Jim Babb and George Donnelly have started a campaign called "We Won't Fly" to encourage people to "act now" and "travel with dignity." They are asking people to understand that Americans should not be "treated like criminals" when going through airports and are opposed to the new full-body backscatter x-ray airport scanner machines that have been put into airports over the past few months.

::::::::

We Won't Fly" Campaign Organizer Talks TSA Pat-Downs, Body Scanners & Opt-Out Day by Jim Babb and George Donnelly

We Won't Fly" Campaign Organizer Talks TSA Pat-Downs, Body Scanners & Opt-Out Day

Jim Babb and George Donnelly have started a campaign called "We Won't Fly" to encourage people to "act now" and "travel with dignity." They are asking people to understand that Americans should not be "treated like criminals" when going through airports and are opposed to the new full-body backscatter x-ray airport scanner machines that have been put into airports over the past few months.

The two call the new machines "porno-scanners." And, they are terribly upset with the airlines, which have allowed government to violate customers' rights and liberties and effectively turn airports in the country into Fourth Amendment-free zones.

Several news outlets have picked up this story and are covering Americans' reactions to the "porno-scanners" and the new pat-down procedure. The story will only perpetuate as news media do their routine reports about Americans traveling for Thanksgiving.

George Donnelly agreed to talk to me over the phone about the "We Won't Fly" campaign and how he is giving Americans traveling on the Thanksgiving holiday an opportunity to stand up to Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and opt-out of being scanned by the "porno-scanners."

On November 24th, the day before Thanksgiving, Donnelly explains, "If you haven't already decided to stop flying to get the airlines on our side in this matter, if you have to fly, if you decided to take that risk, then we urge you to opt-out of the scanners for health and privacy reasons and to take advantage of the meager choice that the government has given us and go through the pat-down."

The main goal of the campaign appears to be going after the control that TSA exacts over airport security. By igniting a consumer revolt, Donnelly hopes those participating in the campaign will push airline companies to ask TSA or the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to break up the government monopoly on security.

"The Philadelphia Inquirer reported that 99% are going through the scanners and so it wouldn't take more than a few opt-outs to slow down these lines significantly," says Donnelly. "If security procedures become slow, this new procedure will not feasible anymore. And the government will be forced to roll them back."

The "We Won't Fly" campaign, Donnelly says, was "started in response to Michael Roberts, the pilot who took a stand. He refused to submit to the scanner and he also refused to submit to this overly invasive and offensive pat-down, this new pat-down."

Roberts blogged about his incident with TSA and started a "Fed Up Flyers" campaign to promote resistance against the "air transportation police state" that Roberts sees forming. That Roberts was willing to put his livelihood on the line as a pilot inspired Donnelly and Babb. They chose to put a campaign together "to bring attention to the issue and highlight the privacy and health risks associated with the procedures."

Since starting the campaign, Donnelly and Babb have been following incidents like a recent one that became a huge story--the incident with John Tyner at a San Diego airport where he told TSA he was not going through a scanner and then, when it was time for a pat-down, he said don't touch my junk. Tyner was "caught off guard," Donnelly suggests, and that's because this isn't the old pat-down that passengers may have found a bit acceptable. This one can be traumatizing, especially for women and children.

The campaign website highlights health risks posed by the machines, mentions how "numerous thefts [by TSA] have been reported at security checkpoints," and notes on how the scanners are "ineffective and unproven."

Donnelly says the feedback to the campaign has been "about 97% unqualified support" with many people showing their passion for this issue. The campaign has received personal stories from people who are upset. They have been following people all over the nation who have seen their campaign and plan to organize an action on Opt-Out Day.

However, there is one particular canard that some citizens are repeating (in addition to the idea that one should be groped and handled in order to keep this country safe). There is this idea going around that "flying is not a right" but rather "a privilege."

Donnelly's reaction to this idea is the following:

"The problem is that the government has created a monopoly for itself, a coercive monopoly for itself in the area of airline security. And, no longer it is a question of privilege. It's a question of rights because the government is involved. The government is supposed to be operating under certain limits and they are exceeding those limits. Now, In order for it to remain in the realm of privilege, the airlines would have to be providing their own security or there would have to be some kind of choice available. But, the government has created this monopoly in the form of the TSA and that's why it's not a question of privilege. It's a question of rights. Know, we have a right to contract with the airlines, if both parties agree, and the government is standing in the way of that."

All this outrage, of course, begs the question: Has this been an undercurrent running for quite some time? And, are circumstances like the escalation in security and stories of TSA incidents in the news creating a kind of tipping point, a turning of the tide where Americans are now finding the courage to speak out?

"We have a lot of stories saying people have sworn off flying since five, seven, even ten years ago," notes Donnelly. "Some people have said it's about time that this revolt has come to pass."

The "We Won't Fly Campaign" is encouraging people to submit their complaints or stories to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) and TSA.

Some after thoughts, which I actually wrote in an article earlier this year when airport security hysteria spread like wildfire in response to a "Christmas Day bomber" who exploded a condom bomb on an airplane (BBC World Today ended up interviewing me in January of this year about the humor I found in all the hysteria and the issues I raised)---

We can objectively address what is transforming airport security and vehemently oppose it without letting the stigma of terrorism get in the way of common sense.

When you are creating a system of security that may ultimately employ body scanning technology that would require a society to rewrite its child porn laws, I think it's time to consider whether one is willing to trade certain freedoms and liberties for a tiny amount of safety or not.

I mean, who wants to create a job that will have pedophiles lining up to get a job with airport security because they can now view body scans of children, experience multiple erections throughout the course of their work day, and at the same time earn a minimum wage?

Somewhere in a cave or terrorist camp, al Qaeda or Islamic extremists are smiling and laughing or they are stupefied by the reality that their attacks against what they believe to be decadent Western powers have brought a reaction that involves state-sanctioned depravity.

It's time to take seriously the words of congress people like Ron Paul who have said time and time again that the U.S. is "doing exactly what bin Laden planned."

Here is a video on the "We Won't Fly" campaign: This flash video was removed for security reasons

The We Won't Fly Plan for Defeating TSA Porno-Scanners and Airport Rent-a-Gropers from George Donnelly on Vimeo.

Authors Bio:
Kevin Gosztola is managing editor of Shadowproof Press. He also produces and co-hosts the weekly podcast, "Unauthorized Disclosure." He was an editor for OpEdNews.com