Slashdot Mirror
Congress Capitulates To TSA; Refuses To Let Bruce Schneier Testify
McGruber writes "Following up on an earlier Slashdot story, earlier today, the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure held a hearing titled 'TSA Oversight Part III: Effective Security or Security Theater?' ... In a blog update, Bruce Schneier says that 'at the request of the TSA' he was removed from the witness list. Bruce also said 'it's pretty clear that the TSA is afraid of public testimony on the topic, and especially of being challenged in front of Congress. They want to control the story, and it's easier for them to do that if I'm not sitting next to them pointing out all the holes in their position. Unfortunately, the committee went along with them.'"
We would not want to threaten the profits of all those backscatter machine companies by pointing out how little TSA's airport security really accomplishes, now would we? What, you think that because Schneier is a prominent security researcher, he is supposed to be talking about the failures of security programs?
Palm trees and 8
Cherry picking speakers to support the status quo is just theater, nicely complementing the security theater of the TSA.
I thought the congress of the United States is a congress of ALL
Or am I wrong in this?
Excluding Mr. Schneier from testifying has violated the charter (if there is one written) of the congress of the United States of America
Or am I wrong in that also?
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
if he doesn't keep quiet.
The committee is controlled by neo-cons. They do not want to hear what is happening. They just want the APPEARANCE of such, esp. with the election around the corner.
Right now they're silencing you officially and nicely, but they might step over the line at some point.
is on Twitter @DarrellIssa Anyone so inclined could tweet the link to Schneier's blog.
If there truly were a population of evil doers who both wished harm on the US and were really willing to work toward that goal, we would have bus stop bombings, etc. in this country. There are tons of unsecured stuff that could be attacked here very easily.
The fact that such does not occur is proof that such a population is largely non-existent and certainly nowhere near being worth all the BS with the Terrorism Industrial Complex.
...who also made himself available for testimoney before congress -- and was never called to testify -- after he blew the whistle on the NSA's installation of those Narus boxes at AT&T switches (throughout America, most probably and at IXPs or EPs, as well).
http://www.wallstreetwatch.org/reports/sold_out.pdf
Dictatorial government actions often start by "limiting voices", regardless of the country.
This is not a good omen for getting the best solutions for a critical issue.
The list of government witnesses in prior hearings were "officials" of various departments, meaning they are managers of employees.
Eliminating Bruce Schneier from the witness list means they really do NOT want any experts in front of the committee as that could bring up troubling "FACTS".
How George Bush continues to crap on future generations for decades after he's gone.
This is the same committee that wouldn't let any women testify in a hearing on contraception last month.
Apparently, if you know something about the topic at hand, they don't want your input.
I said in a previous story that I think his claims that security theater has no value is incorrect.
But he should absolutely be allowed to talk and to present holes in the facade they are presenting.
The TSA needs to be totally disbanded and security taken over by the airports.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
At what point do we, the citizens of the country, finally say, "OK, this government - both of these parties - have lost all legitimacy, and must be thrown out"?
The founding fathers of this country were wise: their advice was that sometimes you have to do that - throw the entire system out, and start anew. I think we've reached a point that would horrify them. It would also horrify them to see our general complacency in the face of every new corruption, every new assault on our rights.
It's time throw it all out. Start with a new, small set of laws, limit the governmental power as was originally intended. Keep the government in the businesses it belongs it, and keep it the hell out of everything else.
That seems a little over-the-top. Sure it strips your clothes off your body, to display a naked gray image of your breasts and penis. Sure the guards have been caught asking particular gorgeous women to step through the machine multiple times. Sure some TSA agents have posted personal notes like "Get your freak on" in lady's luggage. Sure some of those images have been leaked by those same guards to the internet......
Never mind. I guess the description was apart afterall.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Since it is popular to post "Thanks to TSA, I now drive instead of flying", I will point out that the House and Senate are currently in a showdown that likely will result in a cutoff of federal highway funding.
Here is a CNN article about the situation: http://articles.cnn.com/2012-03-21/politics/politics_congress-transportation-bill_1_committee-chairman-john-mica-highway-bill-senate-democrats
And a FoxNews article: http:/// www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/03/24/obama-urging-congress-to-end-transportation-standoff/
And a Politico article: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74498.html
The purpose of this hearing is not to allow congress to learn hidden facts. It is to convince the public that congress is doing its job, and that its decision to continue funding the TSA and to continue allowing the TSA to perform warrantless invasive searches is the result of a well-scrutinized and carefully considered process.
Allowing Bruce to testify will not win hearts and minds.
http://www.schneierfacts.com
Flexible bare-metal recovery for Linux/UNIX
The last time I served jury duty, my job alone was enough to get me thrown off.
The case being considered was an automobile accident (with injuries), where the driver of the car was claiming that part of the steering/suspension had suddenly failed, causing his car to swerve out of control and hit the other car. There was planned to be a lot of expert testimony involving forensic engineers, metallurgists, etc. hired by the defense to back up the claim.
3 of us were thrown out by the prosecuting attorney during jury selection for having engineering or mechanical backgrounds. One machinist, one auto mechanic, and myself (electronics design). Apparently, if you know enough to possibly UNDERSTAND what the hired experts are trying to say, you have no place on the jury....
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
I think that he should sue and argue that by denying him the right to testify by removing him as a witness that Congress is violating his Constitutional Rights specifically the right to petition for a redress of grievances.
"GET / HTTP/1.0" 200 51230 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; Setec Astronomy)"
Security provided by the airports was ineffective enough to allow 9/11 to happen.
That is TOTALLY WRONG.
Security provided BY THE PASSENGERS was ineffective enough to allow 9/11.
Now, that is not the case. In fact even at the time one flight was brought down short of target as soon as passengers figured it out.
No-one wants themselves to die, but even fewer want to die while taking a bunch of innocent people with them. A plane will not be used as a weapon again.
Pre-9/11 security seemed to be good enough to prevent regular bombings, plenty good for me.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Seriously, I think we all know what Schneier's testimony would have been, so other than getting them in the Congressional Record and perhaps a soundbite for the news (fat chance!) was there really a need for him to testify?
When is the time right for us to arm ourselves and kick every one of these fucking criminals out of the elected offices they hold? I think the OWS thing should have been done in D.C. and they should have marched right into the capitol building and the white house. There's no way they could contain that size of group short of opening fire with live rounds.
Maybe when we see piles of dead US citizens that were once our brothers and sisters would we then WAKE THE FUCK UP. This country needs another revolution worse than Madonna needs to retire.
Who will lead us into the new revolution? Who would have real good ideas for fixing our broken democracy? I elect Neil deGrasse Tyson, and maybe Ron Paul could help as well.
In typical Slashdot form, I didn't RTFA; but were there actually GROUNDS for his removal; or do we just let the "Investigated" decide who gets to speak?
I've already petitioned my congresscritters and the Whitehouse as well as filing a complaint with TSA itself (no link for that). In addition, I have decided to boycott air travel until this nonsense stops, and I've started the blog that all these links point to so I can share information about what is going on at the airports. I'm not yet ready to take up arms and start an insurrection, but if you've got some constructive ideas that fall between what I've done so far (petitions, blogging, voting and hitting the airlines in the pocketbook) and armed rebellion, I'm all ears.
If, on the other hand, all you want to do is mouth off to people you disagree with, then kindly STFU, please.
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
The committee members are probably trying to avoid a cavity search next time they take a trip.
Well I used the web forms of my congress people expect for Sen. Toomey of course whose captcha wasn't working. Will call them in the morning since email is too easy to ignore.
Congress, and most of the national government along with it, is little more than a distraction for the public and a tool for funneling billions to already-wealthy companies and the individuals who control them. The few useful and legitimate services they are supposed to provide are increasingly being cut back, eliminated, or ignored. Real people (as opposed to the immortal, inhuman corporations and their philosophical zombie servants) who live in America need to understand that the only likely end-states for the United States Government are authoritarian hell-hole and total collapse. We need to start working hard on alternatives, now, if we want any other outcome for our friends and families.
Otherwise, if i was on the 4th plane and took down the baddies, I would then try to land the plane, and not crash it into 10000000000s pieces.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
I've already petitioned my congresscritters and the Whitehouse as well as filing a complaint with TSA itself (no link for that). In addition, I have decided to boycott air travel until this nonsense stops, and I've started the blog that all these links point to so I can share information about what is going on at the airports. I'm not yet ready to take up arms and start an insurrection, but if you've got some constructive ideas that fall between what I've done so far (petitions, blogging, voting and hitting the airlines in the pocketbook) and armed rebellion, I'm all ears. If, on the other hand, all you want to do is mouth off to people you disagree with, then kindly STFU, please.
Does selective oversight into TSA security theatre equate to Oversight Theatre?
Its official. The monkeys are running the zoo.
Have gnu, will travel.
In a related story, the congress is holding hearings on the magnificence of the emperor's clothing, and are excluding outspoken children from testifying.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
it was an evil panel of old men trying to put their ignorance into every woman's uterus.
Then I took an arrow to the knee.
The kind of people who hate on juries as being stupid are also the kind of people who pat themselves on the back for being "smart" enough to get out of it and thus don't know how it really works.
Actually, you'll find there is a skew towards above average intelligence just because of what is required. You need to have a job that won't can you for being gone. While legally no job can, in practice employers of menial labour have been known to do so. You also need to have an employer who will compensate you for your time, or have enough money you can afford it, since jury pay is jack shit these days, not even minimum wage.
Well guess what? That means more white collar professionals and that means a higher average intelligence.
What gets people thrown out is either involvement with the case, or Armchair Lawyer Syndrome (or the appearance thereof). That's the reason I'm never likely to serve on a jury. I love law shows (they ask) I've done mock trial all that kind of thing. Sets off Armchair Lawyer warning bells for them. They are worried you may decide you know the law and use your own, often incorrect (TV shows are fun not factual) interpretation of the law.
However they don't just seek out idiots or something. Great high profile example? The Terry Childs case. One of his jurors, juror #4, Jason Chilton is a CCIE. Highly educated (a CCIE is on the same level ass a maters or doctorate in terms of knowledge, just applies not theoretical) and in the precise area relating to the case: Network administration.
The jury system is by no means perfect but it is not the crap many like to make it out to be. They have no idea since they refuse to participate.
Unfortunately, as a country after 911 we said we don't care about our rights, just protect us from the terrorists. It's our own fault. Once you lose your liberty, it's hard to get it back. We might as well dismantle the Statue of Liberty, she doesn't stand for anything anymore.
I have nothing against the man but what does he really know about Airport security? All he would do is spout the same obvious general talking points just about any of us would. Better than nothing but far from ideal.
I would rather see a nuclear scientist talk about ALARA or one of those Isrealis who laughed at our foolishness or people who were violated by TSA or were easily able to circumvent its protections.
That he was axed at TSA request is inexcusable nontheless...I'll be sending my rep a letter expressing my concern this not be repeated in the future hearings.
This gov. ceased by the congress of all and is now the congress of foreign gov. such as China, Illegals, Big businesses, Unions, and esp. the very wealthy.
Why start way down the list with China? Your forgot to mention the primary 3 elephants in the room (congress's foremost patrons):
1) Israel
2) The MAFIAA/Hollywood (granted, an Israeli settlement)
3) The Military-Industrial-Terrist-Gittin' Complex
Well, the religious freedom issue was also a women's health issue. It depends on whether you have a medieval perspective on the world, or hold modernist enlightenment ideals like science. A compromise can, of course, be reached, as the Obama demonstrated. However, when it comes to scoring political points, the theatre will never end.
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
Not particularly fair to the passengers...
I agree with your point about what people had been told to do.
But that does not change the fact that the passengers COULD have stopped them but did not. The simple fact is now passengers have been "upgraded" and provide real security whereas before, in general, they did not.
Again it's not the FAULT of those in the planes that did hit buildings they didn't do so, but it would be today.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
If I was a passenger on United 93, I think I would have much preferred that someone on the ground at a security checkpoint stopped the guys
That would have been great!
But it didn't happen.
But here's the thing. This same guys, with the SAME WEAPONS, could easily get on today (just strap a box cutter to the side).
So for all the furor over the TSA we have NO MORE SECURITY against the 9/11 attacks than we did back then...
EXCEPT for the passengers. That is all the difference, that such an attack today would end in total failure because before they could even scratch someone when the box cutters came out they would be on the ground.
That is what I am saying, security has been upgraded but it is because of the passengers.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
More TSA agents have been convicted of felonies than the agency has caught.
More ICE agents have been convicted of bribery than the agency has caught.
I invite everyone to look it up.
Senator Pat Roberts (Apparatchik, Kansas) who was chairman of the Senate 'Intelligence' Committee investigating the (ahem) reasons for invading Iraq famously said, "Let's put this on hold until after the election, to take partisan politics out of it." After the election, he naturally said "There's no reason to investigate the past".
Scumbag.
I have American friends and I just don't understand you guys.
Your government is stripping away the very freedom you fought so hard for. Democrats and Republican.
The patriot act passed and barely a murmur was heard.
You;re being humiliated at airports and it;s all buisiness as usual.
Fake wars.
You better start voting for you rights and freedoms soon because it's almost over now.
How ironic that the very next story on Slashdot (and the one I read before this) was about Chinese censorship of speech the ruling party finds threatening to itself.
Bruce also said 'it's pretty clear that the TSA is afraid of public testimony on the topic, and especially of being challenged in front of Congress. They want to control the story, and it's easier for them to do that if I'm not sitting next to them pointing out all the holes in their position. Unfortunately, the committee went along with them.'"
Not surprising at all. This is going to be just like the SOPA hearings, no dissenting opinions need be heard. What is surprising is that they have enough people on the committee on their side to pull it off this kind of obvious censorship. It also means that this committee meeting is just smoke and mirrors and that nothing is going to be done to curb TSA abuses.
Oh, make no mistake about it, it is a violation of the rights of religious institutions. I don't think that was ever in much question. The question is just how far do those rights extend? My religious rights, for example, do not give me the right to dictate your health care options. Why should it be any different for an employer dictating that an employee cannot have have contraceptive coverage for no incremental expense past what the coverage already costs?
That is why Sandra Fluke should have been allowed to testify in a panel regarding religious freedom. They had a panel made of people whose agenda is pushing that freedom as far as possible, even at the expense of the individual liberty of people like Sandra Fluke. Without her testimony, there was no one to say, "That's too far," and the panel--and the public--did not get a fair representation of the issue at hand.
Also, if you actually watch the panel, you will quickly see that it wasn't just about religious freedom. Every person who testified did so extensively about the issue of contraception. To pretend like contraception just happened to be an issue that came up is extremely dishonest and disingenuous. I for one do not believe that simply draping some issue in the mantle of religious freedom and not allowing any opposing viewpoints because, hey, it's not relevant to religious freedom, is not an acceptable way to debate.
Or is the real issue that the TSA's security implementation is so haphazard and ill-conceived that it is worthless and it should be made more rigorous?
I keep seeing things claiming the TSA is violating in the US. If this is true, why has nobody launched a case against them, and brought it all the way to the supreme court?
Typically, in Canada at least, the supreme court rules via logic and the constitution, which would resolve this in a rational way.
It's called collusion.
TSA needs money, Congress need votes!
Besides, the TSA give Congressional members, Cabnet appointees, top level ambassators, and SuperPAC members a pass in the 'security' queue.
The TSA motto: Got Money, You Pass. 'Franklins' always welcome. And they don't give change for 'Woodrow Wilsons'.
If you choose to live in the middle of nowhere, accept the consequences. Don't make the rest of us pay for expensive infrastructure to facilitate your bad choice. If you have to live in the middle of nowhere because you generate a valuable product (e.g. farmers, miners) then price the cost of transportation into the product.
LOL.
:)
Please excuse me for getting snippy with you, then. I've been arguing with a number of people commenting on this article who seem to think that "debate" means shouting "Huh-uh! Nyah, nyah, nyah," so I was getting a bit testy myself
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
As has been pointed out by various security researchers only 2 things matter in securing an airplane.
1) Make the flight deck secure. Done.
2) Make the passengers know they are all going to die anyway so fight back and quickly. Done.
So everything else is just blatant lies and profiteering by paid off political scum. The scanners don't detect metal when positioned on your side because that shows up black on black. That was known for years now. The old metal detectors would pick that up but where is the profit in that?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RGLHnUTEEE
Try this. March down to the IRS and tell them that you're going to deduct some off of your tax bill because your religion instructs you that "Thou shalt not kill." Tell them that the money you're holding back is because you don't want to have to pay for soldiers to go fight in wars or for lawyers to prosecute federal death penalty cases. Then try to get some Internet time from jail and post again how your religious rights should extend infinitely, and that you should not ever have to pay to allow someone else to do anything that violates your own rights or conscience.
Or do this. Next time you have to go to a hospital, don't pay the whole bill. When they ask you why you're not paying the rest, explain to them that you don't want the rest of that amount to be used for free or low-cost prenatal services to unwed mothers, or to provide emergency trauma care to drug users who get shot or stabbed, or to treat sexually transmitted diseases of the indigent because it's against your religious beliefs.
Or go to an Apple store and tell them you want one of the new iPads. When they bring it out, pull out $300 for the $830-priced model. When they balk at giving you the item, just explain to them that you're conscientiously opposed to the labor practices that Apple is supporting in China, so you're just paying for the hardware. After all, your religious rights extend infinitely, right? By insisting that you pay the full $830, they're violating your First Amendment rights, and you should sue.
Like I said, religious rights do not extend infinitely. Sometimes other people's rights trump your own, especially when it comes to things like health care and their own individual liberty. If, say for example, a religious hospital is given the leeway to not have to pay for coverage or is charged less for insurance because that coverage is not provided, that gives it a financial advantage over another hospital that does not have that advantage. In other words, if a religious institution or company wants to provide public services and compete with public companies, they should be subject to the exact same laws and regulations as everyone else.
In you case you want to send any of these weasels a note about their questionable behavior. Here is the list of members:
http://oversight.house.gov/committee-members/
http://transportation.house.gov/singlepages.aspx/763
It is painfully obvious the TSA security is smoke and mirrors. They are extremely reactive and rarely if ever have thought ahead of issues that have come up. Think about all the "rules" they have now that only surfaced after a breech or near breech.
L053R
For Android App Apk Softwares & Applications 2012!!
Android App Apk Softwares & Applications 2012
www.Mobilexz.com
Please consult your local lobbying office on K-street for a fee schedule. That is all. Go back to sleep. Shearing times have already been posted in your cubes.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Reminiscent of back when Harry Shearer's Le Show (http://www.harryshearer.com/leshow) had scathing content in its "Tales of Airport Security" segments, I found Democracy Now quite interesting today: http://www.democracynow.org/2012/3/28/lawsuit_seeks_halt_to_tsas_use/
eschew crap, proprietary jive such as Adobe Flash and "Warcraft"! Eschew war, for that matter.
George Bush, under whose administration the TSA was established once said that if we change our way of life because of the terrorists, they will have won. Well, TSA is a big change in our lifestyle. We are sacrificing freedom, not for security which would be a bad enough tradeoff, but for the illusion of security, as there is no proof the TSA has prevented any terrorists from coming to the US. We could get a lot of constructive advice from the Israelis who have been fighting terrorism for many more years than we have. Profiling is one thing they do, which is "politically incorrect" here. Let's turn airport screening back to the airports and have the FBI provide them with a database for checking passengers. Maybe we could have some professional security provided by the feds, but the mall cop guys who work for TSA don't make me feel the least bit safer or more secure. We could save billions of dollars every year by scrapping this agency which only provides the illusion of safety.