…would be my time in Operation Desert Storm in 1991. I was in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. 020712-N-5471P-004 According to this distance calculator, it's almost 8,000 miles (great circle distance) from Los Angeles (where I lived at the time) to Kuwait City. My unit was actually based in King Khalid Military City, Saudi Arabia and [...]

…would be my time in Operation Desert Storm in 1991. I was in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

020712-N-5471P-004

According to this distance calculator, it's almost 8,000 miles (great circle distance) from Los Angeles (where I lived at the time) to Kuwait City. My unit was actually based in King Khalid Military City, Saudi Arabia and Camp Doha, Kuwait, but Kuwait City will do for distance calculations.



The second farthest would be on our Panama Canal transit cruise from a few years ago. That distance was "only" 3,264 miles from home.



I couldn't get too much farther away from home; the antipodal point (~12,000 miles) from me is in the middle of the Indian Ocean.

(5K training, week 1, week 2) Week 3 Day 1 (Wednesday): Supposed to do 2 miles, did 2 miles on treadmill in ~25 minutes. Day 2 (skipped): Supposed to do 2.5 miles, skipped as I was traveling. Day 3 (Sunday): Supposed to do 3 miles, did ~4.5 outside in ~65 minutes. Boston: Charles River bridges [...]

(5K training, week 1, week 2)

Week 3
Day 1 (Wednesday): Supposed to do 2 miles, did 2 miles on treadmill in ~25 minutes.
Day 2 (skipped): Supposed to do 2.5 miles, skipped as I was traveling.
Day 3 (Sunday): Supposed to do 3 miles, did ~4.5 outside in ~65 minutes.

I have signed up for a Toys for Tots 5K in Santa Cruz in mid-December. At this rate I anticipate no problems completing it in good time. Next goal will likely be a 10K.

Dear Senator Boxer, First, let me congratulate you on your recent electoral victory. The importance of having you in Washington representing California’s interests, especially considering the alternative, cannot be overstated. I’m writing to express my extreme concern and distress over the Transportation Security Agency’s new policies of whole-body imaging and “enhanced” pat-downs at airport checkpoints. [...]

Dear Senator Boxer,

First, let me congratulate you on your recent electoral victory. The importance of having you in Washington representing California’s interests, especially considering the alternative, cannot be overstated.

I’m writing to express my extreme concern and distress over the Transportation Security Agency’s new policies of whole-body imaging and “enhanced” pat-downs at airport checkpoints.

As you must be aware, the whole-body imaging scanners use ionizing radiation to photograph travelers through their clothes, creating a clear image of their naked bodies. TSA claims that these images “cannot be stored or transmitted” have already been proven false. There are no exemptions for children of any age going through these machines and TSA regulations do not exclude from employment convicted sexual abusers whose crime was more than ten years ago.

If a traveller “opts out” of having their naked x-ray photograph taken, they are instead subject to what TSA calls an “enhanced” pat-down, wherein the traveler’s entire body is groped, squeezed and manhandled, including genitalia and women’s breasts. Again, there is no exemption for children, and recent reports show children as young as three years old being subjected to these procedures. In any context, unwanted contact of this kind is rightly termed sexual abuse.

Senator, the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution states “[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” In no way can the act of purchasing an airline ticket or attempting to board a plane be “probable cause” absent any other suspicion. Certainly no Warrants for these invasive and unreasonable searches are issued before the searches are performed.

TSA agents have stated that travelers “give up their rights when purchasing a plane ticket,” but our Declaration of Independence is very clear in that we are “endowed by [our] Creator with certain unalienable Rights” which cannot be abjured by any government agency.

I see that the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation will hold a hearing on Thursday, November 17, 2010, and TSA Administrator Pistole is scheduled to testify. I hope and plead with you, Senator, to question Administrator Pistole on these new procedures, and to take whatever action you can to see that they are abated, and soon.

Respectfully yours,

Andrew Rich
116 Mission Drive
Palo Alto, California 94303
650-270-5863
andrew.rich@project-insomnia.com

Update: I know that there are two varieties of naked body scanners, and only one uses ionizing radiation; the other uses radio frequencies. I’m sure the Senator is or will be aware of this as well. It wasn’t an intentional omission.

Who wouldn't want to be the Stainless Steel Rat? He's a master thief, a disguise artist and a traveler of space and time. He can go anywhere, be anyone, steal anything. And he does it all within the bounds of an ironclad, if slightly bent, sense of ethics: Life is precious – don't kill anyone. [...]

Who wouldn't want to be the Stainless Steel Rat?

He's a master thief, a disguise artist and a traveler of space and time. He can go anywhere, be anyone, steal anything. And he does it all within the bounds of an ironclad, if slightly bent, sense of ethics:



Life is precious – don't kill anyone.

Only steal from those who can afford it and likely will never notice.



The Stainless Steel Rat books by Harry Harrison were favorites of mine in my formative years (which probably explains a lot) and I still like to pick them up again from time to time.



N.B. I would have answered "Harry Dresden" but for the events in the latest book.

I’m sending this letter through TSA’s “Got Feedback” form regarding the incident at SJC last Friday night. The situation: We went through the TSA checkpoint in Terminal A at SJC on Friday night, May 7, at around 8:00 p.m.. As veteran travelers, we had our 3-1-1 liquids bagged and out, and medically-necessary liquids in a [...]

I’m sending this letter through TSA’s “Got Feedback” form regarding the incident at SJC last Friday night.

The situation:

We went through the TSA checkpoint in Terminal A at SJC on Friday night, May 7, at around 8:00 p.m.. As veteran travelers, we had our 3-1-1 liquids bagged and out, and medically-necessary liquids in a separate bag and declared. Included in the medically-necessary liquids bag was a nearly-full 12oz bottle of Ciba Vision Clear Care Cleaning and Disinfecting Solution. I should note that we have traveled with this product, in this size, literally hundreds of times since TSA’s formation, always in the declared medically-necessary bag and never with any issue.

A uniformed TSA agent took the bottle of Clear Care out of the medically-necessary liquids bag and advised us it would have to be “tested”. The agent returned a moment later and said we could not travel with Clear Care, but was not able to intelligibly describe the problem. I requested a supervisor and one arrived reasonably quickly.

The uniformed supervisor conferred with the agent, took the bottle of Clear Care from him and approached us as we waited after collecting our carry-ons and shoes. Her apparent attitude as she approached was frankly hostile, with a scowl on her face and a defensive posture. She had the bottle of Clear Care with her but would not give it back to us. She said that the bottle had triggered an “alarm” on a test but would not explain what the alarm was or what about the bottle had triggered it, other than to say that this product had triggered the alarm.

We asked for more information and noted that we had, in accordance with TSA policy, declared the bottle as medically-necessary, and that we had traveled with this size bottle of this product many, many times. She was unmoved and continued to repeat that the bottle would not be allowed. I asked if she was the supervisor for this checkpoint and she affirmed that she was. I then asked for her manager. She made an exasperated noise and stalked away, first directing a nearby agent to perform additional screening on my wife’s items. I want to call out this specifically because it highlights the supervisor’s belligerent attitude: the supervisor pointed rudely at my wife and snapped “screen HER” at the nearby agent. It was very clear that this additional screening, which occurred well after we had passed through the checkpoint and regained our carry-ons and other possessions, was in retaliation for questioning her and requesting to talk to her manager.

The second TSA agent, to her credit, was polite and professional as she carefully examined my wife’s possessions and gave her a pat-down search.

A few moments later, the manager (not in uniform) arrived. The supervisor told her the situation, though again in language and tones that were quite antagonistic toward us. The manager then turned to us, with the supervisor still standing right there glaring at us, and said that Clear Care possesses “certain properties which cause the machine to alarm” (her words) and so we would not be allowed to travel with it. I asked her what those properties were and if it was possible that the machine was alarming incorrectly or not configured properly. She would not give any further detail or admit to the possibility of the machine being wrong. With our flight’s departure rapidly approaching, we gave up, collected our belongings and left the TSA checkpoint, leaving our bottle of Clear Care with the TSA manager.

The problems:

1. Nothing in published TSA public policy (that I could find, and I searched quite extensively) prohibits or even addresses Clear Care. No one at the Terminal A checkpoint (agent, supervisor or manager) could explain why Clear Care was not permitted. On the contrary, a document on TSA’s Web site ( http://www.tsa.gov/press/happenings/family_lane_expansion.shtm ) specifically mentions contact lens solution as a permissible medically-necessary liquid.

2. The supervisor’s behavior was shockingly unprofessional, unfriendly and confrontational.

Requested resolutions:

1. Exclusive of all other remedies, I would like to be reimbursed for the purchase price of one bottle of Clear Care. Amazon.com’s price for the 12oz bottle is $10.95 ( http://amzn.to/cAHeeG ) and this is roughly the same as average retail prices, so my request is for reimbursement in the amount of $10.95.

2. I would like someone with decision-making authority to contact me (my contact information appears below) regarding this issue. The discussion will be about both policy and training; policy in that nothing on TSA’s Web site prohibits traveling with Clear Care specifically and yet there seems to be an unwritten prohibition on it; and training in that not one of the three TSA employees with whom we interacted was able to explain what the problem actually was or where we could find written (or online) statements of policy regarding this product, and the unprofessional and hostile behavior of the supervisor.

3. Finally, I would like assurances that TSA agents at SJC (and other airports, of course) will be advised of all current and public policies as shown on the TSA Web site and directed to follow them without on-the-spot improvising.

Yours sincerely,

Andrew Rich
[redacted]
andrew.rich@project-insomnia.com

I will, of course, post any follow-up or reply I may receive.