Friday, July 2, 2010

Please Post Off Topic Comments Here

I have long allowed off topic comments. However, after many complaints from folks who would understandably like to stay on the subject, I am providing this post as a place to comment things that are way off topic with the current post.

I’ve added a link to this post on our sidebar so people will know to post off topic comments here.

You now have the option of subscribing to posts, so you’ll be able to keep up with the comments here if you so choose. So it’s not as if your comment is being exiled to the land of forgotten comments. We’ll be paying attention, and you can stay up to date with an RSS feed.

As much as we’d like to hear about your synchronized swimming club, I ask that all comments posted here remain TSA focused and adhere to TSA’s comment policy.

Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team

1,491 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   401 – 600 of 1491   Newer›   Newest»
HappyToHelp said...

@ George
When has TSA ignored the GAO? Do you not read the statements at the bottom of those reports? Each item brought up by the GAO is responded to by TSA, and is followed up. The GAO also follows up to make sure progress is moving forward. This is how government works. GAO finds something, TSA corrects it. The GAO reports back to Congress. It is a never ending cycle until there are no more problems (there is always going to be problems).

Tim
TSA Blog Team

HappyToHelp said...

Anonymous said…
“Tim said: "[saying] TSA is busy work is far from true, and is a failed illogical statement."
I see what you did there. Clever!
A failed illogical statement would would be a logical statement.
So you agree with the comment! :)”

Not what I ment, but your observation is classic. I was eating a quick dinner when I read this, and did some kind of weird laugh, burp, and hickup combination. My wife is now giving me crazy eye. :)

Thanks,

Tim
TSA Blog Team

Ayn R. Key said...

West wrote:
The enhanced pat down, is not an assault of any kind. It is simply a method used to clear an individual for threat items. ... The enhanced pat down is simply the method used to clear those folks that opt out. It is not punitive, or used to coerce (unlike many have said here), it is simply used to prevent folks from carrying threat items on their person.

I know that you are required to say that. And if I ask you if you are required to say that, you are required to answer that you are not. So I won't bother with that question.

But I do wonder if you feel any pangs of conscience when you repeat the company line.

GSOLTSO said...

Ayn sez - "I know that you are required to say that. And if I ask you if you are required to say that, you are required to answer that you are not. So I won't bother with that question.

But I do wonder if you feel any pangs of conscience when you repeat the company line."

Ayn, I post my views, my opinions and (in many cases) simple facts about the TSA. I almost always (I am sure I have missed a few comments) preface my opinions with a phrase that indicates it is opinion (such as I think, I believe, or IMHO, etc). I do not repeat the company line unless I agree with it, or understand that there is some merit in the process they are posting on. I can simply refrain from commenting on subjects that I am uneducated on, or disagree with. I feel the same thing that I do when I post anywhere - that I am giving my opinion, or presenting facts that I have unearthed somewhere. I agree with you sometimes on subjects (not often, but it happens), but wew just don't see eye to eye on many of the major subjects that involve TSA.

West
TSA Blog Team

GSOLTSO said...

Anon sez - "That is why West's signature over at Flyertalk is so amusing.

"Fear profits a man nothing."

Now there is a man with a wicked sense of humor!"

I do have a rather broad sense of humor, and it can be rather wicked at times (I did grow up watching Monty Python, come on really?)(This parrot has ceased to be!). I just really love that line and try my best to keep it in mind while living my life. If you are ever in town, let me know and I have some pretty good jokes and stories that could have you rolling!

P.S. Tim said he has checked and his FSD has no tubes or nectar feeding assemblies connected to him. I am happy to report, that neither does my FSD.

West
TSA Blog Team

GSOLTSO said...

H2H sez - "My wife is now giving me crazy eye"

Are we sure that is because of the laugh, burp hickup thing? or is that a regular occurrence?

West
TSA Blog Team

Anonymous said...

I asked why sniffer dogs are not being used to detect explosive substances, instead of attempting to find explosives with the naked scanners.
Thanks for your reply Tim. I have asked many questions on here before and never had a reply. It makes a welcome change.
You state that we can read all about explosive detection canine teams on the TSA site. I have looked but can't find anything on this subject.

Anonymous said...

"I can simply refrain from commenting on subjects that I am uneducated on, or disagree with."

Given the enormous number of topics on which you've shown you are completely uneducated on, perhaps you should refrain from posting more frequently. (HOW many countries force every air passenger to remove their shoes again, West...?)

HappyToHelp said...

@ RB
No. Nigren does not come to mind. Nowhere has Nigren claimed AIT pictures are revealing or that he considers them inappropriate.

Bob has stated why the images with the exact resolution will not be posted. Avox commented on it in the ATR blog post. However, the current pictures are not altered. To the naked eye they look the same. Until one of you posted the resolution of the posted pictures, I thought they were the same. The public images are pretty close to the real deal and an informed decision can be made IMHO. Don’t believe me. You can see news footage from various sources that show the images of both AIT machines.

You want me to prove that AIT is child porn? Don’t be overly dramatic. Let parents make their own decision whether they want their children using AIT or not.

Tim
TSA Blog Team

HappyToHelp said...

@ Anonymous September 22, 2010 3:17 PM
I think you are unfamiliar with the blog posters positions that I am responding to. How should I respond to them when they want to disband TSA and through everyone one of us in jail? Some advocate violence. Why? They think TSA is the anti-constitution. While I respect their thoughts and opinions on security, their hyperbole does nothing to move the discussion further, and I am going to call them out on it.

You seam grounded though. Is there anything you want to discuss, or any ideas for future blog posts?

Tim
TSA Blog Team

HappyToHelp said...

@ GSOLTSO
I knew you were a government plant. I am deleting my hard drive as we s…. p….e…a..k
CONNECTION LOST

LOL. Okay I am back. Big brother did not get me.

Tim
TSA Blog Team

P.S. Broadcasting live from an underground bunker

HappyToHelp said...

@ Anonymous September 23, 2010 4:06 PM
TSA's National Explosives Detection Canine Team

Tim
TSA Blog Team

HappyToHelp said...

@ Anonymous September 23, 2010 4:06 PM
If you don’t want to have West post here or not so often, you are in the wrong place. West does a very good job at answering questions, and discussing passenger, and non-passenger concerns. I wish he would post more often. I enjoy reading it.

Tim
TSA Blog Team

Anonymous said...

"Bob has stated why the images with the exact resolution will not be posted."

No, actually, he hasn't. Bob/Curtis has consistently refused to say why he hasn't posted accurate images, and, indeed, needed to be questioned for months before he admitted he's been posting inaccurate images as a matter of policy.

Anonymous said...

"You want me to prove that AIT is child porn?"

No.

Not me. Not anyone else. Nobody has asked for that.

Tim, who asked you to do that?

Please, I know you have a lot of things to do, but please tell us, who asked you to prove that AIT was child porn?

I know you are busy, but please don't brush this question off and just tell us to look back through the list. I do, I really do look back and try to understand why you make some of the statements you do before I ask a question like this.

Who asked you to prove AIT was child porn?

RB said...

You want me to prove that AIT is child porn? Don’t be overly dramatic. Let parents make their own decision whether they want their children using AIT or not.

Tim
TSA Blog Team

September 23, 2010 5:40 PM
...................

Tell me how a parent can may this decision when TSA refuses to provide the information needed to make an informed decision.

The real images from Strip Search Machines have not been posted so no one really knows what they reveal.

Negrin certainly gives substance to the argument that the images are very graphic.

GSOLTSO said...

RB sez - "Negrin certainly gives substance to the argument that the images are very graphic."


Actually Negrin gives substance to the argument that anger control is lacking in some situations. What generated the situation (not to defend him, simply to gie some levity) was allegedly being abused about the size of his genitalia on a repeated basis. What Negrin has stated was that he lost control of his anger after this situation.

A case can be made that decisions by management could have been better, or that Negrin could have pursued things further up his chain of command to remedy the situation better to his satisfaction.

Based on the information I have here at the blog, and commentary by Bob and others here, the images that several folks have posted links to are not the images that are seen by the AIT operators. There are some links (the ones to the news crews filming) that gives you an idea of what the images look like, and what they actually see. The stock imagery is pretty close to what they see (again based on my info from here and other sources).

From a personal perspective, posting the exact images as they are seen (along with any protocols that go with the screening process) could help someone with nefarious intent figure out how to circumvent the system, or try to figure out weaknesses.

West
TSA Blog Team

Anonymous said...

First we have Dubai and other Middle East countries refusing to implement naked scanners, now after a six month trial, Italy have DROPPED their naked scanner programme. The Italian Aviation Authority described the trial as disappointing and the scanners as slow and ineffective.
The slide and the baclkash has begun.

HappyToHelp said...

@ RB
Well first off we have signs at the airport. They provide information and a sample image. You can view our signs on our AIT webpage. Second, Bob blogs about AIT pretty frequently. It is a hot topic, and this is a very popular blog. TSA also reaches out to news organizations, and travel blogs. Do you remember seeing AIT on the Today show? TSA works hard to get the word out, of course it can work harder (crack the wip).

Tim
TSA Blog Team

HappyToHelp said...

@ Anonymous September 23, 2010 8:42 PM
Bob has. This information has been available since February 3, 2010 1:22 PM.

Bob said…
“I have requested the resolution and size and was told it was proprietary information that I could not release.”

Tim
TSA Blog Team

RB said...

Going through security at LAS today the xay operator was griping out load about peoples carry-on items yet not calling for any bag checks.

This behavior is totally unprofessional and really illustrates TSA to a T.

Good job LAS TSA crew!

Ayn R. Key said...

I see Tim. So when you repeat the company line in spite of you knowing it is not true, you do not feel any pangs of conscience.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @ September 23, 2010 8:42

Bob stated sometime back, many moons and maybe a couple of seasons ago, that higher powers will not allow the type of images many people are asking for to be released.

I remember reading Bob's original explanation in a response in some thread. Back in the good old days when he did that type of thing. :)

I've seen it copypastad or referenced in at least one more post. Pretty recently. Sorry I don't have a link or search string to offer.

This issue comes up over and over. I always wonder why the team bloggers here don't have a link to Bob's original comment. Or why they don't just tell the people asking the question that it's not going to happen and the reason why.

RB said...

HappyToHelp said...
@ RB
Well first off we have signs at the airport. They provide information and a sample image. You can view our signs on our AIT webpage. Second, Bob blogs about AIT pretty frequently. It is a hot topic, and this is a very popular blog. TSA also reaches out to news organizations, and travel blogs. Do you remember seeing AIT on the Today show? TSA works hard to get the word out, of course it can work harder (crack the wip).

Tim
TSA Blog Team

September 24, 2010 5:30 PM
.....
I am aware of the lies that TSA has provided to the media.

At no point has actual images been provided to the public so the public understands what they are being asked to accept.

That TSA Apologist Tim is wrong.

I cannot consent without full understanding of what I am giving consent to. Also I don't recall seeing any signage saying a TSA employee is going to grope my penis. Just where are those signs Tim?

Seems TSA should try being honest and truthful instead of using dishonesty at every turn.

I maintain that TSA and its employees have no honor or integrity and you are proving me correct Tim.

RB said...

GSOLTSO said...
RB sez - "Negrin certainly gives substance to the argument that the images are very graphic."


Actually Negrin gives substance to the argument that anger control is lacking in some situations. What generated the situation (not to defend him, simply to gie some levity) was allegedly being abused about the size of his genitalia on a repeated basis. What Negrin has stated was that he lost control of his anger after this situation.

A case can be made that decisions by management could have been better, or that Negrin could have pursued things further up his chain of command to remedy the situation better to his satisfaction.

Based on the information I have here at the blog, and commentary by Bob and others here, the images that several folks have posted links to are not the images that are seen by the AIT operators. There are some links (the ones to the news crews filming) that gives you an idea of what the images look like, and what they actually see. The stock imagery is pretty close to what they see (again based on my info from here and other sources).

From a personal perspective, posting the exact images as they are seen (along with any protocols that go with the screening process) could help someone with nefarious intent figure out how to circumvent the system, or try to figure out weaknesses.

West
TSA Blog Team

September 24, 2010 9:26 AM
..................

Just how did Negrins co-workers know to tease Negrin about the size of his penis if it wasn't for the excellent images from WBI?

Anonymous said...

rb said:
"Going through security at LAS today the xay operator was griping out load about peoples carry-on items yet not calling for any bag checks.

This behavior is totally unprofessional and really illustrates TSA to a T.

Good job LAS TSA crew!"
im sure that you would sing their praises if they did everything the way you wanted them to. you are always on here talking about the positives of tsa...

RB said...

Anonymous said...
rb said:
"Going through security at LAS today the xay operator was griping out load about peoples carry-on items yet not calling for any bag checks.

This behavior is totally unprofessional and really illustrates TSA to a T.

Good job LAS TSA crew!"
im sure that you would sing their praises if they did everything the way you wanted them to. you are always on here talking about the positives of tsa...

September 25, 2010 8:52 PM
...............
I would be happy to talk about the positives of TSA, problem being there are none!

I made a comment about a single TSA employee publicly ranting loudly about peoples bags without regard to how that ranting demonstrated a less than professional demeanor. What I spoke of was exactly what was happening. I also took time to mention that behavior to the checkpoint overseers.

I would suggest that TSA take stock of just why the public holds TSA and its employees in such low regard and do something about it.

That I would be happy to speak out about.

George said...

@RB: I would suggest that TSA take stock of just why the public holds TSA and its employees in such low regard and do something about it.

I am increasingly convinced that TSA management is fully aware of the regard in which the public holds the TSA and its employees. But for some unfathomable reason they've determined that being reviled, despised, and feared by the public is beneficial to National Security and/or their agency. Maybe they believe that if they harass and annoy innocent people enough to make many of them hate the TSA, the complaints will be a proxy metric proving conclusively that the "measures" make things even more difficult for terrorists.

Of course, that defies any logic. But much of what the TSA does defies any logic. We could assume that there actually is logic underlying the visible buffoonery, comprehensible only to the bosses at Headquarters who have access to the Tippy-Top-Secret "robust intelligence" to which Bob periodically alludes as justification for everything the TSA inflicts on us.

But that assumption is contrary to Occam's Razor (which the TSA surely would never allow us to bring aboard an airplane). That exquisite shaving instrument would suggest that what's behind the curtain is the very same inconsistent arbitrary arrogant ineptitude that's on display at checkpoints. Which, of course, is the main reason the public holds TSA and its employees in such low regard.

Ayn R. Key said...

Tim wrote:
You want me to prove that AIT is child porn? Don’t be overly dramatic. Let parents make their own decision whether they want their children using AIT or not.

So you're ok with parents calling the police on the TSOs and having the TSOs arrested?

West wrote:
Actually Negrin gives substance to the argument that anger control is lacking in some situations. What generated the situation (not to defend him, simply to gie some levity) was allegedly being abused about the size of his genitalia on a repeated basis. What Negrin has stated was that he lost control of his anger after this situation.

So while he does provide substance to the claim that some people have anger issues, he doesn't provide substance to the claim of what specifically he had anger issues over? You're just getting silly now and you know it. He had to be angry over SOMETHING for him to have his outburst. Yes, he was angry that people abused him about the size of his genitalia ... how did they know the size of his genitalia? If the images are not graphic then they didn't know and couldn't abuse him. If they knew and could abuse him then the images are graphic.

I find your reasoning as specious as when someone is convicted of conspiracy to commit a crime while acquitted of the crime itself. There is a chain of event. He had anger control problems BECAUSE he was being abused about the size of his package BECAUSE

Fill in the blank. I dare you to fill in the words after the second "because".

Anonymous said...

>>You seam grounded though.

Aw, thanks. You just haven't gotten to know me. My book on how the Lindbergh baby was kidnapped by Rasputin to marry Anastasia and lead the New World Order after being schooled by Judge Crater, Amelia Earhart, the crew of Flight 19, Glenn Miller, Oscar Acosta, Michael Rockefeller, Ayn Rand and Ben Stein under the guidance of our new insect overlords and funded by the gold of the Aztecs hidden at the White Sands Missile range is almost finished. I am still untangling the role of the Project for the New American Century in all of this. I'll send you an autographed copy when it (or I) am released.

And Tim, I have to admit that I have a certain abstract perverse affection for someone who can in one post admonish people, "Don’t be overly dramatic." And then in another post ask; "What more do you want? Blood?"

Zinnnngggggg…

You and West exchange jokes much?

I could not work in the bureaucracy you serve, or any bureaucracy for that matter, but at a safe distance I can admire your chutzpah.

Thanks again for reaching out. I hope you don't feel I've bitten the hand you extended. I'll respond to your other kind inquiry later.

Anonymous said...

RB:
"That I would be happy to speak out about."
YES we finally got rb to be happy! well at least to admit to being happy about something. im sure that you went through the security area with no unhappy thoughts and were looking for only positive things to find. im sure if the tsa person didnt say "have a nice day" in the proper fashion that that would be reported as well. lets try looking at the bright side once in awhile, of course i have your answer already, there isnt one.

Bubba said...

Hey, how about addressing that article published in May in the leading scientific journal Nature saying there is no scientific basis for the very pricey SPOT program??

Or did you think I would forget about it?

RB said...

Anonymous said...
RB:
"That I would be happy to speak out about."
YES we finally got rb to be happy! well at least to admit to being happy about something. im sure that you went through the security area with no unhappy thoughts and were looking for only positive things to find. im sure if the tsa person didnt say "have a nice day" in the proper fashion that that would be reported as well. lets try looking at the bright side once in awhile, of course i have your answer already, there isnt one.

September 27, 2010 5:58 PM
...............
I approach each TSA checkpoint with no preconceived thoughts on what will happen, I let TSA surprise me with their ability to screw up every time with what should be a none event.

What TSA should be asking is just why they can't teach these people how to do a very simple job well.

Oh Anon, you might want to get a keyboard with this ' symbol on it.

Anonymous said...

Why has the PIA not been updated to reflect the fact the Naked Body Scanning has moved from the "pilot" phase to the "mass deployment" phase?

Anonymous said...

So after reading all of the horror stories I decided to encourage the lone TSA agent out of Hartford Ct that showed true humanity to my very upset daughter to keep up the good work, even surrounded by utter chaos he gave an great example of how it should be. I am only sorry I did not take his name.

Anonymous said...

Am I allowed to record TSA interrogations? The next time I am asked to supply a phone number to my place of work, my cell phone recorder will be on, but I want to make sure I am not violating any law. Not interested in TSA policy, but the law.

Anonymous said...

Can item be presented to tsa at an airport for an initial evaluation
to see if the item can be carried
on? This is not for screening purposes..it is for determing if an item can be carried on.

Anonymous said...

If the naked scanners are safe because the radiation does not penetrate inside the body, then why are bones clearly visible in the scans? Rapiscan images clearly show this, and these scanners are currently being used in airports. This is not classified information, it is publicly and widely available information.
If the scans see bones then the radiation is travelling deep inside the body.
How can the scanners be safe?

Ponter said...

"Can item be presented to tsa at an airport for an initial evaluation to see if the item can be carried on? This is not for screening purposes..it is for determing if an item can be carried on."


Obviously not. If you could do that, terrorists could do it too. And soon they'd know what is permitted and prohibited, so they'd be able to circumvent that vital layer of protection.

Keep in mind that what some people who hate the TSA see as inconsistency and incompetence is actually a carefully-coordinated Security Strategy of Unpredictability. If you don't know what you're allowed to carry on, the terrorists won't either! If you always have the risk a TSO prohibiting even item that the TSA website says is permitted, that means the terrorists also have the risk of their bombs being stopped at the checkpoint. That keeps us very safe.

Unpredictability and randomness are one of the most powerful tools the TSA has to keep us very safe from the horror of 9/11. There hasn't been a successful attack on aviation since the TSA was formed, attesting to the effectiveness of the TSA's powerful Security Strategy.

So rather than being angry about what looks like inconsistency, be grateful to the TSO who is doing his or her job of injecting necessary randomness into the screening process. Prohibiting your innocent item means that the TSA is highly effective at keeping dangerous items off airplanes. Everything the TSA does is meant to protect you from terrorists. They have a reason for what they do, and keeping that reason secret is what makes it effective.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Am I allowed to record TSA interrogations? The next time I am asked to supply a phone number to my place of work, my cell phone recorder will be on, but I want to make sure I am not violating any law. Not interested in TSA policy, but the law.

September 30, 2010 12:30 PM
----------------------------------

I answered this question regarding audio only recordings at checkpoints with an email reply i got from TSA but it has been censored on this blog. not sure why they would email me a reply but not allow it to be posted. i assume it is more TSA inconsistency to keep the terrorists on their toes.

Anonymous said...

Ponter said...

If you don't know what you're allowed to carry on, the terrorists won't either! If you always have the risk a TSO prohibiting even item that the TSA website says is permitted, that means the terrorists also have the risk of their bombs being stopped at the checkpoint. That keeps us very safe.

-------------------------------

I would think that the terrorists bombs would not be permitted into the sterile area in any form.
-------------------------------

There hasn't been a successful attack on aviation since the TSA was formed,
------------------------------

there also hasn't been a terrorist caught at a TSA dragnet since they were formed. Which attests to fact that terrorism is such a rare occurrence.

I hope the latest non-specific, overly broad, global terrorist warning doesn't have you barricaded in your house waiting for the sky to fall.

don't worry showing an image of your genitals to a complete stranger in an airport should save you from peril.

HappyToHelp said...

@ Ponter
Interesting post. While some things pertaining to the prohitted item list appear to be inconsistant or unprodectable, it really isn’t. When TSA refers to randomness and unprodicablity, they are talking about different procodures, methods, checkpoint technology, interactions with TSA partners, and selection process. Mostly, the selection process such as every fifth passenger, and so on. The best way to loose a permitted item is by failing your secondary screening. The most common one you hear about on this blog is people loosing LGA’s due to failing the liquid explosive test. This would be procedural, and not random. Same goes for suspicious behavior. A example of random screening would be the ETD testing of passengers hands that we blogged about a while ago. It would be hard to predict, and is done randomly on a radom basses, or selective bases. While the random screening program is robust and important, it does not apply to the prohibbited items list.

On a side note, I would say the most powerful tool TSA has is TSA’s Office of Intelligence. Just my two cents.

Tim
TSA Blog Team

Anonymous said...

It is interesting that the total number of posts on the TSA blog has reduced recently to just the odd one or two. People have just given up trying to get answers from the TSA. Many will simply also just give up flying as the TSA takes on more and more unaccountable and unconstitutional powers in its ever increasing thirst to strip everyone of their civil liberties and freedoms.

Anonymous said...

Am I allowed to record TSA interrogations? The next time I am asked to supply a phone number to my place of work, my cell phone recorder will be on, but I want to make sure I am not violating any law. Not interested in TSA policy, but the law.
___________________________________

This post does not make sense to me. When you are asked for you number to your place of work?

Random Tso said...

TSA will never satisfy the flying public is what the consensus is. No matter what is done, people will find a reason to complain. Prime example: Arrive at a security checkpoint, there's a TSO VERBALLY giving instructions on how to proceed through the checkpoint. Officer says a million times "please empty your pockets of EVERYTHING." The passenger gets scanned and the person viewing the image sees an unidentified anamoly in the passenger's pocket. TSO asks passenger to remove that item, then the passenger gets upset. Did you not just hear the officer repeat the same line 5 times?

As with EVERY agency you will get the bad seeds that's why blogs/forums like this ARE in important.

The famous line from every passenger is "Do I look like a terrorist?" Truth is a terrorist could be anyone.

TSA is NOT there to inconvenience anyone, TSO's want to get the passengers through the checkpoint as quick as possible as well, but security is always top priority.

Before your travels, I suggest that you read tsa guidelines before arriving at the airport. Also arrive with plenty of time before your flight and just listen to the instuctions the officers are giving. It would make your traveling experience a lot easier and less fustrating.


I DO NOT speak on behalf of the agency, just personal observation and opinion.

Random Female Tso said...

Anonymous said...
If the naked scanners are safe because the radiation does not penetrate inside the body, then why are bones clearly visible in the scans? Rapiscan images clearly show this, and these scanners are currently being used in airports. This is not classified information, it is publicly and widely available information.
If the scans see bones then the radiation is travelling deep inside the body.
How can the scanners be safe?

October 2, 2010 10:20 AM
-----------------------------------
Those machines use a technology called millimeter waves. It is pretty much equivalent to sitting in front of a television.

I have NEVER seen a person's bones as an image operator on the AIT machine. (whole body imager)

The images aren't as graphic as people think they are. I highly doubt any of those images would get your mojo flowing.

The only machine that does show bones is the castscope. This is used for people with a cast or prosthetic limb only. You can read more about it at the following link.

http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/castscope.shtm

Good day all.

-Random Tso

Bubba said...

Since I suspect I´ll be censored again, I´ll copy the post I sent for the front page item:

Bob,

Again, my post was not loaded. I´m getting mad. It is as on topic as post number 3.

I want to know why you think curling irons are more important to mention than that article published in May in the top scientific journal Nature saying that there is no science behind the SPOT program.

Anonymous said...

Random Female Tso said...
'ONLY castscope machines show bones inside the body'. This is NOT true. I know that millimetre wave scanners do not show bones, but x-ray backscatter DO show bones - they travel well inside the body. BOTH millimetre wave and x-ray backscatter are used in airports. I am sorry Random Female Tso, but your statement is simply wrong.

Justan said...

I accidentally tossed my passport in the microwave when warming up a towel for my three year old. Now there is a big rectangular burn mark on the back of it (the rest of it is fine). Will this cause problems on my next overseas trip? Do I need to have it replaced?
Thank you!

RB said...

Random Female Tso said...
Anonymous said...
If the naked scanners are safe because the radiation does not penetrate inside the body, then why are bones clearly visible in the scans? Rapiscan images clearly show this, and these scanners are currently being used in airports. This is not classified information, it is publicly and widely available information.
If the scans see bones then the radiation is travelling deep inside the body.
How can the scanners be safe?

October 2, 2010 10:20 AM
-----------------------------------
Those machines use a technology called millimeter waves. It is pretty much equivalent to sitting in front of a television.

I have NEVER seen a person's bones as an image operator on the AIT machine. (whole body imager)

The images aren't as graphic as people think they are. I highly doubt any of those images would get your mojo flowing.

The only machine that does show bones is the castscope. This is used for people with a cast or prosthetic limb only. You can read more about it at the following link.

http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/castscope.shtm

Good day all.

-Random Tso

October 6, 2010 9:00 PM

................
You have never heard of BACKSCATTER WBIers?

That is the machine of choice for TSA and they do emit dangerous xrays.

If the images are not graphic then why is TSA hiding the images from the public?

Bubba said...

Thanks, Bob, for confirming you are censoring us.

Anonymous said...

"TSA is NOT there to inconvenience anyone, TSO's want to get the passengers through the checkpoint as quick as possible as well, but security is always top priority."

If this were true, TSA would dispense with the shoe carnival and war on some liquids carried by some people, since neither has anything to do with security.

"The images aren't as graphic as people think they are. I highly doubt any of those images would get your mojo flowing."

Then why does TSA refuse to post an accurate sample image that's the same size and resolution as that seen by the operator of the strip-search technology?

George said...

@Tim: The best way to loose a permitted item is by failing your secondary screening. The most common one you hear about on this blog is people loosing LGA's due to failing the liquid explosive test.

As usual, happily helpful response raises more questions than it answers. First, why should anyone have to loose [sic] a "permitted item"? It's either permitted or it isn't, and if one has to lose it it's obviously not permitted. Either way, it seems that whether an item is "permitted" is entirely at the whim and caprice of individual TSOs. I guess there must be some logic here that's comprehensible to the folks at Headquarters who are far wiser than I am.

And what is this "liquid explosive test"? Does it regularly generate false positives that cause passengers to loose [sic] liquids that aren't actually explosive?

On a side note, I would say the most powerful tool TSA has is TSA’s Office of Intelligence.

Do you really mean that an oxymoron is your most powerful tool, more powerful than maddening inconsistency or groped genitals? If that's the case, we're all doomed!

George said...

@Random Tso: TSA will never satisfy the flying public is what the consensus is. No matter what is done, people will find a reason to complain.

Actually, I think there is a lot the TSA could do to "satisfy the flying public." Some transparency and accountability would definitely help, particularly standards of knowledge and conduct to which TSOs are publicly held accountable. If we had reason to believe that what you were doing was necessary and effective (other than "that's classified, trust us") you'd probably get a lot more respect and cooperation that would improve whatever modicum of security mass airport screening can provide.

Apparently your bosses aren't interested in any of that. I have to conclude that they believe security is enhanced when the public hates and distrusts them. The only other explanation is that the entire TSA hierarchy from Headquarters on down is so incompetent that they don't know the difference. Both theories are equally plausible. Neither is acceptable given all the tax dollars the TSA is costing us.

TSA is NOT there to inconvenience anyone, TSO's want to get the passengers through the checkpoint as quick as possible as well, but security is always top priority.

The TSA is there to cover the government's posterior by reacting to past terrorist acts or attempts. Inconvenience is an important part of that reaction, since it shows that the TSA can provide security theater sufficient to convince many of us that you're doing something.

Before your travels, I suggest that you read tsa guidelines before arriving at the airport.....

And even if you read and obey the guidelines, you can never know whether the TSO who process you has read them, or how he or she chooses to interpret them. That inconsistency creates frustration that can't be avoided and probably does nothing to improve security. It seems the TSA can't do any better than that.

TSORon said...

George said…
I am increasingly convinced that TSA management is fully aware of the regard in which the public holds the TSA and its employees. But for some unfathomable reason they've determined that being reviled, despised, and feared by the public is beneficial to National Security and/or their agency.
--------------------
Your perception of how the public views the TSA is just that George, a perception. Yours. TSA has more than enough surveys and other instruments that tell us how the public perceives our organization which totally contradict your belief’s. The information has been posted before, but much like the issue about bottles of water the folks posting here refuse to believe the data and the experts. So, you are correct in that the TSA management is fully aware of how the public perceives our organization, its just not something you are going to choose to believe.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Random Female Tso said...
Those machines use a technology called millimeter waves. It is pretty much equivalent to sitting in front of a television.

I have NEVER seen a person's bones as an image operator on the AIT machine. (whole body imager)

The images aren't as graphic as people think they are. I highly doubt any of those images would get your mojo flowing.

The only machine that does show bones is the castscope. This is used for people with a cast or prosthetic limb only. You can read more about it at the following link.

http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/castscope.shtm

Good day all.

-Random Tso

October 6, 2010 9:00 PM
--------------------------------

Yeah but the BXR images do show bones. Here is the link from the TSA website where bones are clearly visible:

http://www.tsa.gov/graphics/images/approach/backscatter_large.jpg

Here is a more accurate link to what the Rapiscan images look like. Again bones clearly visible along with everything else :

http://www.biyokulule.com/sawiro/sawirada_waaweyn/Airport%20scan3.jpg

http://epic.org/privacy/body_scanners/Body_Scan_Pic.jpg

Anonymous said...

Random Female Tso said...
The images aren't as graphic as people think they are. I highly doubt any of those images would get your mojo flowing.
*******************************

Do you think the LAX TSO child pornographer from Feb of this year would not get his "mojo" flowing looking at images of children?

http://www.examiner.com/la-county-libertarian-in-los-angeles/tsa-airport-screener-arrested-for-child-porn-also-worked-at-catholic-school-questions-remain

LTSO with Answers said...

Justan said...

I accidentally tossed my passport in the microwave when warming up a towel for my three year old. Now there is a big rectangular burn mark on the back of it (the rest of it is fine). Will this cause problems on my next overseas trip? Do I need to have it replaced?
Thank you!


Justan, to me the burn mark sounds like it should not cause issue when you use your passport as identity. If the burn does not ruin any information and it is the cover that was damaged it sounds good to go (for me in TSA). For CBP I can not speak for them.

Random Tso Lady said...

RB said...
You have never heard of BACKSCATTER WBIers?

That is the machine of choice for TSA and they do emit dangerous xrays.

If the images are not graphic then why is TSA hiding the images from the public?

October 7, 2010 10:44 AM
---------------------------

Of course I've heard of them, after all I do work for TSA (the name is an obvious give away).

My airport does not use backscatter imaging but from my training and training material, again I've never seen bones. (or maybe I just need glasses, hmm)

These machines have been tested before being placed in the airports, they do not emit dangerous levels of radiation. You are exposed to more radiation during a flight than from one of these machines. (not an excuse, just putting it out there). Do you really think the DHS would want that kind of lawsuit?

As far as TSA keeping the images secretive, they have posted the exact images that we see.

A link as to how the images look is posted in the following blog:

http://blog.tsa.gov/2008/05/which-is-it-millimeter-wave-or.html

Since the machine I directly deal with is the one that uses millimeter waves I can only factually speak on that image. That is exactly how the image appears on the monitors to the officer.


If you still aren't comfortable proceeding with the scan. You can alway opt out for a pat down instead.

-Random Tso/Random Tso Lady

Anonymous said...

When is Pistole going to answer some of those questions he talked about.

Here's one. How long does it take to teach a TSA employee to recognize TSA approved ID's?

retrosurfer1959 said...

I have a question about jewelry I was recently told in Phoenix that a necklace shaped like a bullet with a silver skull on the side was prohibited. WHen I complained and asked to know why I was told that it looked like a real bullet and as such could scare people and it was prohibited. When asked to see this policy in writing I was told the TSA regs are not shared because of security concerns and I just had to accept their interpretations.

I personally can't believe this and think it was caused by them getting angry after I laughed when they asked me if I could remove my artificial legs before the security detector.

Anonymous said...

retrosurfer1959:
I personally can't believe this and think it was caused by them getting angry after I laughed when they asked me if I could remove my artificial legs before the security detector.

why do you think that? perhaps the tsa person was doing their job. did they offer you any options for you to keep your item such as mail it to yourself?
ammunition is not allowed in carryons. check on tsa.gov and you see it in the prohibited items list. relistic replicas of guns are not allowed either.

Anonymous said...

Could someone from the TSA please explain why TSO's don't seem to know what they are talking about? How can we have any confidence in an organisation that does not know what it is talking about?
Random Female TSO says that x-ray backscatter machines do not show bones in the body. We all know this in UNTRUE. Bones near the skin surface are clearly visible. This must pose a risk to health.

Bubba said...

Bob,

Censoring my post exposing your censorship on this blog is the most disgusting form of censorship possible. Keep it up and soon you'll be fit to move to North Korea.

TSM/West said...

Retrosurfer1959 Said
I have a question about jewelry I was recently told in Phoenix that a necklace shaped like a bullet with a silver skull on the side was prohibited. WHen I complained and asked to know why I was told that it looked like a real bullet and as such could scare people and it was prohibited. When asked to see this policy in writing I was told the TSA regs are not shared because of security concerns and I just had to accept their interpretations.

I personally can't believe this and think it was caused by them getting angry after I laughed when they asked me if I could remove my artificial legs before the security detector.

October 8, 2010 7:14 PM
-----------------------------------
It is true. Any realistic replica of weapons or ammunition are prohibited in the sterile area of the airport. You can not carry them on an airplane

Anonymous said...

"The information has been posted before, but much like the issue about bottles of water the folks posting here refuse to believe the data and the experts."

That's true, Ron; you do refuse to believe the abundant data and expert opinion that demonstrates water and shoes pose no threat to aircraft. Why is that, Ron?

Anonymous said...

Let's just get the facts straight here:
X-ray backscatter body scanners DO penetrate INSIDE the body to show bones.
They are DANGEROUS because they penetrate inside the body.
The evidence on how dangerous is contradictory and open to debate: some say it is completely safe, some say it may not be. Why is the TSA gambling with people's health?
If body scanners must be used ( though people should always have the right to opt for the full body pat-down ),then only millimetre wave scanners should be used, preferably coupled with ATR as they now do EFFECTIVELY in the Netherlands.

Ayn R. Key said...

TSM/West wrote...
It is true. Any realistic replica of weapons or ammunition are prohibited in the sterile area of the airport. You can not carry them on an airplane

Not only is that true, unrealistic replicas are also forbidden, such as foam rubber swords from Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean ride. You can't be to careful.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous TSM/West said...
It is true. Any realistic replica of weapons or ammunition are prohibited in the sterile area of the airport. You can not carry them on an airplane

October 10, 2010 8:13 PM
---------------------------------

Yeah even if it is a child's toy bow and arrow it is prohibited. Apparently the TSA are the also "fun police" and not just a waste of tax dollars.

http://www.gadling.com/2009/12/25/tsa-snags-childs-christmas-present-think-like-tsa-when-packing/

Bubba said...

So Bob, why did you censor my other posts and allow the North Korean one? Could it be because some of them included a reference to that Nature article back in May saying there is no science behind the SPOT program that you have been systematically ignoring since then?

Anonymous said...

TSM/West said...
Retrosurfer1959 Said
I have a question about jewelry I was recently told in Phoenix that a necklace shaped like a bullet with a silver skull on the side was prohibited.
October 8, 2010 7:14 PM
-----------------------------------
It is true. Any realistic replica of weapons or ammunition are prohibited in the sterile area of the airport. You can not carry them on an airplane

October 10, 2010 8:13 PM
------------------------------
Realistic replica's like the Disney "Pirates of the Caribbean" toy plastic sword that TSA confiscated at Orlando?

TSA doesn't understand the words "realistic replica" or the little plastic GI Joe doll gun would not have been confiscated either.

Just another TSA Fail in a very long line of failures.

Anonymous said...

"As far as TSA keeping the images secretive, they have posted the exact images that we see."

This is absolutely untrue. Curtis "Bob" Burns has admitted that the images posted on this blog are not the same size or resolution as those seen by the operators of TSA's strip-search technology. Please tell the truth in the future.

Anonymous said...

"why do you think that? perhaps the tsa person was doing their job. did they offer you any options for you to keep your item such as mail it to yourself?
ammunition is not allowed in carryons. check on tsa.gov and you see it in the prohibited items list. relistic replicas of guns are not allowed either."

Has there ever been a any kind of incident involving a replica of a bullet? Even a live round, sans a gun, is hardly a threat. A knitting needle is more of a threat.

retrosurfer1959 said...

It's truly sad when we consider jewelry and kids toys as threats and trained professionals cannot tell the difference between real hazards and jewlery. The concept of anything for the false sense of security is in conflict with so much of what we stand for as
Americans.

I'm sure the TSA has some dedicated, caring and professional individuals it's too bad they become almost invisible behind the arrogant the unknowing and uncaring.

---
As to many of the comments on TSA and treaatment of amputee's

The American Coalition of Amputee's recently surveyed almost 7500 amputees and 75% said they were dissatisfied and had been treated with disrespect by the TSA. 75% is truly horrendous I doubt if 75% of that many people could agree on what day it was, but they sure recognized this treatment. I can sure understand the high % though after 20+ years as a amputee the TSA is the only group that discriminates against me on a regular basis.

TSORon said...

Anonymous said …
But not if it's poured into many <3.4 ounce containers, then poured into a big container once you're past security, I guess. Right?
--------------
I have seen 3 people make comments similar to this in this thread, so I’ll take a moment to show them the obvious error they are making.

So, you combine your multiple liquids into one big container. Just how many people are going to see you do this? How many are going to run to the nearest airline employee, airport police officer, or TSA employee and tell them about your activities? OK, so you do this on an aircraft instead, right? Your row-mate is going to allow this? How about the FA’s? You think you can do something like that without being noticed?

The explosive is only one part of a bomb. One part does not make a bomb, it makes a part. You need at least 2 components to make an effective bomb, and 3 to 4 parts to make one that you are less likely to get caught fabricating on an aircraft. You are in an enclosed, crowded environment, trying to fabricate an explosive device, and you think no one is going to notice and say or do something about it?

Let’s put this inane comment back into the “stupid” cupboard folks and leave it there. Every time someone brings it out and writes it here they just look like someone who can’t form a complete concept on their own.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous TSM/West said...

It is true. Any realistic replica of weapons or ammunition are prohibited in the sterile area of the airport. You can not carry them on an airplane

October 10, 2010 8:13 PM
----------------------------------

If screening proves it to be a non-working replica and not real ammunition which means that it poses no danger to air travel.

Especially in the case or the "bullet" jewelery then why would it not be allowed?

RB said...

Bob, why has the level of censorship gone up here on PV?

I know for a fact that several items submitted have not been posted while complying with the illegal posting requirements.

Remember, this TSA Blog is funded with taxpayer monies and government cannot censor speech.

Anonymous said...

If SSSS is on your boarding pass are you allowed to opt-out?

from FT:

While I've managed to avoid the body scanners so far, my luck ran out this morning at BOS, when I got an "SSSS" BP, apparently for buying a one-way ticket.

When I reached the machine, I politely told the TSO I would opt for the pat-down instead. He yelled over to another TSO and they concluded that there is no "opt-out" allowed with an "SSSS" BP. (Perhaps I should have argued further, but I went through the scanner.) Along with the scanner came the full "enhanced" pat-down, complete with crotch check:

Anonymous said...

I read on this blog that netbooks do not have to be removed from bags for screening. So I didn´t. I got screamed at by an officer at SFO, who got even more annoyed after I told him I read that I did not have to remove it on this blog. Can´t you get your act together? Do I or do I not have to remove a netbook from a bag that otherwise contained only one pullover?

Anonymous said...

"So, you combine your multiple liquids into one big container. Just how many people are going to see you do this?"

None at all, if it's done in a bathroom stall or an airplane bathroom. But you already knew that!

Random Female Tso said...

Too many responses for me to respond to individually so I'll attempt to summarize. I DID NOT say that the backscatter images does not show bones. I stated that I have never seen a person's bones on a tsa xray image besides the castscope. Let's not quote incorrectly.

Again TSA HAS posted accurate images on the website. I even posted that link in my previous response.

...and I stick to my previous saying which is "I highly doubt any of those images would get your mojo flowing."

People can say TSA is nothing but security theater but opinions are just that opinions. Snatch security from the airport and greyhound stock would peak for sure.

For every 1 person that has a problem with TSA, I get 3 more that says "thank you for your service"

There's loads of people that travel regularly and NEVER experience issues. Then you have those that always have issues, which are normally the ones that think rules don't apply to them.
(how dare there be rules!)

If you're a seasoned traveler you should be familiar EXISTING airport rules. There will be times when something happens and a "reaction" response is ushered out. That's what happens with security. e.g. A murder happens in a neighborhood, so the police chief puts more officers on patrol in that neighborhood.

We have those individuals that come to the airport WAITING for the TSA and TSOs to mess up. We also have those who are rude because of a previous experience with a different tso, and feel because the uniform is the same so is the person. The saying "You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar" goes a long way.

If you have any issues while at the security checkpoint you can always ask to speak to a supervisor. The bottom line of it all is if you plan on taking a flight to where ever, you WILL be screened. There are no exceptions to that rule.

Anonymous said...

TSORon said...
So, you combine your multiple liquids into one big container. Just how many people are going to see you do this?


Zero, unless you think terrorists are too stupid to do it in private. Like, say, a bathroom stall.

How many are going to run to the nearest airline employee, airport police officer, or TSA employee and tell them about your activities?

Out of the zero people who saw it, how many will tell? Hmm... let me think.

Besides, it's not against the law or even the TSA rules to pour stuff from little bottles into bigger bottles. So, even IF someone saw, and told, there's nothing that could be done about it.

You are in an enclosed, crowded environment, trying to fabricate an explosive device, and you think no one is going to notice and say or do something about it?

A bathroom stall in an airport is "crowded"?

Let’s put this inane comment back into the “stupid” cupboard folks and leave it there. Every time someone brings it out and writes it here they just look like someone who can’t form a complete concept on their own.

And a 'security officer' who can't possibly imagine the bad guys hiding their activities is... well... you.

Insulting others because you don't have the necessary intelligence or imagination to see the possible flaws in the system is... well, lets just say 'counter-productive'. I'm sure you fit in well at the TSA.

Anonymous said...

"I have seen 3 people make comments similar to this in this thread, so I’ll take a moment to show them the obvious error they are making....

Blah, blah, blah, blah...."

by TSORon

Ever hear of a bathroom stall?

Anonymous said...

George said:
"That inconsistency creates frustration that can't be avoided and probably does nothing to improve security"
that inconsistency is there to stop from being predictable. There is always the option of checking the item that is not allowed. You may find that as an inconvienace but it is an option. Its just as likely to "probably improve security"

Anonymous said...

Anon said:
"When is Pistole going to answer some of those questions he talked about."
He has, perhaps its not the one you want, but he has started the process. Check out the previous topics.

Anonymous said...

Anon Said:
That's true, Ron; you do refuse to believe the abundant data and expert opinion that demonstrates water and shoes pose no threat to aircraft. Why is that, Ron?

Shoes need to go through the xray so that the tsa can see that nothing is concealed inside of them. Richard Reid showed that bombs could be concealed in shoes and that they can not be detected by the metal detector. So, tsa has chosen to have pax remove their shows so that they can see that this will not happen again. Even though other countries do not require it, it doesnt make it wrong.

Anonymous said...

Anon said:
Realistic replica's like the Disney "Pirates of the Caribbean" toy plastic sword that TSA confiscated at Orlando?

TSA doesn't understand the words "realistic replica" or the little plastic GI Joe doll gun would not have been confiscated either.

Just another TSA Fail in a very long line of failures.

I dont think that these items had to be confiscated as these items are permitted in your checked luggage. When such items come through the screening area the pax are given options on what they would like to do with them. i see it 100s of times a year as i travel. the pax can mail it to themselves or put it in checked luggage etc. so its the parents decision to turn it over...

Anonymous said...

Why are new comments and questions that people must be submitting not being posted by the TSA blog team? I think the TSA have given up even bothering to post new comments - after all they they never provide any answers anyway. Or perhaps the general public are so fed-up with not getting any answers to their legitimate questions and concerns that they have just given up?

Anonymous said...

" Even though other countries do not require it, it doesnt make it wrong."

The fact that no other country has a TSA-style shoe carnival -- and claims to the contrary by TSA notwithstanding, most overseas screeners couldn't care less if people getting on US-bound flights remove their shoes -- and that there has not been a single ill effect as a result, does in fact show that TSA is wrong. Specifically, TSA is continuing a years-long hysterical overreaction to a tactic that was tried once and failed and that no one, anywhere on the planet, has tried again in almost ten years.

Anonymous said...

Wow. My first read-thru of this section... I have a question, not for "Bob," but for the rest of you. Given these conditions: 1) It is unreasonable to expect 100% of TSA employees to never make an error at work (and by error, I mean even a rude look); 2) Terrorists DO exist and will use babies, old ladies, and fake Disney toys to cause mayhem; 3) No one MUST fly (there are other ways) and 4) Flying is not your God given right.
With those conditions, please tell us all what your solutions are. I fly a great deal for my company; I've been treated fairly, and treated rudely; I've been frisked, and I've been "whisked." I've had my luggage searched, lost, broken, and GONE.
I have yet, though, to BE KILLED WHILE FLYING BY A BOMB, so I am still smiling. Keep it in perspective, people. Screen me nude if necessary. Better yet, screen YOU nude, I don't feel safe otherwise.

Anonymous said...

Interesting that we are being asked to support an agency that does litmus testing of coffee that was purchased in the secure area of the airport. If they found something, who would really be the responsible party?! TSA, stop wasting my time; stop wasting my taxes!!

And in the headlines "summoned for concealed weapon, a tactical pen". Wow, I feel so much safer now that he does not have his tactical pen. Only need to be concerned with all those people with crochet needles now...

RB said...

Random Tso Lady said...
RB said...
You have never heard of BACKSCATTER WBIers?

That is the machine of choice for TSA and they do emit dangerous xrays.

If the images are not graphic then why is TSA hiding the images from the public?

October 7, 2010 10:44 AM
---------------------------

Of course I've heard of them, after all I do work for TSA (the name is an obvious give away).

My airport does not use backscatter imaging but from my training and training material, again I've never seen bones. (or maybe I just need glasses, hmm)

These machines have been tested before being placed in the airports, they do not emit dangerous levels of radiation. You are exposed to more radiation during a flight than from one of these machines. (not an excuse, just putting it out there). Do you really think the DHS would want that kind of lawsuit?

As far as TSA keeping the images secretive, they have posted the exact images that we see.

A link as to how the images look is posted in the following blog:

http://blog.tsa.gov/2008/05/which-is-it-millimeter-wave-or.html

Since the machine I directly deal with is the one that uses millimeter waves I can only factually speak on that image. That is exactly how the image appears on the monitors to the officer.


If you still aren't comfortable proceeding with the scan. You can alway opt out for a pat down instead.

-Random Tso/Random Tso Lady

October 8, 2010 12:05 PM

.................
So are the images TSA posted exactly what TSA screening clerks see? I think not, or if they are then Blogger Bob lied when he stated this:

"You guys are killing me (and others) with this. These pictures were provided to TSA by the vendor. I have never claimed they are the exact size and resolution that our officers see. I have provided video examples showing what our officers see. I have requested the resolution and size and was told it was proprietary information that I could not release. I'm still looking into being able to get that info for you, but I can't promise anything.

Thanks,

Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
February 3, 2010 1:22 PM"



So now I am confused. You say the images are how they appear on your monitors and TSA's Blogger Bob says they are not exactly how they appear. Are you questioning Blogger Bobs integrity and suggesting that he is not telling the truth?

Oh, and if we Opt Out then we are subjected to a very invasive pat down of our genitals. And you would do this to children?

TSA is not protecting America but is actively destroying America.

Anonymous said...

I am traveling for work without my baby and am still nursing. Can I take my pump as a carry on item since I have a layover and will need it in-between flights?

Gunner said...

Secondary Screenings

http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/michael-arato-tsa-supervisor-allegedly-stole-cash-passenger/story?id=11927122&page=1

So now we know the real reson behind secondary screenings, it gives the TSA agents (how many have been arrested for theft????) and opportunity to steal your money.

Anonymous said...

The TSA is in court on 1st November 2010 fighting a legal challenge by EPIC against the naked body scanner programme. It has now been FIFTEEN MONTHS since the last Whole Body Imaging Privacy Impact Assessment - way back in July 2009. This shows just how little the TSA really cares about privacy and body scanners and just how unprepared they are for a serious legal challenge to their unconstitutional behaviour.

Anonymous said...

TSA Supervisor Accused of Stealing From Travelers
Updated: Wednesday, 20 Oct 2010, 12:12 PM EDT
Published : Wednesday, 20 Oct 2010, 12:12 PM EDT

By Chad Bray

NEWSCORE - A security checkpoint supervisor at Newark Liberty International Airport was charged with stealing from travelers and accepting bribes from a co-worker who allegedly stole money from passengers during screenings, prosecutors said Tuesday.

Michael Arato, a supervisory transportation security officer with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) at Newark's Terminal B, allegedly looked the other way when a fellow co-worker stole money from passengers undergoing security screenings, receiving a kickback of a portion of the stolen money, prosecutors said. The co-worker is cooperating with the government's probe.

Arato, 41, allegedly accepted about $3,100 in bribes between Sept. 13 and Oct. 5, prosecutors said. He also allegedly stole money himself from passengers, pocketing about $400 to $700 a shift, prosecutors said.

In order to facilitate their scheme, Arato and the co-worker allegedly targeted predominately non-English speaking victims, prosecutors said.

Arato, of Ewing, N.J., is expected to appear in federal court in Newark on Wednesday.

Anonymous said...

Random Female Tso said...

There's loads of people that travel regularly and NEVER experience issues. Then you have those that always have issues, which are normally the ones that think rules don't apply to them.
(how dare there be rules!)
----------------------------------

Or the reason is because the rules are always being changed or ignored by TSOs. You guys brag about inconsistency being part of the layers of security. Then you blame passengers when that same inconsistency causes confusion. And you wonder why you are met with frustration???? So when there is a rule change on the fly that now causes an issue where it did not 5 days prior at a diff airport....how do you suppose the passenger should address it????

Anonymous said...

Great Idea to post off comments here it helps to improve concentration of the site.

MarkVII said...

Here's another TSA screener stealing from passengers.

http://www.dailyrecord.com/article/20101020/UPDATES01/310200015/Authorities++Airport+screener+stole+up+to++700+a+day+from+travelers

Indeed, who's watching the watchers?

Mark
qui custodiet ipsos custodes

Blogger Bob said...

RB –When we first posted the pictures, we were showing you what our officers see with the technology. The images we used were provided by the vendors. It’s what they gave us to use, not something we concocted in the bowels of headquarters to deceive passengers as you seem to believe. When people asked for full resolution pictures, I inquired about getting them, but as you know, I couldn’t. However, we’ve allowed reporters to videotape and photograph the monitors of what our officers see. We’ve posted these things on our blog and webpage. We are not trying to hide anything. I realize I’ve said all of this before, but since you continue to call me a liar here and elsewhere, I felt the need to say it again.

Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team

Blogger Bob said...

Yes, your breast pump is fine.

Thanks,

Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team

Anonymous said...

Bob said:

I inquired about getting them, but as you know, I couldn’t.

I assume you inquired from the manufacture. But why is that necessary? TSA owns the machines, TSA is the buyer. TSA is spending millions of taxpayer dollars on these machines and the manufactuer is making a profit. It is TSA's decision, not the manufactures.

If the TSA wanted full resolution images to be distributed, they would be.

RB said...

Blogger Bob said...
RB –When we first posted the pictures, we were showing you what our officers see with the technology. The images we used were provided by the vendors. It’s what they gave us to use, not something we concocted in the bowels of headquarters to deceive passengers as you seem to believe. When people asked for full resolution pictures, I inquired about getting them, but as you know, I couldn’t. However, we’ve allowed reporters to videotape and photograph the monitors of what our officers see. We’ve posted these things on our blog and webpage. We are not trying to hide anything. I realize I’ve said all of this before, but since you continue to call me a liar here and elsewhere, I felt the need to say it again.

Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team

October 21, 2010 8:59 AM

....
Bob, you first said the images posted here were exactly what the TSA employees viewed and later you said they were not.

I didn't make up your words and I think it is clear that you were not truthful.

Publish the real images and settle this issue once and for all.

Are the images safe for school children to view or are they not as claimed by you and TSA?

Are the images ok for the cover of Reader's Digest or are they not as claimed by you and TSA?

Just for clarity this is exactly what you said Bob:
....
"5.09.2008
You asked for it...You got it, Millimeter Wave images.

Here are the much requested, much anticipated, full body images of millimeter wave - both front and back, male and female just like so many of you asked for.

These were provided to TSA by the manufacturer of the technology, L-3. We asked L-3 to blur the facial features just like they are blurred when our officers see the images in Phoenix, Baltimore, LAX and JFK. These are exactly what officers see at airports today and will see in future deployments."
.....

and later you said this Bob:
....
"You guys are killing me (and others) with this. These pictures were provided to TSA by the vendor. I have never claimed they are the exact size and resolution that our officers see. I have provided video examples showing what our officers see."
....
In the first statement you say they are exactly what officers see and in the second statement you contradict yourself by saying this: I have never claimed they are the exact size and resolution.

How can the images be exactly what TSA employees see but not be exactly the size and resolution that TSA employees see?

If the images first posted were not exactly what TSA employees see then what conclusion can we draw from your statement that the images were exactly what TSA employees see Bob?

Your a member of Flyer Talk Bob and have every opportunity to either discredit my claim or even complain to the moderators.

For myself I will let your statements stand on there merits.

You made them, you own them.

Anonymous said...

"Yes, your breast pump is fine.

Thanks,

Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team"

Until some screener says it isn't.

Ayn R. Key said...

Anonymoust TSO wrote...
Wow. My first read-thru of this section... I have a question, not for "Bob," but for the rest of you. Given these conditions: 1) It is unreasonable to expect 100% of TSA employees to never make an error at work (and by error, I mean even a rude look); 2) Terrorists DO exist and will use babies, old ladies, and fake Disney toys to cause mayhem; 3) No one MUST fly (there are other ways) and 4) Flying is not your God given right.

Hello Curtis.

1. We don't expect error free, but we do want basic respect of the bill of rights.
2. Prove it.
3. Sure, we can always drive across the ocean.
4. Right of contract. We've gone over this many times. If you've read through this section, you've read about that.

With those conditions, please tell us all what your solutions are. I fly a great deal for my company; I've been treated fairly, and treated rudely; I've been frisked, and I've been "whisked." I've had my luggage searched, lost, broken, and GONE.
I have yet, though, to BE KILLED WHILE FLYING BY A BOMB, so I am still smiling.


I have a magic rock that keeps you safe from terrorist attacks while flying. I've flown many times holding my magic rock, and I've never been killed while flying by a bomb. I'll sell it to you.

eep it in perspective, people. Screen me nude if necessary. Better yet, screen YOU nude, I don't feel safe otherwise.

If you don't feel safe unless we're screened nude, perhaps you should be the one not flying.

Steve Scottsdale said...

I certainly hope, if you haven't already, post a comment on the ExpressJet pilot who refused a body scan & pat down & was detained & not permitted to board his flight. I'm willing to hear the TSA side but the idea of closely scrutinizing what a pilot carries onto the plane on his body (when he passes the standard screen) sounds pretty dumb to me. Instead, TSA ought to make sure the person is actually the pilot.

Blogger Bob said...

Ayn said: Hello Curtis.

--------------------------------

Are you trying to insinuate something? If so you are way off base.

Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team

Anonymous said...

Everything has pretty much been said here, so I won't repeat it. I will say one thing, though, to you folks who say we have the choice between being scanned or being groped: that really isn't a choice.

Imagine, for example, I was acting as security for a big event that you wanted to attend. My latest intelligence has told me that most dangerous/terrorist acts are committed by people with the use of both hands and feet, and rarely, if ever committed by people recently missing a limb. So, I come to the conclusion that all participants attending this function must have a hand or foot disabled, out of an abundance of caution. The most effective limb to disable would be the hand, so I put up a machine that removes hands. Naturally, the people in attendance are a little upset that in order to attend they must have a hand removed, so (after looking over my intelligence again) I come up with an alternate option - shoot them in the foot.

Now, of the folks who suggest that if we don't like being scanned - we can always be felt up, which would you chose if you wanted to fly today: hand chopped off, or foot shot? Or would you think that either choice is ridiculous and juvenile, not to mention far more than we should expect to endure simply to reach our destination?

Ayn R. Key said...

Ok, this time it wasn't you. But you have posted anonymously before.

Christine Negroni said...

Pity the poor TSA agent
http://christinenegroni.blogspot.com/2010/10/pilot-refuses-scan-yada-yada-yada.html

RB said...

Blogger Bob said...
RB –When we first posted the pictures, we were showing you what our officers see with the technology. The images we used were provided by the vendors. It’s what they gave us to use, not something we concocted in the bowels of headquarters to deceive passengers as you seem to believe. When people asked for full resolution pictures, I inquired about getting them, but as you know, I couldn’t. However, we’ve allowed reporters to videotape and photograph the monitors of what our officers see. We’ve posted these things on our blog and webpage. We are not trying to hide anything. I realize I’ve said all of this before, but since you continue to call me a liar here and elsewhere, I felt the need to say it again.

Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team

October 21, 2010 8:59 AM

.................
Bob, when will you reconcile your differing statements?

Seems to me that you are in violation of TSA's Core values.

You should resign immediately.

Anonymous said...

Hello Curtis.

1. We don't expect error free, but we do want basic respect of the bill of rights.
2. Prove it.
3. Sure, we can always drive across the ocean.
4. Right of contract.


What? Who's Curtis?

1. I agree, people should be treated with basic respect. Again, it is unreasonable to expect that 100% of people in any occupation (even the TSA) would work at all times without error (including errors of respect). If you want 100% respect - you will be disappointed, at the airport and in life.

2. Prove it? Since the "proof" would likely result in dead people, I'm ok with operating on supposition on this one. You prefer the alternative?

3. Nope, not drive. Stay home. You don't have to fly. Or, you can learn to tolerate some less-than-perfect moments in your day.

4. "Right of Contract" ? You mean the contract that comes with buying the (completely optional) plane ticket?

Anyway - I asked a reasonable question. I wanted your legitimate and practical ideas for alternatives. You responded with sarcasm and exactly zero real solutions.

You haven't given me much respect - why do you expect some from other people?

A magic rock? That implies that the TSA has done nothing, and bombs are rare because bombmakers are lazy or don't exist. Is that your position?

Anonymous said...

Bob, you WERE trying to be deceptive by allowing people to believe that the 4.5" tall images were exactly what the officers see. Otherwise you would have cleared up the confusion immediately rather than ignore the questions about resolution for a year.

Bubba said...

Bob,

I am STILL waiting for a comment, any comment, on that extensive article in the top scientific journal Nature saying there is no scientific basis behind the SPOT program.

MarkVII said...

@anon October 22, 2010 5:26 PM

I doubt that folks expect 100% accuracy, respect, and courtesy -- that's a straw man argument However, I doubt the TSA's personnel would tolerate the levels of rudeness and yelling from passengers that I've experienced from the TSA. I'm not talking about an occasional screener who's having a bad day, but a generally confrontational attitude.

Quite frankly, in the two times that I've received traffic tickets, the police officers involved were polite and respectful. Contrast that to checkpoint screeners being rude and confrontational when I've broken no rules at all.

TSA personnel are legendary for making up their own rules and overreacting to petty things. (Check out George's and my "last straw" stories on the thread about solid deodorant for examples.)

The TSA's mistakes would be a lot easier to take if they'd admit to them and apologize. Instead, they dig themselves in deeper by yelling the same things again, only louder. George's and my stories illustrate this.

Fundamentally, the TSA has a credibility problem. This is the same agency, after all, that made such a big deal out of nail clippers and eyeglass repair kits in its early days. As I've asked many times -- what's the security risk here? "Give me control of this plane or I'll mess up your manicure and take your glasses apart?" Keep that in mind, then Google "TSA red team". You'll see how real risks to aviation get overlooked.

I think that hardened cockpit doors, changes to hijacking protocols, and the fact that passengers will fight back have done far more to prevent another 9/11 than not being allowed to carry my pocket knife.

If you think about some of the silly things that the TSA makes such a huge fuss over, is it any wonder that many of us doubt the feasibility of the "liquid bomb"? While I agree that it's theoretically possible, I'm not convinced it's truly practical.

It's credibility is not helped by the stories of clear violations of procedure, such as the child who was forced to remove his leg braces.

It doesn't help that the TSA keeps making the same mistakes. It's ridiculous how rule changes (such as leaving notebook PC's in a "checkpoint friendly" bag) immediately spawn blog posts about screeners yelling at passengers for doing exactly what the new rules say is OK.

As far as suggestions, different ones of us have offered a veritable treasure trove of them over time, but it seems the TSA doesn't listen. My pet suggestion is using secret shoppers to proactively see how the passengers are being treated. The TSA's response was "Got Feedback / Talk to TSA", which puts the onus on the passengers to QA the checkpoint experience. That's a purely reactive strategy. Quality 101 principles hold that you don't use your customers as your QA department. (That was the Big 3 automakers QA strategy for many years, and you can see where it got them.)

I think more accountability and less arrogance would help fix the TSA's image over time. When the TSA screws up, who bears the pain and consequences? Not the TSA -- the passenger. The true test of character for either an organization or an individual is how they treat the people that can't hit back, and I don't like what I see. That's why I stopped flying.

Mark
qui custodiet ipsos custodes

George said...

@MarkVII: I think more accountability and less arrogance would help fix the TSA's image over time. When the TSA screws up, who bears the pain and consequences? Not the TSA -- the passenger. The true test of character for either an organization or an individual is how they treat the people that can't hit back, and I don't like what I see. That's why I stopped flying.

Unfortunately, your solution appears to be the only one available to us (and the TSA isn't the only reason to give up flying). It's too bad that it's not a practical solution for most of us.

I think the TSA has had ample time to demonstrate its organizational character and values. Their goal seems to be less accountability and more arrogance, which they somehow equate with "effective security." If they hassle everyone sufficiently (and yell loud enough), they will somehow stop terrorists from walking into checkpoints.

But even though it makes no sense, and GAO audits find it ineffective, we're still supposed to believe the TSA. After all, they have plenty of proof that they're constantly stopping dangerous people and saving lives. But it's all classified for National Security reasons, so we'll have to trust them.

It also shouldn't be surprising that they take a purely reactive approach to QA, since their approach to security is also entirely reactive. And most of us probably would decide that "Got Feedback / Talk to TSA" isn't worth the bother. Since the TSA's procedures are secret, and the privacy of TSA employees is sacrosanct, there's no way to know whether complaining will result in any action. Or even if anyone will actually see the complaint. Because of the pervasive secrecy, we can only go by what we observe. Since arrogant bullies still remain in the ranks of TSOs, the only possible conclusion is that the bosses don't care about "QA," except perhaps for metrics on the drugs, cash, false documents, and fake military jackets.

Given that many people have no alternatives to flying, the TSA can get away with being despised. "Do you want to fly today?" If the answer is "yes," you have no choice but to accept whatever the TSA decides to inflict. That's what has become of a nation that once prized freedom and a government accountable to the people. We've given that up in favor of "trust us."

Anonymous said...

another stellar trip through Grand Rapids TSA checkpoint. These small airports have the smallest minds seeking the biggest power rush. Today we have to show boarding passes to walk through the xray? I didn't read about any policy change stating this. It's their ignorance that's dangerous (tiresome, inefficient, etc), not ours. At least the AIT was off today and I got to skip the "squeeze down."

Anonymous said...

Bubba said...
Bob,

I am STILL waiting for a comment, any comment, on that extensive article in the top scientific journal Nature saying there is no scientific basis behind the SPOT program.

October 23, 2010 3:55 AM
---------------------------------------

Bubba,
I'm waiting too. But it might be a while, given that it's only been, what, a few months since Bob sent out an email to "experts." As we all know, it can take months and months before an email reaches its destination. Or maybe Bob got a reply but astutely recognized that the questions surrounding Lady Gaga's handcuffs were far more pressing. After all, we're only talking about a devastating critique of a program into which the TSA poured millions and millions of taxpayer dollars and about which (until recently) they loved to boast.

RB said...

Anonymous said...
Bubba said...
Bob,

I am STILL waiting for a comment, any comment, on that extensive article in the top scientific journal Nature saying there is no scientific basis behind the SPOT program.

October 23, 2010 3:55 AM
---------------------------------------

Bubba,
I'm waiting too. But it might be a while, given that it's only been, what, a few months since Bob sent out an email to "experts." As we all know, it can take months and months before an email reaches its destination. Or maybe Bob got a reply but astutely recognized that the questions surrounding Lady Gaga's handcuffs were far more pressing. After all, we're only talking about a devastating critique of a program into which the TSA poured millions and millions of taxpayer dollars and about which (until recently) they loved to boast.

October 24, 2010 3:13 AM

.................
You expect an honest discussion of anything from TSA?

The history of TSA only supports the use of dishonesty to support TSA claims.

Bubba said...

Actually, I don't expect an honest discussion with the TSA, but I would like to see scientific soundness and accountability. Of course, that is difficult considering this is an organization that considers tooth powder a liquid ("it pours").

I'm sticking to the SPOT point because it is so blatant. Nature published the article in May, and is the World's most respected scientific publication. The fact that they completely ignore the article is simply unacceptable.

RB said...

Bubba said...
Actually, I don't expect an honest discussion with the TSA, but I would like to see scientific soundness and accountability. Of course, that is difficult considering this is an organization that considers tooth powder a liquid ("it pours").

I'm sticking to the SPOT point because it is so blatant. Nature published the article in May, and is the World's most respected scientific publication. The fact that they completely ignore the article is simply unacceptable.

October 24, 2010 4:31 PM

............
TSA's typical method is to just ignore things they don't want to talk about in hopes that it will just go away.

It is about the same as a child screaming until they get their way.

Kinda like forcing the Child Porn Viewers on the public.

Anonymous said...

Hello, how about TSA theft?? Does it also fall on the deaf ears category?
In the last year i traveled three times, all three i have my checked luggage searched. Each time some of my property got lost or damaged.
Why is that TSA keep using the excuse of "keeping me safe" to hide all the theft that goes on during these searches?
I can't take my perfume bottle in carry on because the container is 125 ml which is above the 100ml limit. I have to put it in my checked luggage and then the TSA "officers" steal it.
It has happened twice in the last year, and the third time it was a necklace.
More than a coincidence i'd say, almost looks like they use the x ray machine to see what luggage carries things that might be of value, (after seeing thousands of luggage through those x ray machines i'm sure they can identify a perfume bottle from a generic bottle), they search the luggage and "to keep me safe" they steal my property.
It's becoming almost customary that whenever i find the little piece of paper "TSA has searched your luggage" it's almost a certainty that something will be missing.
Thanks again TSA, and keep up the good work!!!

Ayn R. Key said...

Anonymous wrote:
A magic rock? That implies that the TSA has done nothing

I think you're catching on. That's why the critics use the term 'security theater' to describe what the TSA does. They are exactly as effective as my magic rock.

But if you really feel you can't fly unless we are screened nude, well, as you wrote, nobody MUST fly. You can always stay home.

George said...

@Bubba: Actually, I don't expect an honest discussion with the TSA, but I would like to see scientific soundness and accountability.

Bob will surely tell us that the DHS Science and Technology Directorate have conducted numerous studies verifying the effectiveness of everything the TSA does. The studies were conducted and reviewed by leading scientific luminaries, and their soundness is utterly impeccable. But they're all necessarily classified, to prevent enemies from gaining access to information that they could use to circumvent those scientifically-sound security measures. So we'll just have to trust the TSA, as always.

I'm sticking to the SPOT point because it is so blatant. Nature published the article in May, and is the World's most respected scientific publication. The fact that they completely ignore the article is simply unacceptable.

Don't forget the GAO's audit of the SPOT program, even though the TSA would surely want us to forget it. The GAO debunked both the "science" behind behavior detection and the TSA's ineffective implementation of it, concluding that it's a worthless waste of a lot of money (although of course they did so in far more diplomatic language). The DHS response to the audit basically said they will never tolerate anyone outside the DHS meddling in their business, and that they have no intention of following any of the GAO's recommendations (although of course they did so in far more diplomatic language).

@RB: TSA's typical method is to just ignore things they don't want to talk about in hopes that it will just go away.

Alternatively, their propagandists will respond with a noxious barrage of content-free buzzwords presumably intended to leave readers so dazed and confused that they'll just go away. This defense works very well for skunks, so it's entirely appropriate for the TSA.

Anonymous said...

I'm flying to the Bahamas from the US and inadvertently did not include the middle name or initial when I booked the flight. Our driver's license and passport includes an initial or middle name. Will we have difficulty? Should we correct this before flying?

Cass said...

I was on a flight from Asia to the US on Saturday and about 90 minutes before the flight was due to land, we were informed that due to DHS regulations, passengers would not be allowed to leave their seats during the one hour prior to landing, nor access their carry-on luggage. Blankets and pillows had to be stowed below the seats and jackets had to be put on (or I guess, stowed away).

I remember that there were similar regulations right after the attempted bombing around Christmas 2009, but I thought those policies (no leaving seats one hour prior, etc) had been reverted to the earlier policy during the first few weeks or months of 2010. I flew on the same flight during April and we had no such restriction. I tried searching online to see if maybe the policy had been updated again, but the only links I see are from 2009.

Just curious to see what is going on... is it something that is up to the airlines/pilots/crew to enact?

Random tso lady said...

Anonymous said...
Random Female Tso said...

There's loads of people that travel regularly and NEVER experience issues. Then you have those that always have issues, which are normally the ones that think rules don't apply to them.
(how dare there be rules!)
----------------------------------

Or the reason is because the rules are always being changed or ignored by TSOs. You guys brag about inconsistency being part of the layers of security. Then you blame passengers when that same inconsistency causes confusion. And you wonder why you are met with frustration???? So when there is a rule change on the fly that now causes an issue where it did not 5 days prior at a diff airport....how do you suppose the passenger should address it????

October 20, 2010 6:25 PM
---------------------------------

I don't brag about anything, maybe THEY do. Im speaking solely as an individual here. I agree with passengers sometimes about the inconsistency, but even for us rules are always changing. We don't make them we just enforce them. You can feel however you choose about that. When changes are made we are there to tell you about them. Things are different from airport to airport..heck even some checkpoints at the same airport vary. I would love for us all to be on one accord.

When changes are made people can address it the same way millions of other passengers have addressed it. Simply by asking questions. It's really not that hard.

George said...

@Random tso lady: When changes are made people can address it the same way millions of other passengers have addressed it. Simply by asking questions. It's really not that hard.

It is hard when the questions are ignored. Or when they're answered with "That's classified, trust us." Or when they're answered with condescending dismissal. Or when they're answered with outright lies.

If even TSOs who are presumably privy to all the things we must not know complain about constantly changing rules, what hope do we passengers have? And how does it do anything for security?

Anonymous said...

Wow. Back to the magic rock.

Again, you have offered no suggestions for improvement. No practical real ideas.

Yes, I said it was an option to stay home, but I'm not the one complaining about the TSA.

I am trying to understand your position - and it seems to be that bombers don't exist, or are too lazy to do anything. Since (in your words) the TSA is "theater," I can reach no other conclusion.

I'll continue to respond to these posts with the same challenge: If you're going to criticize, please offer alternatives to improve things. Real solutions. Not magic rocks.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Random tso lady said...

Things are different from airport to airport..heck even some checkpoints at the same airport vary. I would love for us all to be on one accord.
---------------------------------

If TSA has SOP then why wouldn't all of you be on 1 accord? Is it poor training or just the famed "few bad apples"?

When changes are made people can address it the same way millions of other passengers have addressed it. Simply by asking questions. It's really not that hard.

October 26, 2010 1:05 PM
--------------------------------

It's not that hard but maybe it's SSI. Passengers didn't create the mess that is air travel, you guys did it yourselves.

Anonymous said...

Random tso lady said...

I don't brag about anything, maybe THEY do. Im speaking solely as an individual here. I agree with passengers sometimes about the inconsistency, but even for us rules are always changing. We don't make them we just enforce them. You can feel however you choose about that. When changes are made we are there to tell you about them. Things are different from airport to airport..heck even some checkpoints at the same airport vary. I would love for us all to be on one accord.

When changes are made people can address it the same way millions of other passengers have addressed it. Simply by asking questions. It's really not that hard.

___________________________________________________

Consistently, more than 50% of my travel results in my SENTRI ID being rejected as not valid. When did TSA make that rule change?

The TSA web site states that a small wrench less than 7" is acceptable. When did EWR change that rule and tell me to throw it out?

Medication may or may not be acceptable today, depending on the whim of a TSO.

Gel packs?

Prosthetic limbs on or off?

Shall I continue?

Why are these things different from airport to airport, or day to day? Are the "rules" really different or are your co-workers making "rules" up on the spot?

We can't ask a question in advance, because in your words, even "checkpoints at the same airport vary."

Having to ask at the security point is too late.

Sorry, but TSA FAILS.

Ayn R. Key said...

Anonymous TSO, why should I be forbidden to talk about magic rocks when that is all the TSA offers us? They are protecting us from liquid bombs that can only be created at Hogwart's School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. They insist on strip searching us with ionizing radiation, and if you feel either part of that is bad they will grope you mercilessly.

So until the TSA stops offering me their magic rocks, I'll continue to point out that they are offering me magic rocks.

You want a solution? Cost-benefit analysis, and I mean one where the rights and sensibilities of the public is actually listed as a cost instead of omitted as irrelevant complaining.

Anonymous said...

" If you're going to criticize, please offer alternatives to improve things. Real solutions. Not magic rocks."

No shoe carnival, since shoes are no threat.

No ID checks, since ID has nothing to do with security.

No liquids nonsense, since shampoo is not dangerous.

No strip-search machines, since they don't work and they're dangerous and disgusting.

No pat-downs without cause.

There! An improved, efficient security process that does nothing to make air travel less safe. You're welcome.

Anonymous said...

Why does the TSA not considered body scanners a type of strip-search when they show details of a persons penis, labia, and breasts?

Also if prisons started using the scanners in lieu of a physical strip-search because it provides the same level of detection....how are they not considered a type of strip-search?

Anonymous said...

AynRKey, your name says it all, but I'll continue pressing for the same info.

TSO? Me? Hardly.

You (and "anonymous") don't believe there are any dangers, correct?

There are no bombers, or they are too lazy? No one in the past has or the future will use a shoe or a liquid to damage a plane?

Passengers should be anonymous (No ID) and I should trust THEM, but not the TSA?

Is this your position? "There are no dangers." Is that it? That's your solution? Accept that there are no dangers?

By the way, sensibilities of the public is a real point, but flying isn't a "right." Like driving a car, it's a privilege.

George said...

@Anonymous, October 27, 2010 9:43 PM Why does the TSA not considered body scanners a type of strip-search when they show details of a persons penis, labia, and breasts?

The TSA is fully aware that the scanners amount to a strip search, for exactly the reasons you note. The TSA is also fully aware that many people are uncomfortable with being routinely strip searched at airport checkpoints, particularly by an agency that's as widely despised and distrusted as the TSA. That's why their propagandists are working so hard to bamboozle us into accepting this intrusion (despite the lack of evidence that sacrificing our privacy would actually protect aviation).

The key to this propaganda campaign would otherwise be a very subtle distinction: A strip search has always involved the physical removal of clothing. The scanner does not require that. Therefore, the scanner is not a strip search, at least not as it was defined before the dazzling new WBI technology became available.

But if you spend even a moment thinking about what the scanner is actually doing-- virtually removing people's clothing to allow an "officer" to view their naked bodies-- the only possible conclusion is that it is a strip search. The TSA's propagandists apparently are attempting to prevent us from reaching this obvious conclusion.

They've done away with the "whole body imaging" terminology and renamed it "Advanced Imaging Technology." That's a wonderfully vague description that provides no clue about what it is; it also appeals to the notion that "technology" has magical properties that keep us safe. The TSA presumably hopes that passengers who don't follow the news and aren't fully aware of what these magical scanners actually do will remain blissfully ignorant.

To address critics who are aware of what the scanners do, they simply repeat their canned talking points: "AIT is not a strip search. The scanners are completely safe. The scanners cannot store images. Our procedures protect privacy. Trust us." Even if that doesn't convince anyone, it may at least convince critics stop wasting their time bashing their heads against a brick wall.

The truly sad thing is that if the TSA were a transparent, accountable agency that had the respect and trust of the public, and they honestly presented a rational case for strip searching passengers, I think we would accept the scanners as a providing a benefit worth the loss of privacy. But the TSA have only themselves to blame for the growing resistance to their "advanced technology."

RB said...

Anonymous said...
AynRKey, your name says it all, but I'll continue pressing for the same info.

TSO? Me? Hardly.

You (and "anonymous") don't believe there are any dangers, correct?

There are no bombers, or they are too lazy? No one in the past has or the future will use a shoe or a liquid to damage a plane?

Passengers should be anonymous (No ID) and I should trust THEM, but not the TSA?

Is this your position? "There are no dangers." Is that it? That's your solution? Accept that there are no dangers?

By the way, sensibilities of the public is a real point, but flying isn't a "right." Like driving a car, it's a privilege.

October 29, 2010 10:18 AM

............
And I have a couple of questions for you Anon.

Why does a persons identity matter if TSA screens these people for WEI? Just what threat do they present after screening?

In the United States a person must have a permit to operate motor vehicles so yes obtaining that permit is a privilege.

Flying as a passenger on a commercial aircraft requires no such permit so your comparing the two is faulty.

Travel within the United States has long been held as a right. To do so on a commercial airplane is a matter between the owner of the airplane and the person wishing to travel, not a bargain between a citizen and the government.

Ayn R. Key said...

Do I believe there are no dangers? No. I'm sure it makes life easier for you to think that I think that. Do I believe that the rules the TSA has implemented do anything to address those dangers? No.

Just because you're willing to pretend that I think there are no dnagers, why do you think I'm willing to pretend that I think there are no dangers? Just because you're willing to pretend the TSA addresses the dangers, why do you think I'm willing to pretend the TSA addresses those dangers? Don't bother answering either question, the answer is contained in the question.

You also mentiong the "flying is a privilege not a right" nonsense. The right to contract is long standing, and that is exactly what a plane ticket is. It is a private contract between the purchaser and the airline. There is no right to force them to sell, true, but if they agree to sell and you agree to buy then you have contract. The role of the government is to safeguard the sanctity of the contract.

No third party has the right to interfere with a private contract. If I enter into a contract to sell you my car, then nobody outside of the two of us has the right to say "you cannot do that because I say so."

Third Party Interference ia a violation of the sanctity of the contract. The government is supposed to protect the sanctity of the contract. The TSA violates the sanctity of the contract by determining whether or not the airline and the traveler can fulfill their contract with each other.

Moreover the right of travel was considered so basic that, while included in the Articles of Confederation, was considered too basic to be included in the Constitution. It has roots going back to the Magna Carta, and is one of the basic principles of Anglo Common Law, a tradition underlying much of United States jurisprudence.

So, based upon right of travel and right of contract, we can derive a right to fly. There is no absolute right to fly, but there is a derived right to fly. If the government was acting in a manner in accordance with the constitution it would protect that right to fly, but instead of the constitution we have TSOs like yourself who, if you consider the constitution at all, consider it an impediment to the job that must bne ignored.

If you really feel that you cannot safely fly unless I am strip searched and molested, unless my rights are violated, well, you believe you have nor right to fly, so you should stay home. You can always take the bus. Until then, I hope you are not the TSO checking me in because of your blatant disregard for the constitution.

Anonymous said...

I'm not a constitutional scholar, but I appreciate your points. Right of Travel, check. Method of your choice, not so fast.
I don't think I can buy your car without the DMV, and the airline cannot sell you your ticket (and ultimately your contract) without the privilege to transport you granted them by the FAA.
Ayn, thanks for finally saying you believe there are dangers. Now I am curious as to why bad things don't happen to airplanes more often. If the TSA does nothing, then we're back to bombmakers just being too lazy. Undedicated. Not quite ready to pull the trigger. Magic rocks.
We're back to No Alternatives. I should simply believe that in the recent past (a few years?) not a single nutjob has shown the wherewithall to bring a quart of gasoline and a lighter on a plane. No angry suicidal banker had the brains to stuff his own luggage with fertilizer. Not one drug-addled mind fantasized that he could wreak havoc by dropping a handgrenade in the commode of that 737 I'm on every week. And they're not even motivated, trained and financed by religous or political backers.
So we can make it a fast walk from curbside check-in to my seat on the plane, no security whatsoever, and nothing will ever happen...due ONLY to the kindness of all the good folks who purchased a plane ticket. In essence, you're suggesting I trust YOU - "anarchy" - but not the TSA.
Is the TSA perfect? Are their methods ideal? Are they the green pastures their publicist would have you believe? Is every technique completely effective? Of course not. And are some of the agents rude, unfriendly, or power-tripping? Undoubtedly.
What is your alternative?
PS - My amusement grows each moment you think I am a TSO.

Anonymous said...

I assume that the incidents yesterday from Yemen are seen on the blog as noncredable and that they have nothing to do with the TSA. I have read this blog for a long time constantly see that "there is not a crediable threat" against the US. Im hoping that these events will show that the US is under a constant threat and that TSA is there just in case they go after commerical aviation again.

Ayn R. Key said...

Actually, you can sell your car without DMV approval. A transfer of Title is easily accomplished without permissions, all it takes is the payment of the appropriate taxes to have it accomplished. But they cannot, in any way, forbid the sale from the willing legal owner to the willing purchaser. They do not have that authority.

So far you agree to right of travel. But you completely failed to mention right of contract. You are, perhaps, pretending that I didn't write it. And you are pretending that I'm also pretending those same. Just as before.

So, right to travel, check. Right of contract, check. Therefore the job of the TSA is to guarantee that nobody outside of the contract can interfere with the contract.

So why don't bad things happen more often on the airlines? Perhaps you should investigate that for yourself instead of having everything spoonfed to you. There are many reasons. First of all, there have been three verified attacks by the airlines on US targets after 9/11. They are the shoe-bomber, the panty-bomber, and the mail-bomber. You are forgiven for not knowing the third since it is very recent.

Three in 9 years shows that attacks of this nature aren't very common. But at this point you are saying "yeah, that shows the TSA is working." Does it? How many attacks were there before 9/11 on the US via the airlines? There were the hostage situations back in the 1980s ... and not much else really. Does the TSA get credit for all the non-attacks that occurred before 9/11? For you, it probably does.

So one reason there haven't been many attacks is because there aren't many attacks. Now why did the panty-bomber and the shoe-bomber fail?

Those two attacks made it past the phony security (flights outside the US going to the US follow TSA protocol). But they failed. They failed because the fellow passengers stopped the attacks. Then the TSA made an announcement that one of their "layers of security" is the fellow passengers, and the sheeple just ate that up.

There was security before the TSA. I know you don't know that, but there was. It was in the interest of the airlines to provide their own security, because they wanted repeat business. Would you rather purchase a ticket on "we keep our customers safe airlines" or "we don't bother screening anyone airlines"? Well, in your case, since neither of those claims are made by the government or verified by the government you don't trust either of those claims, since all virtue comes from the desk of a bureaucrat who you neither know nor have any reason to trust.

So why is it that, in the dark days before the TSA kept us safe by irradiating us, strip searching us, and molesting us, the attacks you say that the TSA is preventing were so uncommon? You should try to come up with an answer to that.

I am not merely saying some of their procedures are ineffective. I'm not criticizing them for not being perfect. I'm criticizing them for failing to provide any actual security while simultaneously stripping us of our constitutional rights in the name of security.

PS. I'm glad you figured out one of the meanings of my screen name. I wonder if you're able to figure out the other meanings. By the way, if you're not a TSO, why do you demonstrate such aptitude for the job? You cannot conceive of any way to do the job other than perverts ogling us and molesting us.

Anonymous said...

If you believe that planes bound for the USA follow TSA protocol in the originating airport - you must not fly international very much. In some cases, the security is more stringent, and in others, more lenient. Please don't think that the shoe bomber or anyone else necessarily receives the same screening that I get in Newark or Dallas or Las Vegas.
It's true attacks are and have been rare. We will never know if it's lack of terrorist effort, or the efforts of the TSA.
One thing is certain: the number of motiviated troublemakers increases every year, in every corner of the newspaper. It's illogical to conclude that rare attacks in the past equate to rare attacks in the future.
I believe the lack of attacks is NOT because no one is willing, or that the TSA "catches" so many in line - but that the risk of being found out before boarding is just too great to bother with.
If I'm wrong, I guess we're all being "inconvenienced" for nothing.
If you're wrong, we can expect bombings to increase with each corresponding decrease in TSA security.
In many other countries, there is no modesty, or is it shame? I doubt the "strip search" you refer to is a violation of any right there. No one cares. Not in the park, not at the beach, not in the airport. It's a very American phenomenon, being phobic about your nudity. As technology advances, all inbound flights will be screened this way. They'll expect reciprocation, whether the scan is done by the TSA or the airline or the cheap hired help. It's not going away anytime soon.
I find your comment about my suitability to be a TSO to be a great compliment, although not the perverted part. That's just ignorant of you to say.

Jim Huggins said...

So ... according to tons of media reports, new screening procedures are now in place at TSA checkpoints. Any possibility that TSA might want to talk to the public about those procedures through this blog?

Melissa said...

I recently flew to Lihue, Hawaii from Dayton, Ohio with layovers in Minneapolis and LosAngeles. How is it possible that my checked luggage was chosen for inspection on both my original flight and my return flight home?Also , on my return flight I was chosen for a full-body scan and a pat-down[I was told it was because my arm flinched during the scan].The first time I found the notice of baggage inspection tag I was disappointed because they had made a mess of my clothes and makeup.The lid was left off of my facial moisturizer and the pump was broke so that it leaked all over my clothes.My makeup bag was also opened and dumped on top of that.I was so careful when I packed,putting everything in baggies.They took it out of the baggies and left it.What a mess!I am just wondering why they can't treat our things with some respect.I couldn't believe it when I found the second notice as I was unpacking.This time the notice was crinkled up as if they were hoping I would not notice.My suitcase was in such disarray,how could I not notice?This all happened in one trip.The TSA has given me cause for reserve regarding any future flight plans.

Anonymous said...

"I have read this blog for a long time constantly see that "there is not a crediable threat" against the US."

What are you talking about? Are you confused? Mixing up your blogs?

Yes, there are many posts here questioning the viability of certain threats. Just as many question the TSA's response to the threats we face. There are many posts here that see the TSA itself as a threat to the liberties and freedoms Americans have died for.

If there are posts on this blog claiming there is no credible threat against the US would you provide us with a link to it? Please? Thank you.

Anonymous said...

Hope we here some TSA clarification of the NY Times story, "Opt Out of a Body Scan? Then Brace Yourself"

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Opt-Out-of-a-Body-Scan-Then-nytimes-3016411705.html?x=0

Seems to be references to lots of arbitrary rulemaking. When can this be improved?

Anonymous said...

Nature published the article in May, and is the World's most respected scientific publication. The fact that they completely ignore the article is simply unacceptable.

October 24, 2010 4:31 PM

yes. Seems like Nature magazine is without flaw... oh wait... Jan Hendrik Schön comes to mind.

But Nature Magazine is NEVER inaccurate.

you have kool-aid stains on your lips, Bub

Anonymous said...

Anon said:
"If there are posts on this blog claiming there is no credible threat against the US would you provide us with a link to it? Please? Thank you."
no shoe threat, no liquid explosive threat, its said all the time. its the tsa circus keeping us in fear of imaginary threats, read the posts...

Anonymous said...

I fly a couple of times a week. I travel through TSA lines in many cities. Some sites are easy and the agents okay, and even nice. Newark is the exception. Every time I travel trough Newark I enounted rude, negative, abuseive agents.... This leads me to believe that Newark has a major supervision problem. A good supervisor trains their employees well and expects the best of them. The agents in Newark act like storm troopers! Obviously no one has explained to them the need to be courtious or treat people with respect.

Anonymous said...

Anon said:
"I can't take my perfume bottle in carry on because the container is 125 ml which is above the 100ml limit. I have to put it in my checked luggage and then the TSA "officers" steal it.
It has happened twice in the last year, and the third time it was a necklace."
How do you know that it was the tsa people? do you know how many people handle your bag between the time you check it in and when you get it at your destination? Lets count, of course it depends on airport configuration; the ticket handler, then most likely tsa, then a subcontractor or 3 for the airline to get it on the plane, then another airline subcontractor or 3 to get it to the baggage claim. So there is a minimum of 6 people that came in contact with your bag so how do you know that it was the tsa. where are the stats on theft from airline employees? or because tsa touched your bag it has to be them that did it?

Anonymous said...

hi,
I import books and magazines from the US to Portugal for the last 15 years, in the beginning of october three of my suppliers ( Ingram International, Ingram Periodicals and Source Interlink )are on hold by TSA because they are unknown shippers ( these are the same I am buying from for the last 15 years ), can you help solve this?
regards,
belmiro ribeiro
tema Lda - Portugal

Bubba said...

Anonymous Nature critic,

Science is self-correcting because scientific work is debated by the best experts in the field. Jan Hendrik Schön was a dishonest scientist whose work did not resist the test of time. He was debunked and his papers were retracted - they are no longer valid references. It was the proper attitude for the case, and this was a very rare case indeed.

On the other hand, the TSA is simply refusing to discuss the lengthy critical analysis Nature made of the SPOT program. If there is scientific support for this program, as the TSA claims, why not show it and publish a response with the journal?

The reason is simple - there is no science behind the SPOT program.

Anonymous said...

How do you know that it was the tsa people? do you know how many people handle your bag between the time you check it in and when you get it at your destination?

Anybody who can take something out of a bag, can put something into a bag.

How many of the people who handle bags go through the same security as passengers?

Anonymous said...

to Anon ref perfume theft.

spreading blame among all the other employees doesn't really work here, sure several people touch a item or bag but odds are overwhelming it is the TSA that is responsible since they are the ones that open and search all through your bag, opening everything trashing your stuff and leaving you a note to say they did it.

And the main point if it wasn't for TSA rules and irresponsible actions nobody else would be in our bags because we could then secure them. And to assume your answer will be to use TSA approved locks? in reality they don't work at all I've gone through four set's in the last year and I have never once gotten my bag back with the locks still on it.

once the lock was cut off with a note that explained how only TSA approved locks could be used. when I showed the supervisor that the lock was clearly marked TSA approved with their keyhole his answer?

Well sometimes they don't work or maybe we didn't see they were approved locks we have the right to remove any locks anyway. The other three times the locks were just gone.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
to Anon ref perfume theft.

spreading blame among all the other employees doesn't really work here, sure several people touch a item or bag but odds are overwhelming it is the TSA that is responsible since they are the ones that open and search all through your bag, opening everything trashing your stuff and leaving you a note to say they did it.


..............
I think baggage theft problems can be blamed squarely on TSA policies.

TSA requires access to baggage preventing people from securing their property.

TSA allows use of TSA approved locks which are routinely cut off by TSA because TSA cannot manage a simple key control program.

TSA does not maintain inspected baggage in a secure manner allowing others to add items or take items out of screened baggage.

TSA has been ineffective in policing its employees and has even hired known felons.

Bottom line, TSA is a total failure.

Anonymous said...

Can you tell us what happened to the TSA official who slipped white powder into fliers' bags, and told them they'd been caught with coke and were under arrest?

If you ask me, this is a criminal matter. What if one passenger did this to another passenger? They be in prison right now.

Tiffany said...

Anon said

"Bottom line, TSA is a total failure."


TSA as it appears can't win with some people. Either they are doing too much or they are not doing enough.

And for all the other people that complain about the SPOT program and AIT Technology wanting specifics on how it is used and applied....of course they can't give out that information. If that were the case why don't they just send all the people on the NFL an email outlining what they can do to get around the policies and procedures that are in place. People need to realize that there are a lot of things that go on in this world which is classified and only available to certain people. TSA has not been on record as catching a terrorist. But the policies and procedures in place have stopped their tests, surveillance, etc. Just keep in mind that they cannot publicize everything for fear of causing mass hysteria.

Anonymous said...

TSA is paid for by taxes, its paid for by you the travelers. You pay it as a port of your ticket.

Anonymous said...

Whether you post this or not I want to inform you that our company is reorganizing to eliminate as much air travel as possible due to the new "screening" methods you have put into place.

About 20 of us used to fly at least twice a month, some much more.

These outright violations by the TSA have gone to the point of unacceptable and we do not expect our employees to endure them.

I know we are not the only company, organization, or family who have made this decision and if common sense does not prevail the market will will as air travel declines.

Anonymous Tech Company
Texas

Anonymous said...

TSA=Security theater

iusbvision said...

Blogger Bob,

With all due respect, your rather unsubstantiated denials about the "perverted" (for lack of a better term) pat downs is not credible for the following reasons.

1 - Blogs on the left and the right are reporting similar experiences about the pat downs. So are regular news outfits like ABC.

2 - The Union that represents the Flight Attendants has said that this is happening to them. Matt Drudge has the link.

3 - Many citizens who are essentially Jenn Q Publics are complaining and posting YouTube video's complaining with similar reports.

4 - Several female celebrities have given reports of TSA breast exams.

5 - If you said anything other than your unsubstantiated denial you would likely lose your job instantly.

So in order for you to be right and all of these diverse people to be liars it would have to be some sort of mass conspiracy that brings the likes of Ann Coulter, Union Bosses and countless citizens all into the same room to plot against you.

Gimme a break...

Anonymous said...

TSA cant win because they do a terrible job and are arrogant to an extreme that would never be accepted if it wasn't a government entity. I would put the creation of the TSA and it's operation as the biggest gain the terrorist made on 9/11 it's a horribly expensive waste of money that abuses the American public across the board and god help the handicapped when your trying to deal with them. I have been asked on three separate occasions now in three different airports if I can walk without my artificial leg. forget SPOT the TSA agents as a rule can't understand the basics of physics or mechanics as simple as Gravity - let alone a complex and flawed technology based on human behavior.

Anonymous said...

I am amazed at the inconsistencies, casual attitudes and frank boredom that TSA employees display across the US> I travel every week for my job. There are TSA employees that are literally nodding off while supposedly looking at the xray's. I watched a TSA agent look the other way while a man walked through the metal detector, it was going off, and he was conversing and flirting with a female counterpart. All I can say is...wow. Really, really scary.

Anonymous said...

Gotta give the TSA some credit they are consistent, Ive never met anyone other than TSA employee's that had anything but disdain for them as an agency. A few weeks ago while in traffic a Animal Control officer (Dog Catcher) was in front of me and he had a bumper sticker on the official vehicle that said " At Least I don't Work for the TSA." I tried to take a photo but couldn't get close enough again in traffic for a picture. Talk about a reality check one of the most hated of all government employees and his point of pride was that he wasn't with the TSA.

Brent said...

to the mod...as a former hill staffer who handled homeland security issues, I'm going to take the nonposting of my submission in response to "Blogger Tim" saying that TSA works with Congress, when in fact TSA does not work well with Congress as further proof that TSA is a rogue agency that needs to be reined in.

Bubba said...

Seeing you seem to have the time to do a lot of posting lately, Bob, I'm sure you can finally answer that in depth article in the World's top science journal Nature saying there is no rime nor reason for the SPOT program.

Anonymous said...

Ok Bob, how does the TSA spin this one? (a) harmless joke; (b) rogue agent; (c) representative of TSA's culture

http://gizmodo.com/5688087/the-tsas-sense-of-humor-makes-me-nervous

a photo of the TSA booth by the security check-in point at IND. Take a close look at the wallpaper on the computer in that booth.

In case you don't recognize the image in the wallpaper, it's this fake children's book cover: "My First Cavity Search"

Anonymous said...

Nice TSA humor:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3584/3304306634_0a9e51503c_b.jpg

RB said...

Bob I have posted several items to various current discussions in the last few days and most have not been posted.

Your excessive and heavy handed censorship clearly violates the restrictions of government limiting free speech and is a violation of your oath to protect and defend the Constitution.

Your oath is not to TSA but the United States. Why don't you honor it for a change.

Secondly while you censor multiple post I noticed that once again the Delete counter has not moved for several days. Is this an attempt to hide your illegal censoring?

If you cannot honor your oath to the United States I suggest you leave government service!

Anonymous said...

I would love to know what you think of this:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mgrdcm/3304306634/

It's a TSA screen with the oh so hilarious fake children's book cover, "My first cavity search" used as a background.

So, what say you?

Anonymous said...

A few questions, Shouldn't all people at all airports be subjected to this for it to really be affective, it is reported that children are subjected to the same "pat downs" which adults are and why wouldn't this be considered molestion as it would be if anyone did this to a child anywhere else, can you tell us how many instances of terrorism this has stopped, what other countries perform such aggresive pat downs and given the uproar do you think that this could increase the chance of someone getting through.

Anonymous said...

A search on the internet shows that Israel uses a "biometric passenger screening system" wich isn't as nearly as intrusive. I think it's agreed that Israel has the best security in the world. Is there no reason we can't use it. Cost? Is our security based on cost? There was an explosive on a UPS cargo plane. Do we have enough security to prevent all such attempts or, as some earlier attempts that were caught pretty much by luck.

Anonymous said...

Bob/TSA,

Please respond to this blog entry on an incident at SAN:
http://johnnyedge.blogspot.com/2010/11/these-events-took-place-roughly-between.html

Besides the attempt to intimidate, and illegally trying to detain the passenger, this is clearly a violation of everything that has been said here (you can decide to not travel, etc).

I await hearing that the entire TSO team at that checkpoint has been disciplined for their illegal behavior.

Anonymous said...

Why does the TSA go through and read my business documents and personal letters in my checked luggage? I fly 100 times per year and I regularly find my documents in my checked baggage displaced and out of order. This only happens when the TSA has inspected my luggage and left a TSA search card in my bag. What are they looking for? Is this mission creep?

Anonymous said...

anon said:
"I think it's agreed that Israel has the best security in the world."
no personal rights, they profile, etc. you prove to them that you are safe to fly period, including interegation. i can just imagine the comments on here if that was used.

Anonymous said...

i put a zip tie on my luggage all the time, no locks, tsa or otherwise. i have never had a problem with theft. if the tsa goes into my bag they find replacement zip ties and put them back on for me. i travel 3 times a week and have never had a problem. offer a possible solution instead of whining and you might be able to get through it.

Anonymous said...

TSA creates far more terror than the terrorists, and has failed to catch even one.

Janet said...

Dear TSA Blog Team-- I'm curious to know how the new pat-downs work with women in skirts? I am part of a very conservative Christian group that takes modesty very seriously. As such, we have collectively determined that the new full-body scanners are not in line with our principles. But as part of my faith, I always wear skirts either at or below my knees.

I'm relieved that I have the right to have my husband with me during the pat down, but am concerned that a pat down may look much different in a skirt than, say, in pants.

Anonymous said...

The gentleman from San Diego posted on line the cell phone audio of his pat down and his refusal to allow his genitals to be touched. A TSA representative followed him from the secured area, and stated that the TSA would be bringing a lawsuit against this man because he refused to be patted down, and decided to not fly. Please comment on the TSA's statement that it would be filing a lawsuit against this person. Is this what will happen if someone refuses to be frisked, and agrees not to fly? The TSA will be filing a lawsuit against them? On what will the lawsuit be based? Thank you.

Mike Lewis said...

"Also, there is no fondling, squeezing, groping, or any sort of sexual assault taking place at airports. You have a professional workforce carrying out procedures they were trained to perform to keep aviation security safe."

That's not what I've heard. Have you been keeping up to date with all the web posts from actual travelers and the news reports about this?

IMHO, not all the TSA staff can be trusted all the time. A few are corrupt, some are incompetent and some are usually competent but are just having a bad day.

In my own field of writing air traffic control software, we never assume our programmers are producing bug-free code just because they are professional and well trained.

Anonymous said...

I have two questions; First, if screening at all is voluntary, and the selection for the AIT/enhanced pat down is random, what prevents someone from, if selected, declining both and just getting back in line? Secondly, if the TSA views liquid of over 3oz as a hazard, why is any liquid found just tossed in a trashcan right there at the checkpoint? Why is this liquid not tested and what prevents someone from just going out, getting more, and trying again?

Anonymous said...

I'm just wondering if you are developing a plan for Opt Out Day. Do you expect a substantial degree of travelers to opt out of the AIT machines?

Anonymous said...

I have a pacemaker and six screws in my back, will I be able to go thru the body scanner ...and should I leave extra early so that I can go thru security? Also I have an ID card for my pacemaker, but was given nothing by my Dr. For the screws in my back, will I be ok? I fly out tomorrow, Tues. Thank you!

Anonymous said...

Why the heck would anyone want to fly in the first place? We bought a brand new van, and we can drive anywhere in the US within a week.

if we want to leave the country, we can drive up to Canada or down to Mexico, and get on a plane.

We can get on Amtrak, or a cruise ship. Beats me why anybody would subject themselves to the humiliation of flying, when they can simply gas up and go.

It's easier to get on the Greyhound.

Anonymous said...

One thing is clear. No matter how this new screening mess turns out the public will never trust TSA employees.

TSA treats the public like a bunch of common criminals or enemy combatants when all that is dersire is to move freely about the country.

TSA has dug a hole so deep it will never be filled in.

TSA employees will always be looked at in a poor manner and TSA HQ is only making things worse.

Good job TSA!

Anonymous said...

sorry to continue the Israeli security topic, if we are going to be truely serious about our security than do it the Israeli way. Make everyone go through the scanner or an aggressive pat down instead of a small percentage. When you say "no personal rights" that's essentially what's happening now. If we're going to do it than do it.

Anonymous said...

LOL, poor Blogger Bob seems to have run for the hills. I wonder if this all got to be too much for him, or if his TSA bosses have shut him down while they deal with the massive backlash they seem to have been totally unprepared for?

N.Rondello said...

I object the full body scan and the enhanced pat downs. I feel both are a personal violation and unnecessary.

ジョージ said...

I'm currently living in Japan, and recently, Japan Post has enacted new restrictions on packages sent to the US. I've been told that due to increased security risk, the TSA has decreed that all countries sending packages to the US are forbidden to send any by air mail with weight over one pound.

Is this true? The strange thing is that although Japan Post is currently carrying this decree out, I have been unable to find any news articles or press releases by the TSA verifying this.

Is the TSA actually responsible? If so, I'd be very interested to see any sort of official press release about this new policy.

If the TSA is not responsible... who is?

I appreciate your time and help, as I have had a ton of trouble trying to find answers about these questions. Thank you.

Anonymous said...

I want to know how to protect myself from individuals who refuse scanning devices and pat-downs. I don't want to be on a plane with any of these inconsiderate, misguided nitwits.

JAS said...

Dear sir,

Due to medical concerns and issues stemming from sexual abuse earlier in my life, I do not wish to have images of my body viewed by a stranger (or anyone else for that matter). Thus, I am unwilling to use the Full Body Scanner.

I understand that those who opt-out of the Full Body Scan are subject to an enhanced pat-down that includes contact with genitals and breasts. Again, by a stranger, who uses the front of their hands and palm. Because of the sexual abuse I've experience (at the hands of both women and a man), I'm not comfortable doing this either.

If I am not able to make myself go through the emotional torment I'd associate with the Full Body Scan or the Enhanced Pat-Down, what options do I have?

Please help?

JAS

Anonymous said...

“Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” Benjamin Franklin. These words were true more than 200 years ago and are even truer today.

Since 2001, we have gradually given up our dignity, our freedom and our rights in the name of "security". I am all for reasonable security efforts, but not at the price of my rights or dignity.

Enough is enough. Neither I, nor my family will choose to travel by air until this madness stops, and if I must fly, I plan to "opt out" of the TSA's "porno scanners" and go through the aggressive "pat down" (others call it fondling or sexual assault).

If enough Americans do this and opt out, the entire security system will be so snarled and backlogged that the President and Congress will be forced to do something. Hopefully, their first action will be to dismiss Ms. Napolitano.

No Ms. Napolitano, you do not have my cooperation, my patience or commitment to help you and the TSA take away any more of my rights. I "opt out".

thecodemonk said...

After doing a lot of reading on this whole thing today, I've completely decided that the TSA is just a disgusting organization that MUST be shut down.

The sexual abuse of CHILDREN, the naked photographing of CHILDREN, the sexual abuse of MANY WOMEN. This is STUPID! I'm contacting EVERY politician and writing letters to every organization and most of all, I'm contacting all the airlines and telling them I AM NO LONGER FLYING until this is resolved!

Anonymous said...

Why would anyone fly?

we don't all have the luxury of having a week to travel somewhere, many of us need to fly often several times a week for work reasons. This is why everyone is so upset at the TSA and it's ridiculous actions simply put we don't have a choice.

Anonymous said...

So with all the controversy surrounding the TSA right now, how is it possible that there are zero comments on the newest blog entries? That just seems a little off to me...

Nuno Santos said...

With measures like those you implemented, how the hell can your country justify wars with the argument of bringing democracy?

it would be nice if your president and staff got the tsa treatment when travelling to the nato conference..

Anonymous said...

If the TSA does indeed follow through on its threats against John Tyner, they deserve the fate due all fascist thugs.

Drew said...

This morning flying from Logan, the backscatter images were in use.100% of passengers were being routed through the ait I presume because traffic was light enough to allow it. However, airport and airline employees were siphoned through the traditional metal detector. Of course I support their moving to the front of the line and understand the need for employees to move quickly through security checkpoints. I am curious what the current policy is for these employees and the ait. Why are they allowed to opt out (without a pat down) when others are not? Thanks.

Tom said...

I picked the wrong time of year to read Lippman's "Public Opinion."

This blog is not a source of information. It is a vehicle for manufacturing consent.

Tom said...

"The enhanced patdown is not an assault of any kind"?

In what state of the Union is it not a sexual assault to touch another person's genitals without permission?

I want to see my family for Christmas. They are 2000 miles away. I have no choice but to fly. I have no choice but to submit to sexual assault in order to do so.

«Oldest ‹Older   401 – 600 of 1491   Newer› Newest»