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."
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
4
2
1
