|
Originally Posted by scoow
Am I missing something? I don't see any reference to this Operational Directive in Bob's post, dated 12/31 at 3:29pm. I don't see a 12:31pm post. Perhaps it was edited?
Here's the link that should pop you right to it. Least it does on my screen. |
Originally Posted by HSVTSO Dean
(Post 10992492)
Here's the link that should pop you right to it. Least it does on my screen.
But I'm sure it's one of those ID-10-T errors on my part. ;) Is it in a comment re. the "Ring in the New Year, Not the Walk Through Metal Detector" post? If so, I see 11 comments; none containing the info. quoted by studentff. |
Originally Posted by scoow
(Post 10992689)
"Sorry, the page you requested was not found." :eek:
But I'm sure it's one of those ID-10-T errors on my part. ;) Is it in a comment re. the "Ring in the New Year, Not the Walk Through Metal Detector" post? If so, I see 11 comments; none containing the info. quoted by studentff. http://www.tsa.gov/blog/2008/12/tsa-on-60-minutes.html |
Originally Posted by doober
(Post 10992702)
Soow, the info is in the thread preceding the Santa at the WTMD,
http://www.tsa.gov/blog/2008/12/tsa-on-60-minutes.html Knew it would turn out to be one of those ID-10-T errors. :o |
Originally Posted by HSVTSO Dean
(Post 10991887)
Blogger Bob went through some hoops to get you guys that information, too. Directives such as that are almost always considered to be SSI (the only ones that aren't, that I'm aware of, have to do with our dress code :P). For him to get that posted onto the Blog would have required a great deal of parlay with the office of the Administrator as he bandied back and forth with justification for doing it, and showing how it would be more beneficial to the mission than not releasing it (in this case, public opinion).
In the end, Kip Hawley would've had to given him written permission to release the full-text information of the Directive, and lift it from SSI protection. (By the way, this all goes on the assumption that it was SSI to begin with, and since it took this long, it most likely was.) I'm curious what the TSA screeners are taught in the concept of administrative search for prohibited items versus acting as an agent in an unlawful search since I don't seem to see the criminal statue of having $10.01K on my person. Has any TSA screener actually brought this up during your recurrency training? During initial? Personally I'm still trying to figure out the front page of the www.tsa.gov web site where announces how many people were arrested at a TSA check point for "13 passengers were arrested due to suspicious behavior". Which state or federal criminal statue is that, "suspicious behavior"? Me thinks the TSA (and its screeners) would not recognize the Bill of Rights if it was laying next to the paper shredder. But I do what I can each time I go thru a TSA check point. Private screening certainly is very inconvenient to the 2 or 3 screeners, especially when dealing with me. |
Originally Posted by studentff
(Post 10992409)
This text is extremely telling about TSA's mentality. They lump cash in with illegal drugs as a form of contraband. Illegal drugs are in fact contraband (though I have serious doubts as to if TSA should be reporting them), but CASH IS NOT CONTRABAND.
They have essentially extended their administrative search to search for contraband that is otherwise not illegal. They refer the cash to law enforcement, bypassing the probable cause requirement that cop would have had to search for the cash. And then depending on the cop's local rules, the cop may have the option to seize the cash with no other evidence what so ever and the burden of proof for recovery on the passenger. Yes, you risk such seizure if you drive down the street with $11K in your car, but you are protected because the cops can't go searching for that cash unless they have legitimate probable cause to search your person and/or vehicle. TSA has bypasses that completely and created an extremely high risk that any domestic air traveler traveling with cash is subject to a high risk of seizure. Those who don't believe slippery slopes of destroyed freedoms happen, and don't believe TSA is involved in these slippery slopes, need to consider this situation carefully. Then again, maybe you can afford having 25% of your paycheck garnished by order of a federal judge for ten years. |
how to browse directly to a comment on TSA blog
Originally Posted by scoow
(Post 10992689)
"Sorry, the page you requested was not found."
|
Originally Posted by pmocek
(Post 10994541)
That's due to a problem with the TSA blog.
*Though being a TSA product, it shouldn't be a surprise. |
FOIA request for TSA's cash=contraband operational directive
I have submitted a FOIA request for the TSA operational directive Blogger Bob cited (OD-400-54-20, "Discovery of Contraband During the Screening Process", May 9, 2005). I plan to follow-up here after fulfillment of the request.
Following is a template that others can use to do the same: Code:
From: <me>A FOIA request can be submitted by mail, fax or E-mail. By mail Transportation Security Administration Freedom of Information Act Office, TSA-20 11th Floor, East Tower 601 South 12th Street Arlington, VA 22202-4220 By fax (571) 227-1406 By E-mail [email protected] Your FOIA/PA request must contain the following information: Your name, address and telephone number. If you have an email address, please provide it. Specify whether you are making a FOIA or Privacy Act (PA) request. Provide specific detailed information about the records you are seeking. Indicate what format you would like the information requested to be provided to you in, if it is other than paper. State your willingness to pay any fees and indicate how much you are willing to pay as advance authorization to process. If you are mailing your request please prominently mark on the envelope "FOIA Request." In addition, prior to submitting a FOIA request you may want to search our web page to see if the information is already posted. You should receive an acknowledgement letter within 4-5 business days after your request has been received. This letter will contain a TSA tracking number for your request, which is needed when contacting our office. Should you need additional assistance, feel free to contact the FOIA Headquarters Office at toll free 866-364-2872 (866- FOIA-TSA). |
Phil, I wish I would have know you were doing a FOIA request. There is a letter generator located here that makes it easy to make a letter that includes the FOIA statutes and deadlines. Below is a copy of the first FOIA request I am making.
Michael Cummings address redacted January 1, 2009 Transportation Security Administration TSA-20, West Tower FOIA Division 601 South 12th Street Arlington, VA 22202-4220 FOIA REQUEST Dear FOI Officer: Pursuant to the federal Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552, I request access to and copies of any records, including but not limited to memos, e-mails, internal communications, external communications, minutes, or notes, pertaining to or referencing a TSA Blog poster known as Trollkiller. I would like to receive the information in electronic format. I agree to pay reasonable duplication fees for the processing of this request in an amount not to exceed $20. However, please notify me prior to your incurring any expenses in excess of that amount. If my request is denied in whole or part, I ask that you justify all deletions by reference to specific exemptions of the act. I will also expect you to release all segregable portions of otherwise exempt material. I, of course, reserve the right to appeal your decision to withhold any information or to deny a waiver of fees. I look forward to your reply within 20 business days, as the statute requires. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Michael Cummings |
I just sent my Congresspeople e-mails quoting Blogger Bob about >$10,000 being contraband and asking why this was allowed to happen.
Will it bring any results? Quien sabe? ~~ I also posted the same on the Obama website, change.gov, where the most popular question is: "Will President Obama eliminate domestic warrantless wiretapping of US citizens by modifying the "Terrorist Surveillance Program" (TSP)? Is the Fourth Amendment going to be restored, or weakened further by the Obama Administration?" |
Seizures of large sums of money at security checkpoints have been occurring long before TSA's inception. With that said, I have yet to see one seizure where I work where I felt the person was a fraction honest and/or legitimate about where and how they received the funds. It's funny to see a person who claimed $18k to the IRS the year before, and now has $42k in cash to start a dry-cleaning business with a "partner," but yet does not know the partner's name, address, or phone number and has no job. Do you think any of them get mad when the currency is seized? They expect it. They cannot show one shred of evidence of legally obtaining the money. I see large sums of money many times with Egyptian families and others in the middle east. They may get questioned, but I have yet to see their money confiscated because they legitimately earned it and have appropriate documentation to prove such. Besides, TSA has little to do with it. They see large bulks of money and call law enforcement. We investigate a little further, and if some things don't add up and/or we detect deception, then it goes further.
I know this subject has come up once before and there was many posts made regarding the legitimacy of these searches at checkpoints. Before we get into that again, regardless of whether you feel the search is legal (even though it has been proven as an administrative search where one consents by entering the checkpoint), it's really a mute point. If you're dumb enough to try to take drug-buying money through a security checkpoint at a US airport, you deserve to get caught. |
Originally Posted by SgtScott31
(Post 10999268)
Seizures of large sums of money at security checkpoints have been occurring long before TSA's inception. With that said, I have yet to see one seizure where I work where I felt the person was a fraction honest and/or legitimate about where and how they received the funds. It's funny to see a person who claimed $18k to the IRS the year before, and now has $42k in cash to start a dry-cleaning business with a "partner," but yet does not know the partner's name, address, or phone number and has no job. Do you think any of them get mad when the currency is seized? They expect it. They cannot show one shred of evidence of legally obtaining the money. I see large sums of money many times with Egyptian families and others in the middle east. They may get questioned, but I have yet to see their money confiscated because they legitimately earned it and have appropriate documentation to prove such. Besides, TSA has little to do with it. They see large bulks of money and call law enforcement. We investigate a little further, and if some things don't add up and/or we detect deception, then it goes further.
I know this subject has come up once before and there was many posts made regarding the legitimacy of these searches at checkpoints. Before we get into that again, regardless of whether you feel the search is legal (even though it has been proven as an administrative search where one consents by entering the checkpoint), it's really a mute point. If you're dumb enough to try to take drug-buying money through a security checkpoint at a US airport, you deserve to get caught. Why would you or any other LEO investigate? If I had $9,999.99 by TSA standards I would be ok, yet with $10,000.00 I suddenly become some internatioanl terrorist. In either case Transportation Safety has not been threatend. What documentation must I have to possess a perfectally legal item? Since when? Please quote the law? So I have to prove that I am not guilty of a crime instead of you proving I am? You can act on some TSO dweebs call who thinks they have a big catch and you respond without reasonable suspection. Is that how the law works in your state? What a sad state of affairs for our country. |
Should we place any limits on scope of TSA searches at airports?
Originally Posted by SgtScott31
(Post 10999268)
Seizures of large sums of money at security checkpoints have been occurring long before TSA's inception. With that said, I have yet to see one seizure where I work where I felt the person was a fraction honest and/or legitimate about where and how they received the funds.
But while we're on the topic of your opinion: Regardless of the current state of the law, what do you think the limits of these searches we have allowed in order to enhance transportation security should be? I don't like the fact that something that a TSA baggage checker finds in someone's personal belongings that is completely unrelated to the safety of his fellow airline passengers could lead to an investigation of him. It's no more appropriate than setting up a roadblock or just having police stop people walking down the sidewalk and searching them for any of those same things. In my opinion, nothing else found during such an airport search should be admissible as evidence in court. This would help keep TSA focused on their duties and leave law enforcement up to those who are trained to enforce the law in a constitutional manner. I do understand, however, that many people figure once TSA is pawing around in our bags, anything they see that clearly indicates wrongdoing should be fair game. I disagree, but won't argue. But let's consider the limits of TSA's searches a little differently. What about the things that do not clearly indicate wrongdoing? What about jewelry? Does the wearing of jewelry at an airport checkpoint warrant police involvement? What if it appeared to be very expensive jewelry? What if the person wearing the jewelry didn't appear to be able to afford to purchase such jewelry? Would it be justifiable to stop and hassle that person -- perform secondary searches, check his IRS records, interrogate him -- because some TSA bag checker thought it seemed like this particular jewelry was an indication of his wrongdoing?
Originally Posted by SgtScott31
(Post 10999268)
It's funny to see a person who claimed $18k to the IRS the year before, and now has $42k in cash to start a dry-cleaning business with a "partner," but yet does not know the partner's name, address, or phone number and has no job.
Originally Posted by SgtScott31
(Post 10999268)
If you're dumb enough to try to take drug-buying money through a security checkpoint at a US airport, you deserve to get caught.
SgtScott31, how would you feel about us setting up checkpoints like the TSA's, but out at miscellaneous places? Let's say that it was economically feasible to erect these "public security checkpoints" and that the searches could be performed in just a minute or so. Should we just set up checkpoints wherever we can fit them to search everyone in search of the few bad people? It sounds like you would prefer to live in a police state. |
Originally Posted by SgtScott31
(Post 10999268)
It's funny to see a person who claimed $18k to the IRS the year before, and now has $42k in cash to start a dry-cleaning business with a "partner," but yet does not know the partner's name, address, or phone number and has no job.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:18 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.