Police Concerned About Parliamentarian’s Safety

By GottaLaff

Handout / Courtesy of Congressional Pictorial Directory, Government Printing Office/Los Angeles Times/MCT

Nobody is safe now. Be proud, Tea Tantrumers and Rushpublic fear-mongers:

Tea party protesters are reportedly planning a protest at the home of Senate Parliamentarian Alan Frumin later this week, prompting Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Terrance Gainer to work with local law enforcement officials to ensure Frumin’s safety.

Once again these zealots are invading the privacy of a fellow citizen by going to his home. Where he lives. With his family.

I remember hearing that Frumin is a very private man.

Not any more.

"I didn't go through all of that just to flash my boobs at a stranger...Security is an illusion."

By GottaLaff

One of our commenters wrote something very personal under the post about the airport scanner invasion of privacy ("Airport worker photographed screen as female passed through scanner"). She has generously allowed me to use her heartfelt comment as a post.

Please take the time to read the whole thing:

I am a sexual assault survivor and I have been told by the TSA that while we can request a wanding (to avoid a pat-down), if we opt out of going through the body-scanner, they cannot guarantee the personnel or a wand would be available. The TSA rep told me that she could not guarantee that if I refuse to go through the scanner, that I won't be subjected to a pat-down. This is totally unacceptable to me and this incident in the UK only reinforces my fears.

I fought my attacker off, who had a gun by the way. I got out of it without being raped and with only a bad burn on my forehead where he tried to shoot me (either the gun didn't fire properly or it was a blank, but as soon as I realized I wasn't dead I went berserk on the guy and he gave up). I didn't go through all of that just to flash my boobs at a stranger who might have a camera in his or her pocket, or to be touched by a TSA agent, every time I have to fly. The lack of control over who sees or touches my body is what is bothering me, and sexual assault victims like me, the most.

I am starting a consulting project in Chicago in a few weeks and I am seeking therapy for the trauma just thinking about this is making me go through. I feel violated all over again. I know I got off easy because I was not actually raped or hurt badly like other sexual assault victims. I can only imagine what they are going through, if it is making me feel this horrified.

Security is an illusion. This technology is not even proven. Our government should not force its citizens to comply with such an egregious form of violation of our constitutional right to privacy if there is not guarantee it will work.

I have decided to take a stand. On my first return flight home, I will wear a one-piece bathing suit through security. I am a former competitive swimmer and while my body is not as toned as it used to be (having twins will do that to a woman) I feel comfortable being in front of people in my bathing suit (not a bikini - and for those of you who would like to make racy comments - please refrain because it is people like you who make me want to jump through my computer and commit bodily harm).

I want to take back control over what I will allow people to see and this is the only thing I can think of doing. My racing suit will show everything a scanner or a pat-down would detect and it would provide me with a way to control who sees what parts of my body. I will respectfully ask that they perform a visual scan, without touching me. If they will not comply, I will not fly, but I will take a stand.

Thank you for sharing that with us. You are a survivor, and security is indeed, an illusion.

Airport worker photographed screen as female passed through scanner

By GottaLaff

All those jokes about having to get in shape, work out, and diet before going to the airport these days aren't too far off. Virtual nudity can be awfully intimidating.

So can illegal photos of virtual nudity.

Check out this little invasion of privacy:

A Scotland Yard spokesman said: "Police received an allegation regarding an incident that happened at Heathrow Terminal 5 on March 10. A first-instance harassment warning has been issued to a 25-year-old male."

The BAA employee took a photo of his co-worker, Jo Margetson, when she inadvertently went through a scanner.

"I can't bear to think about the body scanner thing," she told the Sun. "I'm totally traumatised. I've spoken to the police about it. I'm in too much of a state to go to work."

I'd be traumatized, too, only with a Z.

The incident is likely to reignite privacy concerns over the scanners by civil liberty groups.

There's much more here.

H/t: BoingBoing

Orly Taitz is no longer a laughing matter

By GottaLaff

Wow. Just wow. Orly Tatiz has crossed a big line:

[T]two days ago, her windmill-tilting expedition to prove that our president wasn't really born here led her to go several miles over the line. She posted the name, address and phone number of an innocent woman in Plantation, Florida.

The most benign explanation for this is that Orly is still trolling around for evidence of Social Security fraud by the Obamas. She's posted the names of numerous innocent people who are purportedly aliases for the Obamas.

Information on who to contact about shutting orlytaitzesq.com down here.

I've made jokes about this woman, I've snarked and snickered and posted about her and her failed "birther" attempts. But when she invades the privacy of a fellow citizen, possibly putting an innocent woman's life in danger and setting her up for any number of worrisome intrusions, that is going too far. That is invasive and scary.

Christian Dem in NC is right. This isn't funny any more.

Oklahoma abortion law ‘like undressing women in public’

By GottaLaff

OK is not OK:

As of November 1, doctors in Oklahoma will be compelled -- under penalty of criminal prosecution -- to post the details of each abortion they perform online. Among the details to be posted for every abortion is the patient's age, marital status and race; her financial condition; her education; and the total number of her previous pregnancies.

Race? Not that any of those details are relevant, but ... race?

"A friend said it best: It's like undressing women in public, exposing their most personal issues on the Internet," Lora Joyce Davis, one of the plaintiffs suing to prevent the law from coming into effect, told ABC News.

Undressing women? More like rape, if you ask me, I mean, since we're talkin' "invasive".

So this law is supposed to make women so uncomfortable and squirmy that they'll throw up their hands and change their minds? Really? Did that work in the pre-Roe dark ages? Would they prefer the coat hanger attempts of yesteryear?

The answer to that is yes, by the way.

And if someone feels strongly enough to get an abortion-- which is a highly personal decision, and a constitutional right-- do these so-called lawmakers actually believe that public humiliation will deter them from a life-changing, heart-wrenching, carefully considered decision?

Davis, along with former state Rep. Wanda Jo Stapleton, filed the lawsuit with the help of the Center for Reproductive Rights. The lawsuit seeks to have the law declared unconstitutional under the Oklahoma Constitution because it covers more than one subject.

Chipping away at choice, whether it be through backwards-thinking, privacy-invading laws or Pro-Life Cupcakes, means chipping away at our existing legal rights, and some of these methods threaten our democracy.

According to CCR, nearly one-quarter of women in the United States have to travel more than 50 miles for an abortion.

Now that's a crime.

F.B.I. and States Vastly Expand DNA Databases

By GottaLaff

I bet the Rushpublics will demand that their DNA secede from the United States to avoid government overreach:

Law enforcement officials are vastly expanding their collection of DNA to include millions more people who have been arrested or detained but not yet convicted. The move, intended to help solve more crimes, is raising concerns about the privacy of petty offenders and people who are presumed innocent.

Until now, the federal government genetically tracked only convicts. But starting this month, the Federal Bureau of Investigation will join 15 states that collect DNA samples from those awaiting trial and will collect DNA from detained immigrants — the vanguard of a growing class of genetic registrants.

The F.B.I., with a DNA database of 6.7 million profiles, expects to accelerate its growth rate from 80,000 new entries a year to 1.2 million by 2012 — a 17-fold increase. F.B.I. officials say they expect DNA processing backlogs — which now stand at more than 500,000 cases — to increase.

Law enforcement officials say that expanding the DNA databanks to include legally innocent people will help solve more violent crimes. They point out that DNA has helped convict thousands of criminals and has exonerated more than 200 wrongfully convicted people.

But criminal justice experts cite Fourth Amendment privacy concerns and worry that the nation is becoming a genetic surveillance society.

Snooping for Dollars: Facebook cashing in on "friends"

By GottaLaff

Write this on your Facebook wall:

Facebook is planning to exploit the vast amount of personal information it holds on its 150m members by creating one of the world's largest market research databases.

In an attempt to finally monetise the social networking site, once valued at $15bn (£10.4bn), it will soon allow multinational companies to selectively target its members in order to research the appeal of new products. Companies will be able to pose questions to specially selected members based on such intimate details as whether they are single or married and even whether they are gay or straight.

I de-activated my account about a year ago, for a year or so, because of privacy issues like this. I recently re-activated. But if this is how Facebook treats their friends, they may lose me for good this time.

FYI: If you are my friend on Facebook, you just got an "event invitation" notifying you of what I just posted. Consider it a public service announcement.

...[B]ut the company’s attempts at systematic market research have failed repeatedly, with users protesting the privacy invasion. Guess how they’ll greet this latest bit of news?

'Body image' scanners ready for use in Fort Worth airport

Creepy, creepy stuff. Another reason for me to avoid Texas.

D/FW AIRPORT — Beginning Friday at two checkpoints at Dallas/Fort Worth Airport’s Terminal D, the Transportation Security Administration will begin using two "whole body image" machines that can look through your clothes and produce images of your body to detect metallic and non-metallic objects hidden under layers of clothing.

For modesty’s sake, the machine will blur your face while a remote screener looks over the rest of your body for suspicious items.

(snip)

The TSA is conducting pilot programs to evaluate various technologies in whole-body imaging to detect objects carried on persons going through airport security checkpoints. Images show the surface of the skin and objects that are on the body, not in the body. The expectation is that the machines will allow screeners to conduct inspections for weapons, explosives and other metallic and non-metallic threatening objects without physical contact. There are two major types of technology: backscatter and millimeter wave. D/FW is implementing the latter.