Pilot punished for YouTube video, photography is illegal

You all know you are fighting to retain your 2nd Amendment right.
We all have been watching the TSA and the war on the 4th Amendment.

What you may not be aware of is that at the same time the government has declared war on our 1st Amendment right. Tourists, students, professionals, and activists are arrested daily for the crime of photography.

Incredibly this news story touches on all three issues.

http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=113529&catid=2


Sacramento-area pilot punished for YouTube video

George Warren Posted: 12/22/2010

SACRAMENTO, CA - An airline pilot is being disciplined by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) for posting video on YouTube pointing out what he believes are serious flaws in airport security.

The 50-year-old pilot, who lives outside Sacramento, asked that neither he nor his airline be identified. He has worked for the airline for more than a decade and was deputized by the TSA to carry a gun in the cockpit.


...............---Moderator Edited--
RESPECT COPYRIGHT HOLDERS: We often share news stories with one another. Please remember that these stories are copyrighted material and only post a fair-use excerpt along with a link where the rest of the story may be read.

That second link is really scary. Kind of a long read, but wow... :shocker:

And some of the stupid statements by police & prosecutors?
Very sad that such people have any authority.

The second link is a long read. Unfortunately it barely scratches the surface of photographers being arrested.

Apparently, the pilot demonstrated that TSA's security isn't iron-clad. I don't think that's much of a surprise to anyone with half a brain.

However, plastering the details of those gaps in security all over the Internet where anyone with an axe to grind, was about seven cylinder's shy of a V8, and I'm not referring to the vegetable drink.

Photography of Air Force flight lines has been verbotten since I first signed up, as has the military dissemination to the enemy of battle plans, estimates of troop strengths and weaknesses, and details of a base's perimeter security.

How in the world is this any different? Seriously, folks - would any of you post your address on Twitter or Facebook along with your two-week vacation plans and the fact that you've been meaning to fix your home alarm, but never got around to it?

"Loose lips sink ships," and that's directly applicable in this situation.

since9 said:

Apparently, the pilot demonstrated that TSA's security isn't iron-clad. I don't think that's much of a surprise to anyone with half a brain.

However, plastering the details of those gaps in security all over the Internet where anyone with an axe to grind, was about seven cylinder's shy of a V8, and I'm not referring to the vegetable drink.

Photography of Air Force flight lines has been verbotten since I first signed up, as has the military dissemination to the enemy of battle plans, estimates of troop strengths and weaknesses, and details of a base's perimeter security.

How in the world is this any different? Seriously, folks - would any of you post your address on Twitter or Facebook along with your two-week vacation plans and the fact that you've been meaning to fix your home alarm, but never got around to it?

"Loose lips sink ships," and that's directly applicable in this situation.

Click to expand...

+1

And I really like the first quote in your signature area.

since9 said:

Apparently, the pilot demonstrated that TSA's security isn't iron-clad. I don't think that's much of a surprise to anyone with half a brain......
...
"Loose lips sink ships," and that's directly applicable in this situation.

Click to expand...

Well if everyone with half a brain knows it already then "loose lips..." isn't applicable. The ship has already sunk.

since9 said:

Apparently, the pilot demonstrated that TSA's security isn't iron-clad. I don't think that's much of a surprise to anyone with half a brain.

However, plastering the details of those gaps in security all over the Internet where anyone with an axe to grind, was about seven cylinder's shy of a V8, and I'm not referring to the vegetable drink.

Photography of Air Force flight lines has been verbotten since I first signed up, as has the military dissemination to the enemy of battle plans, estimates of troop strengths and weaknesses, and details of a base's perimeter security.

How in the world is this any different? Seriously, folks - would any of you post your address on Twitter or Facebook along with your two-week vacation plans and the fact that you've been meaning to fix your home alarm, but never got around to it?

"Loose lips sink ships," and that's directly applicable in this situation.

Click to expand...

I see. With respect to the public places the pilot filmed and the words that he uttered ....we should use just a little censorship. Only enough to get the job done, eh?

HankT said:

I see. With respect to the public places the pilot filmed and the words that he uttered ....we should use just a little censorship. Only enough to get the job done, eh?

Click to expand...

How about using the word "discretion," as in would you like it if your son posted a YouTube video about where you keep an external key to your house and how to bypass your alarm system, or would you rather he show a little more "discretion?"

Censorship is an act an authority performs on one of it's subjects. Discretion is the common-sense approach we expect those in whom we trust to avoid committing acts which can harm themselves and others.

Example: Having flown large aircraft for 20+ years, I could probably sit down and figure out half a dozen ways to bring one down, were I so inclined (I'm not). Even if I were to conduct that little mental exercise, would I post the results on YouTube? Heck no, as that would demonstrate a complete, utter, and quite brainless lack of discretion. It doesn't matter whether or not there are thousands of other pilots out there who could come up with the info. What matters is that I would do it. That's discretion.

By the way, the pilot wasn't censored. He was disciplined for his failure to show an appropriate level of discretion commensurate with the trust and maturity expected of a person in his position.

since9 said:

How about using the word "discretion," as in would you like it if your son posted a YouTube video about where you keep an external key to your house and how to bypass your alarm system, or would you rather he show a little more "discretion?"

Click to expand...

That is the correct line of thought in this instance. He just used the wrong venue.

since9 said:

How about using the word "discretion," as in would you like it if your son posted a YouTube video about where you keep an external key to your house and how to bypass your alarm system, or would you rather he show a little more "discretion?"

Click to expand...

Your analogy does not map out to what the pilot divulged.

It's not like he pointed out that an extra supply of valid swipe cards was hidden in a fake rock near the security door wihich allows access to the operational area of the airport. Your offered comparison is wwwwwayyyyyyyyy sssssssttttttrrrrrrrechhhhhhhhhhhed. (Even, amazingly, more so than your first conveniently stretched analogy.)

No, thanks, S9.

The "indiscreet" guy had two main points:

1. The level of airport security at SFO and elsewhere for operational personnel was significantly deficient when compared to that for flight personnel (and regular fliers) . And that such a state is DANGEROUS.

2. He tried to raise his concerns with the bureacracy but was not listened to--hence generating his approach of going public.

A further highly important point is self-evident (at least to fans of the U.S. Constitution) after seeing the response of TSA and local LE (PCSD): Mess with a governmental agency and you get punished. And first they come for the gun rights...


This case, besides the salient issues that are raised in the specifics, supports the notion that the rights protected by the 2nd and 1st Amendments are inextricably intertwined . . .

HankT said:

A further highly point is self-evident (at least to fans of the U.S. Constitution) after seeing the response of TSA and local LE (PCSD): Mess with a governmental agency and you get punished. And first they come for the gun rights...


This case, besides the salient issues that are raised in the specifics, supports the notion that the rights protected by the 2nd and 1st Amendments are inextricably intertwined . . .

Click to expand...

A belated Christmas Miracle!

Someone with a brain. It is an Honor Sir.

HankT said:

The "indiscreet" guy had two main points:

1. The level of airport security at SFO and elsewhere for operational personnel was significantly deficient when compared to that for flight personnel (and regular fliers) . And that such a state is DANGEROUS.

Click to expand...

Absolutely, a point with which I agreed, and which should be raised through the appropriate venue, as OCW mentioned.

2. He tried to raise his concerns with the bureacracy but was not listened to--hence generating his approach of going public.

Click to expand...

Throughout my two decades in the Air Force, raising some issues found an immediate response and fix. Raising other issues found significant opposition, at which point I had to decide if pushing harder was worth it, or even if I was pushing things up through the right channels.

The TSA is charged with screening for flights, but according to their website, they're only screening passengers, baggage, and air cargo (which is carried on passenger flights).

Apparently, as the pilot insistend, they're not very concerned about the ground guys.

I get that.

What I don't get is the pilot's unwillingness to keep pushing the videos up through the appropriate channels, which includes TSA's contact lines, the DHS Office of the Ombudsman, which provides oversight over TSA's processes, programs and procedures, and Congress, particularly the Senate Oversight Committee.

My Congressman has an office here in town. If I want to meet with him, I call his office and schedule a meeting. If the issue is more urgent, I talk with one of his staffers, explain the nature of the issue, and if he/she agrees (they usually do), they'll up-channel the issue.

I do not, however, go to YouTube and and upload videos describing key loopholes in TSA's security, as that places all passengers at increased risk.

That's just stupid, HankT, and no amount of manipulating the argument by claiming "rights" is going change the fact that the pilot did NOT exhaust his available avenues of redress, and attempted to short-cut the system, thereby putting more people at risk.

PS: I'm aware the 1st protects the 2nd, and the 2nd protects the 1st, having posted just that many times here on OCDO. That's not the issue. The issue is that the pilot was stupid and got what he deserved.

since9 said:

PS: I'm aware the 1st protects the 2nd, and the 2nd protects the 1st, having posted just that many times here on OCDO. That's not the issue. The issue is that the pilot was stupid and got what he deserved.

Click to expand...

So exercising one's Constitutional rights is okay as long as they check with you first. For even if they break no law they may be condemned by your opinion.

Good to know...





Meanwhile back in reality:

http://www.news10.net/news/article.aspx?storyid=113850&provider=top&catid=188

Whistleblowing pilot: Uproar may have already made skies safer
George Warren Posted: 12/24/2010

Meantime, the pilot's attorney is inviting a Congressional inquiry and says his client is prepared to testify.

"This might actually stop something that might otherwise have happened this Christmas," said the pilot, who News10 is not identifying to protect his job with a major U.S. airline.

The 50-year-old Army Reserve helicopter test pilot who has flown with the airline for more than a decade was deputized by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to carry a firearm in the cockpit on domestic flights.

Several days after he posted a series of six videos on YouTube pointing out what he believes are serious flaws in airport security, a team of six federal agents and sheriff's deputies arrived at his home outside Sacramento to confiscate his gun and badge.

Click to expand...

http://www.news10.net/news/story.aspx?storyid=113731&catid=2

Sacramento's whistleblowing pilot explains why he did it
George Warren Posted: 12/23/2010

"I just tried to address my concerns and voice it on YouTube," he said in an interview with News10, which broke the story Wednesday.

The pilot said he did not regret posting the video on YouTube despite the difficulty it has caused him.

"Somebody obviously has to address the issue. Really, the only way this news story got traction is because of the government's response," he pointed out.

Click to expand...

http://www.news10.net/news/story.aspx?storyid=113970&catid=2

Whistleblower pilot says he may go public this week
George Warren Posted: 12/26/2010
The 50-year-old pilot, who had previously asked News10 not to identify him or his airline, said he hoped to be in a position where he "could safely come out of the shadows."

The pilot made the announcement on a Website called Patriot Pilot that he and his attorney, Don Werno, published Christmas Day.

"I look forward to fully joining the debate on the national security problems that I helped to expose through my YouTube videos," the pilot wrote.

Click to expand...

So the point is still:

Be careful filming. Although it is not illegal filming cops and anything/anyone from a public space (except in two states) you could be arrested and or condemned by your peers.

since9 said:

Absolutely, a point with which I agreed, and which should be raised through the appropriate venue, as OCW mentioned.



Throughout my two decades in the Air Force, raising some issues found an immediate response and fix. Raising other issues found significant opposition, at which point I had to decide if pushing harder was worth it, or even if I was pushing things up through the right channels.

The TSA is charged with screening for flights, but according to their website, they're only screening passengers, baggage, and air cargo (which is carried on passenger flights).

Apparently, as the pilot insistend, they're not very concerned about the ground guys.

I get that.

What I don't get is the pilot's unwillingness to keep pushing the videos up through the appropriate channels, which includes TSA's contact lines, the DHS Office of the Ombudsman, which provides oversight over TSA's processes, programs and procedures, and Congress, particularly the Senate Oversight Committee.

Click to expand...

The TSA is not the Air Force. The TSA is 110% security theater. 0% actual security.

What I'm wondering about this pilot is why he even wasted his time. Clearly he believes the TSA possesses greater-than-zero efficacy. That must be a fun delusion.

Although Liu is no longer an FFDO, his flight status with his airline has not changed. Liu's wife, Sandra, said she worries about repercussions from the publicity, but supported her husband's decision to go public.

"I think my husband was very courageous. He did what he believed what right," Sandra said. "It's not all about us. It's about the safety of every American."

Click to expand...

Couple of shills if you ask me.

marshaul said:

The TSA is not the Air Force. The TSA is 110% security theater. 0% actual security.

Click to expand...

+1,000,000

The Military is tasked with providing security against all enemies foreign and domestic. Revealing their operational techiques to the enemy would be treason.

Commercial airlines are tasked with providing safe transport to the general public. When someone reveals--to the very public they are tasked to transport safely--that their policies actually pose a THREAT to the safety of said passengers, that, my dear friends is NOT a crime--it is a PUBLIC SERVICE, and should be applauded and hailed as an act of heroism.

This pilot should get a medal, not threatened with a jail sentence...

Dreamer said:

SNIP This pilot should get a medal, not threatened with a jail sentence...

Click to expand...

Agreed. He's showing the emporer's lies.

Anybody see this one, yet?

The Department of Homeland Security told a federal court that the agency believes it has the legal authority to strip search every air traveler. The agency made the claim at oral argument in EPIC's lawsuit to suspend the airport body scanner program...

http://epic.org/


I found out about it here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/

Dreamer said:

+1,000,000

The Military is tasked with providing security against all enemies foreign and domestic. Revealing their operational techiques to the enemy would be treason.

Commercial airlines are tasked with providing safe transport to the general public. When someone reveals--to the very public they are tasked to transport safely--that their policies actually pose a THREAT to the safety of said passengers, that, my dear friends is NOT a crime--it is a PUBLIC SERVICE, and should be applauded and hailed as an act of heroism.

This pilot should get a medal, not threatened with a jail sentence...

Click to expand...

And what about the fact that enemies might not have known of these weaknesses without insider information? Now that he has publicly released the information he has increased the chance of those weaknesses being exploited before there's time to fix them. If he would have instead used up all of the proper chains to address the issue then that could have still resulted in fixing the issue w/o putting the information out there for the bad guys. Instead, after meeting with a bit of resistance he jumped to the easiest and most sensational route.

It's like using a 2500lb bomb when a 500lb bomb would have worked just fine. Does it do the job? Sure, but innocent people could end up hurt because of it.

Aknazer said:

SNIP If he would have instead used up all of the proper chains to address the issue then that could have still resulted in fixing the issue w/o putting the information out there for the bad guys. Instead, after meeting with a bit of resistance he jumped to the easiest and most sensational route.

Click to expand...

You realize that "fixing the issue" really means total, unarguable safety? And, the only way that can be achieved is by strip and cavity searching every person having anything to do with the flight--passengers, flight crew, their luggage, and ground crew.

Take a quick look at the link in my post just above.

As mentioned by another poster above, TSA is security theater; this is not a comment on the fact it doesn't work. Its a comment on the fact that the show's producers of know it won't really stop an attack. The show's producers don't really intend for it to work. They want to look like they are doing something while racking up big $$ for the huge new government agency and its suppliers. Also, think Chertoff = Rapiscan. The bloody revolving door means the producers are in some cases lobbyists for the suppliers.

Power and money.

And, they have the fear angle to justify their existence and further intrusions. They totally know it is a game of "how much can we intrude without driving away airline customers." They've had years to think this through. And, they are organized. I have no doubt the calculations about how much the public will put up with are very nuanced.

Dreamer said:

+1,000,000

The Military is tasked with providing security against all enemies foreign and domestic. Revealing their operational techiques to the enemy would be treason.

Commercial airlines are tasked with providing safe transport to the general public. When someone reveals--to the very public they are tasked to transport safely--that their policies actually pose a THREAT to the safety of said passengers, that, my dear friends is NOT a crime--it is a PUBLIC SERVICE, and should be applauded and hailed as an act of heroism.

This pilot should get a medal, not threatened with a jail sentence...

Click to expand...

When you put it that way...

Good point.

Aknazer said:

And what about the fact that enemies might not have known of these weaknesses without insider information?

Click to expand...

First, we need to define what and identify exactly WHO this elusive "enemy" really is...

Believe me, the REAL "enemy" already knows about weaknesses in our air security...

(wait for it , wait for it...)

Because they freaking DESIGNED the system themselves...

Here's a little clue for the hard of thinking:

Name a single "hijacker" that has gotten on a US flight in the last 20 years that WASN'T put on the plane or otherwise aided, trained, covered for, and/or directed by an "unidentified US intelligence/LE agency"...

We'll wait...


Let's just put it this way. It's a good thing that TSA is so utterly incompetent. Because if they actually DID the job they are supposedly tasked with, it would put a HUGE dent in the covert operations of the rogue factions of CIA, NSA, FBI, and DHS...