November 23rd, 2010
UK Daily Mail
Furious security staff have hit back at pat down searches in place across America, claiming that they hated dealing with obese travellers and those with personal hygiene problems.
There has already been a angry passenger backlash against the measures introduced by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).
But after being contacted by a travel blog, 17 staff have also expressed their disgust after the policy was put in place last month.
The staff said that they hated having to carry out the body searches, with one claiming that it was worse for him than the passenger.
A traveller undergoes an enhanced pat down by a Transportation Security Administration agent: Staff have said that they also find the searches unpleasant
Rush: Passengers move through a main security checkpoint at the Denver International Airport in Denver, Colorado
'It is not comfortable to come to work knowing full well that my hands will be feeling another man’s private parts, their butt, their inner thigh,' one told the BoardingArea blog.
'Even worse is having to try and feel inside the flab rolls of obese passengers and we seem to get a lot of obese passengers!'
Another said he had a huge problem dealing with a 'large number of passengers... daily that have a problem understanding what personal hygieneFur is.'
All the staff said that they had experienced a high level of personal abuse while carrying out the pat-downs.
'Being a TSO means often being verbally abused, you let the comments roll off and check the next person,' one said.
'However, when a woman refuses the scanner then comes to me and tells me that she feels like I am molesting her, that is beyond verbal abuse.
'I asked the woman if she thought I like touching other women all day and she told me that I probably did or I wouldn’t be with the TSA.
'I just want to tell these people that I feel disgusted feeling other peoples private parts, but I cannot because I am a professional.'
Angry passengers have subjected TSA officers to verbal abuse and even physical threats.
The American Federation of Government Employee, the union which represents officers, said a TSO was punched by a passenger in Indianapolis.
Union President John Gage called for more information on the searches including leaflets for passengers.
He said: 'TSA must act now — before the Thanksgiving rush — to ensure that TSOs are not being left to fend for themselves.'
Up to two million passengers per day are expected to fly today and tomorrow ahead of Thanksgiving, with huge delays expected.
Huge queues: Passengers move in line for the checks at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport in Atlanta
Meanwhile, one patient traveller has proved it is possible to bypass the high-level security measures in place at all airports, but only if you have time on your hands.
Blogger Matt Kernan recorded his epic experience as he returned to North Kentucky International Airport in Cincinnati from Paris on Sunday.
Exasperated at being told to prepare for a body scan and with time on his hands, the determined businessman decided to make a stand - with remarkable results.
Writing on his website noblasters.com, he said: 'I certainly don’t enjoy being treated like a terrorist in my own country, but I’m also not a die-hard constitutional rights advocate.
'However, for some reason, I was irked.'
'Maybe it was the video of the three-year old getting molested, maybe it was the sexual assault victim having to cry her way through getting groped, maybe it was the father watching teenage TSA officers joke about his attractive daughter.
'Whatever it was, this issue didn’t sit right with me. We shouldn’t be required to do this simply to get into our own country.'
As a result, Mr Kernan informed staff he did not want to go through the infamous Backscatter imaging machine.
He was told he would have to undergo an invasive pat-down search, but again politely told staff that he would consider any contact with his genital areas as assault.
After being told that the two options were TSA policy, he replied: ' I disagree with the policy, and I think that it is unconstitutional.
No exemptions: Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa goes through an Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) full-body scanner at the city's airport
'As a US citizen, I have the right to move freely within my country as long as I can demonstrate proof of citizenship and have demonstrated no reasonable cause to be detained.'
As the situation escalated further airport police were called and more senior TSA officials but Mr Kernan refused to back down, remaining calm throughout.
Eventually causing a stand-off between police and TSA officers over who should resolve the situation, Mr Kernan was told by a superviser: 'Here’s what we’re going to do. I’m going to escort you out of the terminal to the public area.
'You are to stay with me at all times. Do you understand?'
He was then escorted by the police and no less than 13 TSA officer through security without a hand laid on him.
He said: 'And then came the most ridiculous scene of which I’ve ever been a part.
'I gather my things – jacket, scarf, hat, briefcase, chocolates.
'We walk over to the staff entrance and he scans his badge to let me through. We walk down the long hallway that led back to the baggage claim area. We skip the escalators and moving walkways.'
He was then waved away by annoyed officers and said: 'In order to enter the US, I was never touched, I was never “Backscatted,” and I was never metal detected.
'In the end, it took 2.5 hours, but I proved that it is possible. I’m looking forward to my next flight on Wednesday.'
THE INCIDENTS FUELLING THE OUTCRY
A flight attendant and cancer survivor revealed her horror at being forced to show her prosthetic breast to a security agent during a pat-down at Charlotte Douglas International Airport.
Cathy Bossi said two female Charlotte TSA agents subjected her to what Ms Bossi described as an aggressive pat down.
She said they stopped when they got around to feeling her right breast - the one she had lost through her illness.
She was then apparently asked to remove the prosthetic breast from her bra and show it to the TSA agents.
'There are blowers and there are dogs out there that can sniff out bombs', she said. 'There's no reason to have somebody's hands touching your body parts.'
Another woman is also comparing her experience at Lambert Airport in St. Louis to being sexually assaulted.
Penny Moroney was flying home to Chicago when while going through security, the metal in her artificial knees set off the detectors.
She had to undergo more screening because of the alarm going off and when Ms Moroney asked if she could go through a body scanner she was told none were available.
The only alternative offered to Ms Moroney was a pat-down which she said she found a horrific experience.
'Her gloved hands touched my breasts... went between them. Then she went into the top of my slacks, inserted her hands between my underwear and my skin... then put her hands up on the outside of my slacks, and patted my genitals', Ms Moroney explained.
Patdown search: Mandy Simon
'I was shaking and crying when I left that room. Under any other circumstance, if a person touched me like that without my permission, it would be considered criminal sexual assault.'
And in a third incident security footage showed three-year-old Mandy Simon sobbing and pleading with staff to 'Stop touching me' as she searched in Chattanooga, Tennessee.
She had become upset after her teddy bear was put through an X-ray machine.
Bladder cancer survivor Thomas Sawyer, 61, was left 'humiliated' after a pat-down search burst his urostomy bag leaving him covered in his own urine.
He said: 'I am totally appalled by the fact that agents that are performing these pat-downs have so little concern for people with medical conditions.'
The incident occurred on November 7 at Detroit Metropolitan Airport and Mr Sawyer claims staff ignored his pleas about the bag.
However at San Diego Airport on Friday, Samuel Wolanyk stripped down to his underwear rather than walk through a body imaging machine.
He refused to put his clothes back and was arrested for not allowing security officials to search him
November 23rd, 2010
Seoul, South Korea (CNN) -- In a sharp escalation of hostility along their disputed sea border, North Korean and South Korean forces traded fire Tuesday, a deadly skirmish that jacked up diplomatic tensions in a volatile region.
Two South Korean marines were killed and 15 South Korean soldiers and civilians were wounded when the North fired about 100 rounds of artillery at Yeonpyeong Island in the Yellow Sea, South Korea authorities said, according to the South Korean Yonhap news agency.
South Korea's military responded with more than 80 rounds of artillery and deployed fighter jets to counter the fire, defense officials said.
Firing between the two sides lasted for about an hour in the Yellow Sea, a longstanding flashpoint between the two Koreas. In March, a South Korean warship, the Cheonan, was sunk in the area with the loss of 46 lives in a suspected North Korean torpedo attack.
"Restraint should be exercised on both sides," said Stephen Bosworth, the U.S. special envoy on North Korean denuclearization. He was in Beijing to discuss nuclear matters and spoke to reporters.
This latest action occurred during South Korean maritime military drills.
In Seoul, the South Korea government swiftly denounced the action as an "indisputable armed provocation against the Republic of Korea. Making matters worse, it even indiscriminately fired against civilians. Such actions will never be tolerated."
In its statement, the South Korean government said it "immediately and strongly responded to the provocation in accordance with the rules of engagement" and will retaliate against any additional acts of provocation in a resolute manner."
After the incident, Yonhap news agency in South Kore said the Seoul government "banned its nationals from entering the communist state, indefinitely postponed their scheduled Red Cross talks and began looking at ways to push the United Nations to condemn Pyongyang."
North Korea, meanwhile, said the incident stemmed from South Korean military drills, codenamed Hoguk, exercises that Pyongyang calls "war maneuvers for a war of aggression."
The "South Korean puppet group" engaged in "reckless military provocation" by firing "dozens of shells" inside its territorial waters "despite the repeated warnings of the DPRK" or Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the North's military said in a statement.
"The revolutionary armed forces of the DPRK standing guard over the inviolable territorial waters of the country took such decisive military step as reacting to the military provocation of the puppet group with a prompt powerful physical strike," the statement said.
"It is a traditional mode of counter-action of the army of the DPRK to counter the firing of the provocateurs with merciless strikes," said the statement, which warned that it "will unhesitatingly continue taking merciless military counter-actions against it" if the border is crossed.
This incident comes after a U.S. scientist reported that North Korea has a new uranium enrichment facility. North Korean officials said the facility is operating and producing low-enriched uranium, according to Stanford University professor Siegfried S. Hecker.
The enrichment facility contains 2,000 centrifuges and appears to be designed for nuclear power production, "not to boost North Korea's military capability," Hecker says.
But U.S. and South Korean diplomats said the latest relevation confirms the country's long-term deceit.
Sanctions have been progressively placed on North Korea in response to a succession of nuclear and missile tests and the sinking of the South Korean warship in March.
The United States said it would not dismiss restarting six-party talks aimed at denuclearizing the North. However, it said it would not return to negotiations unless North Korea showed good faith.
Countries that had been negotiating with North Korea over its nuclear program issued swift reaction.
The United States "strongly" condemned North Korea's action, and a U.S. Defense Department official told CNN that the "hope is that this is just one isolated incident, not an escalation into a different military posture" by the North.
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said China had "taken note of relevant reports" and expressed its "concern." "Relevant facts need to be verified and we hope both parties make more contributions to the stability of the peninsula," he said.
Russia's Interfax news agency said Russia condemned North Korea's artillery shelling and said "those who initiated the attack on a South Korean island in the northern part of the inter-Korean maritime border line assumed enormous responsibility."
Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan's cabinet held a ministerial meeting and Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshito Sengoku announced a government statement condemning North Korea and calling the act "unpardonable."
"This provocation by North Korea compromises the peace and security of not only South Korea, but also the entire region of North East Asia, including Japan. Japan demands North Korea to stop such action immediately," the statement said.
Asked whether the violence in the Yellow Sea would make resumption of six-party talks more difficult, Bosworth said, it's never been easy to reconvene the talks.
Yeonpyeong island is part of a small archipelago about 80 kilometers [49 miles] west of the South Korean port of Inchon, which serves Seoul, and is close to the tense Northern Limit Line, the maritime border between the two Koreas in the Yellow Sea.
North Korean artillery is extremely difficult to hit, because it is dug into coastal cliffs. Though the North has tested its artillery -- and tested anti-shipping missiles -- it has not fired artillery into South Korean territory in recent years. One of North Korea's most potent threats is artillery dug in along its demilitarized zone with South Korea and ranged on Seoul.
While the reason for the attack was in dispute, one North Korea watcher said the incident stems from the nuclear issue..
Choi Jin-wook, senior researcher at the Korea Institute of National Unification, said Pyongyang is "frustrated with Washington's response to their uranium program and they think that Washington has almost given up on negotiations with North Korea."
"I think they realize they can't expect anything from Washington or Seoul for several months, so I think they made the provocation."
"I definitely think this is centrally directed from Pyongyang. This can't be done without orders from Pyongyang," he added.
Meanwhile, with national leader Kim Jong Il apparently in ailing health, his son Kim Jong Un is being raised to prominence in the isolated state, in what pundits see as a succession process.
Journalist Andrew Salmon and CNN's Steven Jiang and Yoko Wakatsuki, contributed to this report.
November 22nd, 2010
Just make sure not to do something that might make Facebook angry. Otherwise it might nuke every link to your site, choking off this river of traffic that you’ve worked so hard to build.
That’s the message Facebook sent today with its censorship of links to Lamebook, a humor site that posts lewd conversations spotted on the social network. Facebook has confirmed that it is automatically blocking all links to Lamebook and that it has also removed the company’s ‘Fan’ page. Not because the content was offensive, mind you, but because Facebook doesn’t like Lamebook.
Update: Facebook CTO Bret Taylor has written this statement, explaining that this was a mistake. Note that this story originally broke this morning and I’ve been in contact with Facebook most of the afternoon, so this clearly wasn’t just a bug:
This was a mistake on our part. In the process of dealing with a routine trademark violation issue regarding some links posted to Facebook, we blocked all mentions of the phrase “lamebook” on Facebook. We are committed to promoting free expression on Facebook. We apologize for our mistake in this case, and we are working to fix the process that led to this happening.
The move was precipitated by a legal battle between the two companies. Lamebook filed for a declaratory judgement earlier this month that would assert that it is not violating Facebook’s trademark (the two parties have apparently been in negotiations over this for some time). Unsurprisingly, Facebook followed that up with a suit alleging that Lamebook violated its trademark.
Okay, so Facebook doesn’t like Lamebook’s name. I don’t agree with Facebook’s stance, but fair enough — it isn’t the first big company that’s overzealous when it comes to protecting its trademark. But by blocking Lamebook’s content, Facebook is crossing a line.
Not only is it currently impossible to share a Lamebook link to your News Feed or a friend’s Facebook Wall — you can’t even include them as part of a direct message or email to friends (you get an error message indicating that it’s “abusive or spammy”, which isn’t even accurate). That’s completely outrageous, and it’s a warning flag that comes only a few days after Facebook announced a new hybrid email/IM/SMS product. Do you really want someone to be censoring your outbound email?
One reason why Google has done so well is that people trust it. If you sue Google, it isn’t going to threaten to delist your company from its search index. Likewise, Facebook needs to keep its distance from the content its users are sharing. No, it won’t be getting rid of its terms any time soon, which forbid content that is “hateful, threatening, or pornographic; incites violence; or contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence.” But there’s a difference between blocking content as a matter of principle and doing it to deter companies from suing you. This is setting a disturbing precedent.
I reached out to Facebook to ask if there was any reason beyond the trademark claim that drove its decision to block Lamebook — maybe there’s something else going on here that would make their decision seem slightly less Orwellian. I also asked if Facebook has previously blocked content to other sites it had a legal dispute with.
A Facebook spokesman said he was unable to answer those questions. He did, however, give me the following statement, which is similar to what Facebook has said before about the issue:
We’re disappointed that after months of working with Lamebook they turned to litigation. We believe their website is an improper attempt to trade off of Facebook’s popularity and fame and we will continue to protect our brand and trademark. As I told Robin earlier, our terms prohibit posting of material or other activities on Facebook that infringe the rights of others. We reserve the right to pull down any content we believe is infringing. That includes linking to material we believe to be infringing. We also specifically prohibit use of any Facebook or confusingly similar marks (See SRR Sec. 5.1, 5.2 & 5.6 http://www.facebook.com/terms.php).
Update: It looks like Lamebook links are working again as of around 6:00 PM PST. I’ve asked Facebook if they’ve changed their decision or if this is simply a bug.
More From TechCrunch
November 22nd, 2010
Nobody is safe.
Velma Hart, who burst onto the media scene after telling President Obama she was scared about her financial future, has been laid off. Hart was let go as the chief financial officer for Am Vets, a nonprofit Maryland-based veteran services organization.
Hart has become another casualty of the tough economy in which so many people have lost their jobs.
"It's not anything she did," said Jim King, the national executive director of Am Vets. "She got bit by the same snake that has bit a lot of people. It was a move to cut our bottom line. Most not-for-profits are seeing their money pinched."
King would not say whether the organization had had other layoffs.
"Velma was a good employee," he said. "It was just a matter of looking at the bottom line and where could we make the best cuts and survive."
King hadn't seen the irony in Hart being fired just two months after she emotionally told Obama about her fears for her own financial well-being during a town hall meeting in Washington.
"I hadn't thought about this in connection to the town hall meeting. She was at the town hall as a private citizen. Whatever she had to say were her own thoughts," he said.
Hart's comments to Obama became political fodder as proof that the president was losing his die-hard supporters - African American voters. Hart told me at the time that she still supported Obama but that she had expected more changes by now.
She said what really disappointed her is that the change and better economic conditions Obama promised haven't come fast enough.
"My husband and I joked for years that we thought we were well beyond the hot-dogs-and-beans era of our lives," she said during the CNBC town hall broadcast. "But quite frankly, it's starting to knock on our door and ring true that that might be where we're headed again. And quite frankly, Mr. President, I need you to answer this honestly: Is this my new reality?"
Well, unemployment has not just knocked on the door of the former Army reservist. It has busted through the door.
When contacted Monday, Hart would not discuss the matter.
In an interview with me two months ago, she said that although her personal finances were in pretty good shape, she was worried. She has two daughters in private school, and the oldest is looking at colleges. Although her husband is employed, she was concerned about higher consumer prices. She talked about her home value being down. She talked about feeling anxious.
"You don't have to be on the street to be struggling," Hart said in the earlier interview. There are different degrees of struggling."
Hart said telling Obama that her family might be forced to dine regularly on hot dogs and beans was just an attempt at levity.
"It was symbolic," she said. "I'm a lot more fortunate than others."
But in what is clearly a too-eerie situation, Hart foretold her future.
"We are all caught in the middle of the insanity," she said.
Other News From The Washington Post
Readers can write to Michelle Singletary at The Washington Post, 1150 15th St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20071. Her e-mail address is firstname.lastname@example.org. Comments and questions are welcome, but because of the volume of mail, personal responses may not be possible.
Washington Post Staff Writer
Washington Post Staff Writer
November 22nd, 2010
Jim Campbell / Conservative Examiner/ November 22, 2010
As scholars have recently begun to revisit the history of the United Nations, it has been noted the organization started largely by communist’s members of the Council of Foreign Relations, (CRF) and socialists had as their ultimate goal to overturn the U.S. Constitution and subjugate the U.S. to the whims of their group.
Why should the taxpayer support this corrupt organization when member states vote against United States interests 70-80% of the time? Why when their common goal was a socialist world government.
Sixteen key U.S. officials who shaped the policies leading to the creation of the UN were later exposed in sworn testimony as secret Communists.
These included communist spy, Alger Hiss, chief planner of the 1945 founding conference, and the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, Harry Dexter White. The Soviet Union under Stalin and the entire Communist Party USA apparatus worked tirelessly to launch the U.N. Since it’s beginning in 1921, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) has always worked for world government.
The key CFR founder, Edward Mandell House, in his book, Philip Dru: Administrator, called for “Socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx,” The CFR was an early promoter of the U.N., and 43 members of the U.S. delegation at the U. N. founding conference were or would become CFR members.
The U.N. has always chosen socialist one-world-order for leaders since it’s inception.
The United Nations is an international organization founded in 1945 after the Second World War by 51 countries, many communist and socialist countries committed to maintaining international peace and security, developing friendly relations among nations and promoting social progress, better living standards and human rights.
Has it been successful in maintaining peace? The answer is an emphatic no. What did they accomplish in the Korean War, Vietnam, and the U.S. operations in Iraq and Afghanistan? That would be an absolute zero unless we count member nations selling their votes for oil to veto the United State’s attempt to remove Saddam Hussein from Iraq.
Perhaps a new Mission Statement for the U.N. would better clarify their actual purpose.
“When we get past infighting among member nations we will react but then as usual it will be too late.”
The U.N. is an outrageously expensive operation that does three things well, deliver “meals on wheels” when they aren’t stolen by the tin-pot dictators and tyrants before getting to the people and their inoculation and contraception programs.
The U.N Charter reads well, and sounds just great if it were true, however, the U.N. has never lived up to it’s stated objectives and represents an organization that subverts the interests of the United States, sadly with U.S. taxpayer money.
Thus Americans are becoming aware of this sham organization the, U.S. must withdraw from the group and move as quickly as possible to get them off of U.S. soil. Voters must demand that their representatives reprepresent them.
Removing the U.N. from U.S. soil, the strategy:
1. The site of UN Headquarters is owned by the United Nations. It is an international territory. No federal, state or local officer or official of the United States, whether administrative, judicial, military or police may enter UN Headquarters except with the consent of and under conditions agreed to by the Secretary-General of the Organization.
However, the United Nations is bound by an agreement with its host country to prevent its Headquarters from being used as a refuge for persons who are avoiding arrest under the federal, state or local laws of the United States or who are required by the Government of the United States for extradition to another country or who are trying to avoid the servicing of a legal process.
2. The reader may wonder how this story fits with the U.N.’s bound agreement: DIPLOMANIAC: Ex-Sri Lanka commander Shavendra Silva is suspected of war atrocities, but a current UN position gives him full U.N. immunity.
3. Does this means that the U.N. cannot be removed from the United States? If so where is such treaty or deed?
4. "Currently, the U.N. pays rent to the city of New York for office space in two nearby buildings on 1st Avenue for $25 dollars a square foot. The United Nations is in the midst of a $1.87 billion renovation project. Guess who is scheduled to pick up a major portion of the tab?
5. In fact, The United States is assessed at 22% of the U.N. regular budget and more than 27% for U.N. peacekeeping budget. Obama requested $516.3 million for the U.N. regular budget and more than $2.182 billion for the peacekeeping budget for 2011.
6. The SMART thing to do is what we need to do with illegal aliens, stop enabling them.
7. As the United States resigns it’s membership from the U.N. that cuts the funding to keep it on our soil. Where will they get the money to pay New York City for the rent?
8. End diplomatic immunity to all member nations who support terrorism, are currently terrorist countries. Stop them at U.S. Customs, turn them around and send them back to their sponsoring countries.
9. The U.S. may then to develop an organization that would be involved with countries wanting to establish representative democracies, and forgoing the likes of the vast majority of human rights violating, terror supporting and out right terrorists countries currently among it's membership.
10. Not to sound conspiritorial, but on a somber note, since this organization has existed since 1945, where have our representatives from either party been, calling for it to be disbanded and certainly defunded by the U.S.
Has the United States been played by their leadership who may be a large part of the problem? This article was written, please take it viral, fax it to your members of congress. It's time for American leaders to lead if their goal is to restore the United States to it's once prominent position in the world.
Like what you see? Subsribe by clicking the box at the top of the page. An email of Conservative Examiner will be sent to your inbox each time a new article is published.
That’s my story and I’m sticking to it, I’m J.C.