Michael Yon has been providing excellent, independent journalism from Iraq and Afghanistan for the past several years. He doesn't work for anyone. He asks readers to donate to his support. His blog
Yon was questioned by the TSA at Sea-Tacoma International Airport. They asked him questions that have nothing to do with security and he didn't answer. Good for him. So they arrested him. Well, they say they didn't arrest him, They just handcuffed him and detained him. What's the difference?
Yon was returning to the United States from Hong Kong to visit family when TSA officials stopped him during a routine security checkpoint. "Officials asked me what was in my bag--nothing wrong with this question," Yon said in an interview with BigGovernment.com. "I told them it was normal stuff, clothes and toothbrushes."At this point the TSA officials escorted Yon to a designated screening area where they examined the contents of his bag. "Then they asked me how much money I make," Yon said. Yon suggested to the TSA officials that the question was inappropriate and unrelated to transportation security. The award-winning blogger noted another TSA officer approached Yon: "he asked who do I work for." "I did not answer the question which clearly was upsetting to the TSA officers."
Yon was escorted to a room elsewhere in the airport where he said he remained silent during much of the questioning. According to Yon, "they handcuffed me for failing to cooperate. They said I was impeding their ability to do their job."Yon described the TSA officials as noticeably frustrated by his refusal to answer their questions: "I always assume everything is being recorded. I was trying to be professional."
Yon continued, "They said I wasn't under arrest, but I'm handcuffed. In any other country, that qualifies as an arrest."
Ultimately Port Authority police released Yon; according to Yon, the police were "completely professional."
Please keep comments on topic. I am in Mexico and international data access costs me money.
7 Jan 2010: I closed comments for the same reason. No problem with what dialog I read - not much anyway. Just that it's overwhelming my IPhone and costing me per MB.
Posted by Ron Hebron at January 06, 2010 10:53 AM | Email ThisThe major difference seems to be- we went from 2001 until 2009 w/out an attack getting executed to the degrees we've seen in the past year. Now that we are reading miranda rights and shutting down gitmo, it's a field day for attackers.
Posted by: Andy on January 6, 2010 11:32 AMFrankly, I would be even more concerned if he hadn't received some special attention. Geez.
Posted by: Mykelbe on January 6, 2010 11:46 AMIn a recent dealing with the IRS, I was being asked questions I felt were relevant, and answering as best I could. Then they asked "what bank do you use?" Huh? So I asked the person to repeat the question. Same "what bank do you use?"
I asked back "do I have to provide this information"? Their answer "well I'm curious and I want to ask it". So again I asked and clarified "do I have to provide this information, which regulation or form requires that information?"
Clearly irritated the IRS employee was rather rude and said I was impeding their job. Apparently getting information that is not legally required is expected by the Government. And merely asking for the reason such data is needed is deemed as being uncooperative. I'm fully expecting my 5th audit in 5 years, because of my refusal to simply ask what the justification for a request of information was...
As far as Yon, I get it each time I come back from the US. I'm always asked "why did you go to China". "For work" is the answer. "Who do you work for?" always comes next. "Myself - I am self employed" is the answer and the truth. But then the flags apparently go up because no one travels internationally for their own business I guess...
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on January 6, 2010 11:48 AMSarcasm aside, wow--what a mistake these TSA people made.
Posted by: Michele on January 6, 2010 12:18 PM...and yet some fools want to give these same imbeciles control over your healthcare decisions and 1/6th of the U.S. Economy. Unreal.
Posted by: Rick D. on January 6, 2010 12:19 PMIt's not that the question itself is important, they don't care if I have been to Israel before, they want to know if I am a liar.
The seemingly senseless follow up question provides the interviewer with a plethora of information.
Posted by: Mykelbe on January 6, 2010 01:20 PMIt's not that the question itself is important, they don't care if I have been to Israel before, they want to know if I am a liar.
The seemingly senseless follow up question provides the interviewer with a plethora of information about the traveler that can separate the threat from the innocent traveler.
Posted by: Mykelbe on January 6, 2010 01:21 PMYou're comparing apples to hammers. This isn't Israel.
The TSA had no business requesting this information and Yon was correct in refusing to provide it.
It's long past time to knock these government employees off their power trips.
Posted by: jimg on January 6, 2010 02:00 PMThey arrested Michale Yon, while giving a visa to a terrorist and allowing him to board a plane with a bomb. Oh... good news... they just revoked his visa!
Anybody catch the graph today of private sector employment going down while government employment goes up? The declining line *pays* for the growing line. How long can that sustain itself?
This government we have is upside-down in all respects, from airport security to everything else.
Posted by: Gary on January 6, 2010 02:10 PMFor his wife, those 3 days were pure hell. He had just "disappeared".
And now they're gonna run his health care.
Are we finally going to rattle Congress to its knees this fall and demand our enemies fear us rather than we fear our government.
No hellcare because I did not assign my authority to Congress to kill me with it.
No More TSA complete failure and going for more with Unions.
Talk about "pure hell"....Why in the world do libs want us to be like Canada---where people with health insurance wait for care and suffer with inadequate medical infranstructure, UNLIKE people with insurance here.... crazy....
Posted by: Michele on January 6, 2010 04:04 PMThis is the sort of abuse that makes me a longtime supporter of the ACLU.
But, of course, when this same organization, the Anti-Christian Liars Union, defend child molesters pro bono, that kind of "abuse" you're okay with.
Posted by: Rick D. on January 6, 2010 04:19 PMWhat's your opinion about the government running our health care? Do you see any civil liberty issues there?
[I asked you to stay ON TOPIC.
RH]
Posted By Peter Callaghan on January 4, 2010 at 4:16 pm Bookmark and Share Share this
I couldn't make something like this up so I'll just present it as filed.
Nine Democratic senators have filed a bill that would remove from state law any references to school kids that are considered negative.
Instead, all such references - such as at-risk, in-poverty and disadvantaged - would be replaced with the phrase "kids at-hope." Prime sponsor is Sen. Rosa Franklin of Tacoma. Joining her are Claudia Kauffman of Kent, Rosemary McAuliffe of Seattle, Joe McDermott of Seattle, Debbie Regala of Tacoma, Karen Fraser of Olympia, Karen Keiser of Kent, Brian Hatfield of Raymond and Derek Kilmer of Gig Harbor.
The bill starts with a statement of policy and then goes on for 61 pages in order to amend all of the various and scattered use of the undesired terms.
Posted by: Medic/Vet on January 6, 2010 04:34 PMRead this article - which is awesome - for context.
http://www.sfweekly.com/2009-12-16/news/the-worst-run-big-city-in-the-u-s
(Sorry I can't do snazzy links. You'll have to cut and paste. For some reason I've never been able to get them to work on this board.)
Posted by: johnny on January 6, 2010 04:36 PMAs I've commented before, all of the post 9-11 belt removal, shoe removal, ID checks and other Security Theater measures installed, with the exception of the security doors on the airplanes, are useless. While the majority of these useless changes were brought about under a Republican led administration, I don't blame Republican politicians for the bed wetting fear many have of terrorist attacks. Most pants soiling terrorized Americans will rest easier thinking there is some way to stop a motivated and educated suicide bomber by removing their shoes, putting thousands of names on a list, screening muzlims or maybe now examining your underpants.
The Bush initiated and Obama continued extra-constitutional process of holding people without due process and Habeas corpus is wrong. Beyond being inconvenient to people, it is likely to be frequently abused.
Like Bruce @19, I have been and continue to be a supporter of the ACLU.
Yon and Joan Rivers are recent examples of 'connecting the dots'. Oh, and you can't take "that" on board cause it was not in the right dimensioned clear bag.
No, they're not. They're examples of *not* connecting the dots.
Apologies Gary. That was sarcasm. There are very rarely dots connecting an event which has not happened.
Posted by: MikeBoyScout on January 6, 2010 05:10 PMThe Things He Carried, and The Logic of Suicide Terrorism.
Posted by: MikeBoyScout on January 6, 2010 05:31 PMIt's not bed-wetting fear. It's a misguided attempt to head off liberal jackasses from making political hay off 'the next' terrorist attack that you'll surely blame on Republicans.
And it's political correctness ... proudly brought to the rest of us by the same liberals who continue to poo-poo the real freaking threat.
It ain't Yon. It ain't Rivers. And it sure as hell ain't me or my family.
It's Islamic jihadis. And as long as people like you continue to coddle them for fear of - gasp - profiling male Muslims, we will continue to be under attack.
You know, maybe if you liberals considered Islamic jihadis as much of an enemy as you consider us conservatives, we all could get the upper hand on this menace.
I'm certainly not holding my breath.
Posted by: jimg on January 6, 2010 06:21 PMAsking him questions about how much money he makes? Clumsy, and rude, need to find better conversational questions to ask. But still comprehensible.
Handcuffing him because he refuses to answer how much money he makes? Tyranny. It's tyranny. And I have experienced it myself, officers handcuffing me, and when I ask what I'm under arrest for they tell me I'm not under arrest. What do I have to do to get the handcuffs taken off? "Just promise you'll do whatever I say." Yeah... that is the actual requirement they had.
Posted by: Cicero on January 6, 2010 08:53 PM"We are war. We are at war with al Qaeda"
Really? Then why are you sending the enemy prisoners to civilian courts?
Then last week my dad was asked to remove his hoody sweatshirt while going through airport security. My dad refused stating he had nothing underneath...trust me no one wants to see a 68 year old man's hairy chest, but he got to go through a lovely pat down instead. Sheesh!
Posted by: lookoutwife on January 7, 2010 04:55 PM"I'm directing that our intelligence community immediately begin assigning specific responsibility for investigating all leads on high-priority threats so that these leads are pursued and acted upon aggressively, not just most of the time but all of the time."
Soooo.... they weren't doing that already? Did anybody besides me think that the job of our intelligence community was always such?
What a C.F.
Posted by: Gary on January 8, 2010 07:32 AMYou're right..this isn't Israel. In Israel, they have EFFECTIVE security that does not involve making infants take off their booties, screening 80 year old men, or other nonsense. They have layered security, with trained professionals asking intrusive questions to profiled targets specificaly to test if they're telling the truth. Such is the price of REAL security. At airport security in Israel, I've been asked everything from who I work for, to naming my family members, to where I went on my honeymoon. A smart person just recognizes its standard security, its not personal, and answers the frickin questions without whining or complaining.
The problem of course is that your average TSA screener has far less training, and is far less likely to ask the correct questions to pull this off. Still...recognize that it is IMPOSSIBLE to have both security, and individual rights/privacy. Real security requires probing, personal questions, extensive profiling, and backscatter x-rays showing complete anatomy.
Posted by: Proteus on January 8, 2010 09:45 AM