being able to use those powers against them, has little to do with the issue itself which was and always has been a Liberal issue. When did we decide that Bush was right after all? Can someone explain that to me please? Is it a case of IOKIAD now? How sad to see people falling for this. How sad for all those who fought so hard for everyone's rights.

I have not changed my position in six years on this issue. And I was among a majority of Democrats who agreed. Now suddenly we are all 'rightwing trolls'? This is bullshit. This is all about money. I wondered why all of a sudden Democrats were so silent. Now I know it wasn't just because of the holidays. They were waiting to find out whose side they are on and as always, they have come down on the side of the wealthy Corps, the Chertoffs, Giulianis of the world. It is disgusting to watch.

[alstephenson]

46. ++++1

[Mojorabbit]

53. +10000 nt

[DemReadingDU]

62. +++

[Catherina]

71. Sabrina, I love you! n/t

[ooglymoogly]

66. Wow! convolute much?

Propaganda is the art of making something appear what it is not. The Nation has produced a propaganda hit piece and I for one, do not appreciate it; speaking of trolls.

[Andy823]

4. I have to agree with you.

It's all a game the right keeps on playing trying to make the president look bad, and sadly way to many on the left fall for this crap and help them. Polls show most americans approve of the job of screening at the airports, and like the tea party crowd being "grassroots", this is just another lame attempt to damage the president for political gain!

[LisaL]

9. Gee, I wonder how some people on this site would react

to these enhanced pat-downs and x-ray scanners if Bush president right now? Something tells me it would not get the same reaction.

[TorchTheWitch]

13. it's as obvious as a herd of elephants in the bathtub

and it's making me start rethinking what I'm doing here anymore.

[krabigirl]

57. Lol, it is all about poltics and your "team," right? Principles mean nothing.

I am sure i am about to banned, but this is disgusting!

So you would be against the scanners and enhanced groping if bush was in charge, but under Obama, it is a-ok? Lmao.

[ooglymoogly]

67. If I wanted to read right wing crap, I'd go to a freeper sight.

for shame!!!

[AspenRose]

5. You should see the comments underneath the story on the site.

Yikes :wow:

[Mojorabbit]

6. I really think the new enhanced search

was just the last straw. I have seen outrage on both sides. I do think that the media loves a good story like this though and have run with it. I have no doubt that the right wing media has stuck their nose into it but the ACLU also has recorded a huge number of complaints and I for one am glad people are pushing back.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

20. I'm with you, I want all those freedoms I once had and if I have to

push back, then so be it.

[appleannie1]

7. My son flies as part of his job. I never know where he is at any given time.

He has never had a problem with any security measure. He has always said that since he has no choice but to fly, he would much rather be frisked or patted down than to have to get on a plane not knowing if everyone else has a bomb. He was in the air on 9-11.

[NNN0LHI]

8. Recommended. When this hit the news like the bogus Acorn stuff I knew it was a set up

[sabrina 1]

40. This was a huge issue for Democrats for the past six years.

Were you supporting these machines when Bush was in office? Because every Civil Rights organization was fighting them, and every Democrat I know was opposed to them. Now, suddenly, what Bush could not get done, a Democratic administration succeeded in doing. And the outrage was justified. The fact that some on the right are now joining in that outrage, is a good thing. If only they had when these grotesque abuses first appeared in 2004.

What IS weird is how these stories attempting to turn back the work of all those who successfully stopped them during the Bush years, are appearing on leftwing sites.

I am seeing how hypocritical the left really is. Just as hypocritical as the right. The money that has been made by Corporate America in the past year since Chertoff et al succeeded in their years long mission to get them into U.S. airports, is astronomical.

So, for the left the issue never was about principles after all. It was because it was Bush!

These articles now supporting something the left has opposed so long, THEY are the astroturf, no doubt funded by the same gang that funded the attacks on Michael Moore.

I opposed these abuses of the Constitutional rights of Americans since 2004, I have no intentions of turning a blind eye to them now because a Democrat is in the WH.

You are right about one thing. These pro-Constitutional abuse articles ARE a set-up. You need to do some research on the history of this battle.

Fyi, btw, they are illegal in New Zealand and so far, two states here are planning to ban them with bi-partisan support. I hope they succeed and will be remaining in the fight against Corporate America's theft of our rights. This is all about money. Fall for it if you wish, the CEO of the aptly named Rapiscan, thanks you, although I doubt you will get to share in the profits from our loss of rights.

[Catherina]

72. Unrec'd (thread, not you). You might really want to rethink that, talking about set-ups.

Jeremy Scahill:"The article my magazine, The Nation, published about John Tyner is a shameful smear"

[originalpckelly]

10. Are you fucking kidding me?

You know, just because this happened under a Democratic administration, it doesn't mean we have to accept it. This is wrong. The FUCKING ACLU OPPOSES IT! When did they turn into a right wing organization?

If this had happened under Bush, I doubt there would have been even one post supporting it. You fucking make me sick. WHEN DOES IT END? They are using a machine to strip search people! Aside from body cavity searches, how much more intrusive can they get? Do you not even believe in a right to have certain things private? Am I in fucking prison? Then why should anyone see me naked unless their about to get it on with me or they're taking care of me medically?

[LisaL]

11. Well Obama supports it so it must be all good.

:sarcasm:

[originalpckelly]

12. And the only people who oppose it here are just right wingers dividing us on purpose.

The ACLU has been taken over by right wingers.

[Canuckistanian]

15. It's the only possible explanation

Why can't people see that?

[originalpckelly]

17. I think Obama is a right wing plot to discredit Obama.

:P

[Canuckistanian]

26. +1

Err.... I think.

[Truth2Tell]

74. awesome

:rofl:

That's almost sig line worthy. :thumbsup:

[TorchTheWitch]

18. no it isn't

It's the "Team D at any price" crowd many of whom have been here for years.

[Canuckistanian]

25. Relax

I was being sarcastic. I hate overuse of the sarcasm smilie.

[TorchTheWitch]

44. In this case it obviously wouldn't have been overuse n/t

[Frances]

39. I came to DU when people were defending

Nader's run in 2000.

I go back to 1980 when the left abandoned Carter for Teddy (whom I preferred), which helped us get Saint Reagan.

I go back even further to 1968 when I held my nose and voted for Humphrey (in spite of the Chicago convention nightmare) over Nixon.

So, yes, I am for Team D because the alternative has been so much worse every time I got disillusioned with the Dem.

I will complain about specific issues that I don't agree with, but I have not personally had any problems with airline security nor have I seen anyone else have a problem and I have traveled across country on two separate occasions in the last two months. I'm very grateful that I am not the hysterical type and that I don't believe hysterical hype.

[ooglymoogly]

68. That you held your nose voting for Humphrey, a died in the wool

liberal says a bunch. The problem here is not taking whatever precautions are necessary for safety. It is spending billions on machines where millions have been spent to get the government buying them. Why do governments who have never had a lapse in their safety record, laugh at us for this Orwellian intrusion that is admittedly unsustainable. A fact that will come into play after the billions have been spent to buy these machines.

[TorchTheWitch]

14. it's sickening all right

I feel like I'm on the freeper site here lately.

[Individualist]

16. Hear, hear!

[readmoreoften]

30. +1. Just because a libertarian group tries to spin TSA patdowns doesn't mean they're okay.

Fred Phelps criticizes US soldiers, am I supposed to support the war because of that?

[Pholus]

34. +1 on that one.

So, any of you "it's wrong to question this types" going to take on that one? Didn't think so.

[sabrina 1]

70. It did happen under Bush. The 'enhanced patdowns' were tried

in 2004 and had to be abandoned because of outrage FROM THE LEFT. As you rightly guessed there was not one post supporting them on Democratic blogs back them. Were we astro-turfed by the Koch brothers back then? Is the ACLU part of a rightwing plot to make this Administration look bad? They DO look bad to anyone who was involved in protecting our Constitutional rights for the last six years, and who now have been set back years by this administration's purchasing of those odious machines.

What utter nonsense these smears from the left are.

[LostInAnomie]

19. It's not just RWers. A crap load of the left have been yelping like scalded dogs...

... and making up bullshit nightmare scenarios.

[originalpckelly]

22. Bullshit nightmare scenario:

People in America are selected out of the flying public to have naked pictures taken of them, it won't be in flesh tone, just some weird gray color. That way no one knows they're seeing you naked.

Oooops! Sorry about that.

[Fruittree]

24. The only thing I think is a problem is the radiation -

Are these machines safe? Have they been tested somehow? Naked picture? I think that's just an over-reaction - most human bodies are similar - As an adult once you've seen one, you've kind of seen them all... ...Don't you think??

[alstephenson]

47. "The only thing I see is a problem is...."

your stupidity.

[Fruittree]

58. I love your open-mindedness and willingness to rationally

discuss issues...

[Pholus]

27. Really. Then what are the radiation dosage numbers. Energies, flux. Why no honesty?

Why did they lie about resolutions of pictures or the ability to save them? Read the TSA blog to see what I mean.

Oh that's right. I'm being unreasonable.

I should SUPPORT the government lying when our team is in the White House.

My bad.

[ooglymoogly]

69. Bullshit nightmare scenario; CONFLICT OF INTEREST!!!

A nation conned into spending billions on machines that lobbyists have bribed it into defending and buying. A system that is admittedly unsustainable; which will become known only after the billions have already been spent and everybody's pockets have been lined and another Kotch is born, once again getting obscenely rich off the taxpayer and able to buy a bigger piece of the government by and for the rich. The new world order, Brave New World, The third way.

[frylock]

37. making up bullshit nightmare scenarios..

like underpants exploding planes....

[sabrina 1]

60. So, you were on Bush's side when he tried to install

these machines since 2004, and you were opposed to the Democrats and the Civil Liberties organizations who stopped him?

It's funny, I was involved in this fight since it began, and I never once saw a Democrat who supported this assault on our Constitutional rights in five years. Now all of a sudden they are everywhere.

This is the fifth time I am asking someone who thinks that an assault on our Constitutional rights is okay if a Democrat does it. Whose side were you on when we were fighting the Bush administration about these machines?

I guess I will not receive an answer. So far, not one supporter of these Bush-era abuses of our rights, has answered my question.

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. I guess I have been a right ringer

Since the days of the USPA then...

:sarcasm:

Yes they are using this, but the Nation is missing this and it is not a football game.

[Pholus]

23. Don't like gropes = failure of DU Ideological purity test?

:eyes:

So much for the big tent. So much for civil liberties and human rights. It's only matters that my complaint might make the President look bad.

Thanks guys. At least this issue is opening my eyes about who I thought I was playing for.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. The article has been debunked by Glen Greenwald and others.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/

[readmoreoften]

31. Thank you. I can't believe the Nation is resorting to such low information bullshit.

Good god, what are we coming to?

[girl gone mad]

45. Remember the hit job they did on Wes Clark a few years ago?

Par for the course, unfortunately.

[GETPLANING]

29. You really have to admire their cunning

All this to steer a few airport security contracts to a few well connected businesses. The real pity is, 9-11 occurred precisely because private airport security let the hijackers onto the planes. And these people would let it happen again for their own personal monetary gain.

[blue neen]

32. The Koch's are masters of diversionary tactics.

Whatever message they want to control, they find a way to do it.

[inna]

33. read Glen Greenwald's response to this:

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/11/24/tyner/index.html

Having said that, it's a SHAME that this issue has been hijacked from the left.

[hfojvt]

36. that was posted on DU yesterday too

kinda funny that it seems a good portion of DU didn't see that post

[frylock]

35. fuck this shit. you all tried to align the left with the teabaggers when we opposed obamneycare..

and now you're going to attempt the same with this just because the dems are too fucking cowardly to take up this issue.

[originalpckelly]

38. I mean, as we all know, the only problem is that people weren't buying over-priced health insurance.

Hopefully, the exchanges will lower prices, but I wonder how much lower prices would have been if they'd had to compete with a public insurance option, you know?

[sabrina 1]

42. It's almost funny to watch the sudden abandonment of an issue

that was so important to Democrats when Bush was in power, isn't it? I never realized how hypocritical some on the left were until now.

They will not silence me, in fact, I can see we need to double our efforts to protect our Constitutional rights since apparently now, Democrats no longer care about them. I will not live in a police state without trying at least, to prevent it. Nor will I help Michael Chertoff and Rudy Giuliani et al, to get rich by selling out this country's Constitutional rights for political partisanship. This has finally convinced me that this country truly is run by Corporations and our elected officials were bought and paid for before they ever got to DC.

[girl gone mad]

49. Just when you think they can't stoop any lower...

they prove you wrong, again.

Trashing an ordinary citizen who was standing up for his personal right not to be groped? That's pure sleaze.

[krabigirl]

56. Agree with you. It is very disheartening.

[applegrove]

41. Oh for sure. They want Americans to tie the feeling of being potentially violated by the TSA

with rejection of paying taxes. It is with emotional layer upon emotional layer that they build up their base's feelings of rejection of all things government. They either make a member of their base more ardently against government violation...or they plant the seed of 'government violation' in some unsuspecting American who just doesn't like the idea of have his/her junk touched.

Either way they want to make sure this feeling sticks with Americans.

[sabrina 1]

50. Do you really think it is just about 'having their junk' touched?

I have asked this question several times over the past few days but still have not received an answer from those suddenly supporting these machines.

I'll try again. When these machines were first learned about back in 2004 and Liberals everywhere, not just in this country either btw, immediately opposed them and civil suits were brought against the government to stop their use, were you a part of that battle to stop the government from using fear to destroy our Constitutional rights? Did you support the successful efforts of the ACLU, the Civil Liberties Union and all the other 'leftwing' organizations who fought to halt these abuses of our rights?

Did you know eg, that those efforts were successful, even under Bush and with people like Giuliani and Chertoff trying desperately to scare people into accepting them? Until last year when sadly, it was not Bush, but a democratic administration who finally caved and bought these grotesque machines for our airports and dealt a real blow to all those efforts made while Bush was taking away right after right?

The reason I'm asking is I am truly shocked to see Democrats now supporting what they so opposed under Bush as I never once saw any support on any democratic forum, for these machines until now. And I would like to know what has changed. Are our civil rights no longer important, and if not, why not?

[applegrove]

51. It is also a civil right to be able to get on a plane that is safe. The terrorists have

demonstrated that they very much want to take down a plane using explosives. We think W. was negligent for not reacting to the August memo. How would we feel about a plane blowing out of the sky with 300 people on it when we know it is on the terrorists agenda?

[sabrina 1]

52. If it is a civil right to be able to get on a plane that is safe, then

you might want to ask yourself why there are so many plane crashes where so many more people have been killed throughout the history of flying, than any terrorist could dream of. Do you really think you can make flying safe?

Do you know what the odds are of a terrorist blowing up a plane, against say, dying in a plane crash?

If you want planes to be safe, I'm afraid that is very wishful thinking on your part and you probably should never have been flying, now or ever.

We can never be safe, and those who are willing to give up their rights in a futile attempt to be 'safe' deserve neither safety or rights, as someone famous once said.

Please, do me a favor, stop giving away MY rights because of your irrational fear of a threat that is so miniscule the world is laughing at us for how easily frightened we are in the 'Home of the Brave'.

I am not afraid of dying in a plane crash but it could happen and it is far more likely to happen because of 'pilot error' than by 'terror'. I will not be manipulated by fear when there is no reason to be.

You are at far greater risk of harm every day when you drive your car. What should we do about that? And if this government really cares about saving lives (forgive me for laughing) then why have they allowed 440,000 Americans to die for lack of adequate health care since 9/11? How many again died of a terror attack since then? The money spent in the last year on these useless machines would have saved so many of those lives. Do you see how illogical this is?

Americans need to stop being such cowardly, whimpering, scared rabbits. It's embarrassing. But the government and their corporate masters love their frightened citizens. Since Democrats caved after six years of Bush being unable to do it, and installed those grotesque machines in our airports, Rapiscan CEOS have made a small fortune.

Let's keep making them richer, so they can buy more of our elected officials.

Sorry, but this kind of illogical thinking and irrational fear and the ease with which people can be manipulated, makes me ill sometimes.

[Desertrose]

54. +1000

Everything you said.

[kowalski1]

61. + 1000

I think secretly most liberals would have supported the Patriot act if it was passed by the Obama administration. Neither team wants to see their side suffer another embarrassment from a terrorist attack. Sad but true. Also I wonder why the terrorist are so obsessed with blowing up airliners?
The way I see it, the greatest dmg now would come from blowing up a crowded movie theater or concert and why they keep trying the heavily fortified airports is beyond me

[theFrankFactor]

77. A Fellow Outsider

You're not alone Sabrina. Since the Obama presidency I have learned a lot about my party and much of it is very, very bad. The question is; what will people like you and I do to stop this stupid game? The Democratic prarty is rotten at the top and anyone who looks at the history of the democratic congress at least since Bush would have to be a partisan sheep not to see it.

[Gravel Democrat]

59. The underwear bomber was on a watch list, his dad reported him, boarded a plane without a passport-

“...On November 11, British intelligence officials sent the U.S. a cable indicating that a man named “Umar Farouk” had spoken to al-Awlaki, pledging to support jihad, but the cable did not reflect Abdulmutallab’s last name. Abdulmutallab’s father made a report to two CIA officers at the U.S. Embassy in Abuja, Nigeria, on November 19 regarding his son’s “extreme religious views”, and told the embassy that Abdulmutallab might be in Yemen. Acting on the report, the suspect’s name was added in November 2009 to the U.S..‘s 550,000-name Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment, a database of the U.S. National Counterterrorism Center. It was not added, however, to the FBI’s 400,000-name Terrorist Screening Database, the terror watch list that feeds both the 14,000-name Secondary Screening Selectee list and the U.S.‘s 4,000-name No Fly List, nor was his U.S. visa revoked.

“...U.S. State Department officials said in Congressional testimony that the State Department had wanted to revoke Abdulmutallab’s visa, but U.S. intelligence officials requested that his visa not be revoked. The intelligence officials’ stated reason was that revoking Abdulmutallab’s visa could have foiled a larger investigation into al-Qaida.

“...He had purchased his ticket with cash in Ghana on December 16. Prior to boarding the plane eyewitnesses Kurt Haskell and Lori Haskell testified live on CNN that they witnessed a “smartly dressed Indian man” helping Abdulmutallab onto the plane. They also testify that the ticket agent refused to allow Abdulmutallab on the plane because he did not have his own passport…”

**Would you be able to board an airplane bound for the US without a passport?***

Each and every one of these *facts* has been documented at the following link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umar_Farouk_Abdulmutallab

So by following established rules and adding a little common sense, there would have been no underwear bomber.

Where does the negligence lie here?

Will anyone from the Government be held to account for the outrageous errors and oversights listed above?

Edit to ask if this Ames/Levine circus act were all pissed off when Koch Industries gave funding to the DLC and served on it's executive council (I'd bet not):

Right-wing Koch Industries gave funding to the DLC and served on its Executive Council
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9014275

[DemReadingDU]

63. Yep, and now Chertoff has his scanners in the airports

and the TSA agents are allowed to grope us.
:puke:


I'd feel safer if they inspected 100% of the cargo. The bomb could be in the belly of the plane because only 20% of cargo is inspected.

[DemReadingDU]

64. only 20% of the cargo is inspected

So you feel safe when all the people on your flight have been thru the nudie scanners and or groped by the TSA agents. Well, the bomb could be in the cargo belly of the plane.


"It is a gaping hole in the nation’s anti-terrorism security system, experts say. About 22 percent of all U.S. packages shipped via air cargo are finding their way into the bellies of passenger jets, according to the General Accounting Office. Yet, there is little or no screening of such parcels.
http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/blog/broadway_17th/2010/11/air-travel-today-doesnt-scan-for.html

11/2/10 Only 20% of cargo to U.S. checked for bombs
Billions of pounds of packages bound for the U.S. each year are delivered on passenger flights in which cargo is checked with an electronic system that does not screen for bombs, lawmakers and security experts said Monday.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-11-02-1Acargobombs02_ST_N.htm
http://homelandsecuritynewswire.com/only-20-percent-us-bound-cargo-screened-bombs

11/2/10 In Air Cargo Business, It’s Speed vs. Screening, Creating a Weak Link in Security
It is an essential lubricant of the global economy — the multibillion-dollar air cargo industry, which every day carries millions of express packages of every shape and size around the world, parcels that can include things as diverse as an electronic component and a human body part. But the discovery last week that terrorists had used United Parcel Service and FedEx to ship two explosive devices has set off a debate over what can be done to improve cargo security without damaging a business built on getting packages anywhere, quickly and cheaply.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/02/business/02cargo.html

[frylock]

48. The article my magazine, The Nation, published about John Tyner is a shameful smear.

http://twitter.com/jeremyscahill/status/7512074246688768

[krabigirl]

55. This garbage is considered journalism?!

And to think i used to read the nation. Never again.

[Gormy Cuss]

65. I don't support privatizing the TSA. I support removal of scanners and ending the grope downs

except as secondary screenings. Even then, the scanners used should be required to produce a less precise body image.

That article is a good expose of who is behind the current outrage, but I've been against these scanners for over a year and I'm far from alone. If that makes me a libertarian in your mind, so be it.

[20score]

73. I've been a subscriber of The Nation for about ten years. If they don't condemn this BS, I won't

be a subscriber next year.

[somone]

75. Is there an article in The Nation on the corporate welfare for Chertoff's machines

and Obama's travels with the Rapidscan CEO?

[Mimosa]

76. ^ I bet there won't be one anytime soon ^

I wish I were rich so I could donate to Mother Jones.