Interesting People mailing list archives
How the TSA encourages airport theft
From: dave () farber net
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 07:51 -0400
...... Forwarded Message ....... From: John Adams <jadams01 () sprynet com> To: dave () farber net Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 19:08:25 -0400 Subj: For IP? How the TSA encourages airport theft Not their headline, I should note, but my own somewhat cynical take on the subject. Here's the money quote, from a few paragraphs down in the story: ''It sounds like TSA has confused ends and means. They are compromising security for the sake of secrecy,'' Aftergood said. http://www.ajc.com/monday/content/epaper/editions/monday/ news_041b592785bc71c000c8.html Airport security tricky in court Criminal case dropped to guard secrecy Rebecca Carr - Cox Washington Bureau Monday, May 24, 2004 Washington --- Last fall, Miami prosecutors thought they had a solid case against a federal baggage screener who was caught on videotape stealing CDs from passengers' luggage. Just one small problem: The defense would be allowed to question a key prosecution witness from the Transportation Security Administration about Miami International Airport's security and training of baggage screeners. Fearing the testimony could put what the government calls Sensitive Security Information in the hands of terrorists, prosecutors dropped the charges. U.S. District Court Judge Adalberto Jordan set the defendant free. He is now in Miami studying radiology. The case reveals a growing tension between the public's right to know about a crime at one of the nation's busiest airports and the federal government's desire to protect sensitive security information from disclosure. The federal government argues that even seemingly innocuous information about the nation's transportation systems could aid terrorists and other criminals in their plots. Critics disagree, saying that to cloak such information in secrecy undermines the public's ability to protect itself. The Miami case is ''a rather shocking story,'' said Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists' Project on Government Secrecy. ''It sounds like TSA has confused ends and means. They are compromising security for the sake of secrecy,'' Aftergood said. The critics have it all wrong, said Lauren Stover, the eastern field director for TSA public affairs based in Miami. ''Our agency does not like to hide under the SSI umbrella,'' Stover said. The Miami case and other examples of the TSA refusing to release sensitive security information have raised concerns among open government advocates who say there is no oversight on what TSA can stamp ''SSI.'' ''It is an invitation to unlimited secrecy,'' Aftergood said. ''These decisions need to be reviewed by some sort of oversight mechanism.'' Open government advocates say there are understandable reasons to keep certain sensitive documents and pieces of information from the public. But the public should at least know how much information has been removed from the public domain under the SSI label. Jane Kirtley, director of the Silha Center for media ethics and law at the University of Minnesota, said the whole notion of removing reams of information from the public for an unlimited time frame is ''very troubling.'' ''The idea that we can basically close off this amorphous category of information without any checks and balances is very troubling,'' Kirtley said. Lawmakers complain Some Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill are concerned about the lack of oversight to ensure that TSA is not abusing its authority. ''While it is important that truly sensitive security information not be disclosed to the public, the Bush administration all too often inappropriately uses secrecy as a weapon to prevent the American public from learning of its activities,'' said Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.), a member of the House Select Committee on Homeland Security, which oversees the policies of TSA. The agency wanted to prosecute the Miami baggage screener to the highest degree possible, Stover said. ''We are a transparent agency operating that way every day under the belief that the public has a right to know," Stover said. "We have to learn to balance that against information that might be used against us.'' The agency was concerned that an open court proceeding would reveal critical information because of videotape footage showing the defendant stealing and expert TSA testimony about screening procedures. Terrorists could watch the videotape and hear from TSA officials how they screen bags. The agency does not want to do ''the homework'' for the terrorists, she said. ''Our mission is to safeguard the security of our nation and traveling public, and we could not jeopardize innocent lives for the actions of a few individuals,'' Stover said. Amy Von Walter, a spokeswoman for the TSA based in Washington, estimated that about a quarter of the agency's actions are marked ''SSI,'' but she could not quantify that figure because the agency deals with ''billions of documents.'' Von Walter said the agency does not hesitate to take appropriate action when baggage screeners violate the law. For example, four baggage screeners in Detroit were indicted last month on theft charges. The TSA was given the power to keep secret sensitive information about the nation's transportation networks soon after Congress created the agency on Nov. 16, 2001. But the concept of keeping secret sensitive security information has been around since 1974. That's when Congress passed legislation giving the Federal Aviation Administration permission to protect a narrow band of information about its research and development from public disclosure. Expanded security Under TSA's management, the definition of SSI has greatly expanded to include nearly a dozen different regulations, including information about security programs, vulnerability assessments and technical specifications of certain screening equipment, according to a recent report by the Congressional Research Service, the research arm of Congress. Basically, anything that poses a ''detrimental '' threat to air travel qualifies as sensitive security information, according to the regulations defining SSI. Unlike national security documents that are reviewed before receiving classification status of ''top secret,'' information placed in the category of SSI is ''born'' secret, meaning there is no criterion to meet or review to ensure that it should be removed from the public's view. The federal government created the Information Security Oversight Office to monitor the number of classified documents it creates each year. No such monitoring agency exists for SSI materials. The materials are simply removed from the public domain without any type of oversight as there is with the classification system. Another important distinction is there is a time limit given to classified materials. While some of these time limits are extended for decades, there is no time limit with SSI materials. On Tuesday, the TSA expanded the authority to the U.S. Coast Guard. The Coast Guard will be allowed to use the SSI label to keep secret port and facility security assessment plans required by legislation passed by Congress last year.
ON THE WEB: The CRS report can be found on the Federation of American
Scientists Project On Government Secrecy site: www.fas.org ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- How the TSA encourages airport theft dave (May 25)