Friday, January 7, 2011

A Friendly Suggestion on Products Designed to Conceal Sensitive Areas

Throughout history, there have been many creative products offered to consumers that promise to make certain parts of their lives easier. Some work better than others, and well... some just don’t work at all. What am I getting at? I’m getting at the products folks have created that are designed to shield private areas of passengers going through our Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT).

Remember the post (Message In a Carry-On) about the artist who designs metal plates for baggage with messages that appear on the X-ray monitor? This is very similar to that. If there is something shielding an area and we don’t know what’s under it, we have to conduct a pat-down.

So basically, passengers should be aware that the use of these types of products will likely result in a pat-down. Some might think this is TSA’s way of getting back at clever passengers. That’s not the case at all. It’s just security.

We're certainly not going to tell you what you should or shouldn’t buy or wear, but I feel it’s only fair to give you a heads up on your choice of attire.

Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team

Feel free to read and comment on all of our previous AIT related posts. If you’d like to comment on an unrelated topic you can do so in our Off Topic Comments post. You can also view our blog post archives or search our blog to find a related topic to comment in. If you have a travel related issue or question that needs an immediate answer, you can contact a Customer Support Manager at the airport you traveled, or will be traveling through by using Talk to TSA.


170 comments:

Anonymous said...

If there is something shielding an area and we don’t know what’s under it, we have to conduct a pat-down.

Thanks for the admission that the AIT machines produce images detailed enough so operators can clearly see genitalia.

Anonymous said...

So you are saying that if a passengers genitals are not shown in graphic and explicit detail then that passenger will face a manual inspection of their genitals.

Anonymous said...

I hope whomever is responsible for this policy is fired and subsequently investigated. It is obvious to everyone that these activities are entirely counter productive to the goal of ensuring safety in travel.

That you would go so far to further such an obviously failed effort is truly disturbing.

Anonymous said...

finally something i agree with! i don't know if these people are thinking they're "sticking it to the man" (or woman) but to think that it won't up their chances of even more hassle at the checkpoint is ridiculously short-sighted on their part.

not worth it imho.

Anonymous said...

Bob, how does it feel telling citizens what kind of panties they should wear?

Anonymous said...

Just another example of how incompetent the TSA is. I travel the world and the US is the biggest joke of security. The US should take the example from the European Airports. Quick, effective security administered by law enforcement, not rent-a-cops. Sad that we're spending so much money and inconveniencing so many for a false sense of security in the US.

Wayne said...

Anonymous said...
Just another example of how incompetent the TSA is. I travel the world and the US is the biggest joke of security. The US should take the example from the European Airports. Quick, effective security administered by law enforcement, not rent-a-cops. Sad that we're spending so much money and inconveniencing so many for a false sense of security in the US.

HuH? What?
Does anyone remember what country the underwear bomber departed from?
European security quick and effective! Don't make me laugh.
Obviously most of you posting here have never traveled outside of your Mom's basement.

Anonymous said...

This makes good sense and only the deliberately ignorant will fail to understand. The machine is designed to detect things under cloths that should not be there, might be dangerous, etc. If you put something in the cloths that makes it impossible for the machine to see through... then the Officer is forced to double check it personally. Perhaps very personally.

It's sorta like the guy wearing a t-shirt with a marijuanna leaf on it, driving a car with a cloud of mj smoke in the cab and an open can of suds in the cup holder who gets upset when he's pulled over and the cop wants to check to see if he's driving under the influence. You ask for it and then are surprised when you get it? Grow up!

For the anonymous folks going off on the "admission...genitalia" tangent. No, Bob did not say that. If you cover it so the machine can't see behind it... someobody is going to have to touch it. As they told me in boot camp many years ago, stand by to stand by.

Anonymous said...

Bob, how does it feel telling citizens what kind of panties they should wear?

Did you even read the post?

"We're certainly not going to tell you what you should or shouldn’t buy or wear, but I feel it’s only fair to give you a heads up on your choice of attire."

If you want to hold up your travel, by all means, wear the goofy underwear. You'll be the only one laughing.

Anonymous said...

Hey anonymous who said..."It is obvious to everyone that these activities are entirely counter productive to the goal of ensuring safety in travel" .... what'r you smoking? If the machine can see the plastic explosive I've hidden under my robe but the metal detector can't... how is the image scanner failing?

The failure is your mind if ya can't figure that out. Honestly, nobody cares about your junk and it ain't all that to begin with. I got one two, just mine sags more cause I'm old.

Anonymous said...

It is unbelievable in the United States of America that a government agency states they need to see you naked to board a plane.

1. When are you going to post information regarding the health effects of the AIT machines based on an independent study?

2. When are you going to publish the process for firing a TSA officer that invades a taxpayer's privacy?

3. When are you going to address protecting a taxpayers personal property on the security belt while they are being "patted down"?

The TSA will be studied in future college courses as to how out of touch they can become with their customers - the American taxpayer. Clearly every American taxpayer is going to have to demand change from their Congress person. The TSA is out of control - your a disgrace to every law abiding taxpaying American citizen.

Anonymous said...

I'm just curious how even with the "enhanced pat-downs" that the TSA will be able to tell what the item/underwear is without a strip search. Supposedly they cannot cup or grip genitalia in any form/fashion.

What this post tells me is that we can look forward to more erosion of our rights as citizens.

For those of you who think this is OK please feel free to move to a another country where these actions are the norm.

Anonymous said...

When is the TSA going to release the XRay dosage range of the machines?

You are being sued to release this information, Congress has ordered you to, and you don't allow your employees to wear radiation badges to measure exposure.

At the same time you are claiming the machines are safe when all independent experts are saying that "no exposure to ionizing radiation is safe".

When is Napolitano going into the machines? When do we see Obama put his daughters in the machines?

Anonymous said...

Here is the thing, Bob- we don't trust you or your officers. Anyone who wants can do a google search on "tsa" "measuring" to see what graphic term TSO's call AIT machines, and yet you deny that these machines strip of us our privacy?
I am against these machines for one reason only: I don't trust that the TSO putting people through AITs is not sending hot chicks through to give his buddy screening the images a thrill. Until you can tell me that this never happens, I will support every legal effort to get these scanners out of our airports.

Anonymous said...

"The machine is designed to detect things under cloths that should not be there, might be dangerous, etc."

Like colostomy bags, prosthetic breasts, adult diapers, and other private and harmless medical devices that are the only things your nude-o-scopes are actually detecting?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
It is unbelievable in the United States of America that a government agency states they need to see you naked to board a plane.

1. When are you going to post information regarding the health effects of the AIT machines based on an independent study?

They have, multiple times, since it is not the answer you believe to be true in your head you refuse to believe it or recognize it as fact!

2. When are you going to publish the process for firing a TSA officer that invades a taxpayer's privacy?

What do you mean "publish"
If a TSA officer is not doing their job properly, and there is malicious intent the individual is fired...what more is there to say?

3. When are you going to address protecting a taxpayers personal property on the security belt while they are being "patted down"?

The policy has always been to keep the passenger withtheir property in their line of vision or with a traveling companion...how many cases of theft happen due to your perceived notion that the individual is kept from their property happen on a daily basis to the MILLIONS of people who fly each and every day?? Am I saying it never happens, no, but a majority of thefts that occur in any airport are due to the confusion and stress level of the individual who allow themselves to be distracted from their domain awarness...i.e. leaving their bag unattended whil figuring out what gate to go to, corraling traveling companions, etc....

Anonymous said...

Bob says: " Some might think this is TSA’s way of getting back at clever passengers. That’s not the case at all. It’s just security."
No, it was "just security" when we could be checked out and board a plane.
Making sure that nobody can hide their genitals and nipples isn't "just security," it is a power-hungry agency out of control.
Please stop fighting the public on this!

Anonymous said...

What a disgrace you people are. You are threatening to grab peoples genitals if they don't wear the correct underwear. I don't know how you "feel it's only fair". It's fair to give people a choice and what you are doing is giving a thinly veiled threat.

Anonymous said...

Actually, Bob, you & your coworkers have told and continue to tell women that they will be sexually assaulted by invasive body searches if they wear head coverings, jewelry, underwire bras, long skirts, tight skirts, loose pants, cultural clothing like saris, religious clothing (like turbans for men), menstrual napkins, & various medically necessary devices and items.

I suggest you update your blog post to reflect the truth.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

The policy has always been to keep the passenger withtheir property in their line of vision or with a traveling companion...how many cases of theft happen due to your perceived notion that the individual is kept from their property happen on a daily basis to the MILLIONS of people who fly each and every day?? Am I saying it never happens, no, but a majority of thefts that occur in any airport are due to the confusion and stress level of the individual who allow themselves to be distracted from their domain awarness...i.e. leaving their bag unattended whil figuring out what gate to go to, corraling traveling companions, etc....

January 7, 2011 5:50 PM

This is an outright lie. I have personally had my belongings removed from my line of sight while being made to use the AIT and/or being subjected to a pat-down.

Try again and tell the truth not policy which is at best and an absolute lie at worst.

If you enjoy this type of abuse by our government, supposedly for the people and by the people (what a joke). Please feel free to move to another country that suits your thinking.

Anonymous said...

The person who responded to this post is clearly a TSA employee who offers no facts...that's the problem! Frequent travelers like myself don't believe the TSA officers who are usually uneducated and have limited training. Where's the information and/or TSA policies that supports your replies? Seeing is believing!

It is unbelievable in the United States of America that a government agency states they need to see you naked to board a plane.

1. When are you going to post information regarding the health effects of the AIT machines based on an independent study?

They have, multiple times, since it is not the answer you believe to be true in your head you refuse to believe it or recognize it as fact!

2. When are you going to publish the process for firing a TSA officer that invades a taxpayer's privacy?

What do you mean "publish"
If a TSA officer is not doing their job properly, and there is malicious intent the individual is fired...what more is there to say?

3. When are you going to address protecting a taxpayers personal property on the security belt while they are being "patted down"?

The policy has always been to keep the passenger withtheir property in their line of vision or with a traveling companion...how many cases of theft happen due to your perceived notion that the individual is kept from their property happen on a daily basis to the MILLIONS of people who fly each and every day?? Am I saying it never happens, no, but a majority of thefts that occur in any airport are due to the confusion and stress level of the individual who allow themselves to be distracted from their domain awarness...i.e. leaving their bag unattended whil figuring out what gate to go to, corraling traveling companions, etc....

Sam said...

Bob, do you understand why people wear clothing? One of its primary purposes is to protect the wearer from the vision of others. "Others" includes, believe it or not, government officials and lackeys.

More than one religion has modesty as a basic tenet - meaning in order to fly, you are requiring people (such as myself) to violate our basic beliefs and long-held traditions, for an absurdly small benefit, according to your own PR blog.

And driving or taking a train or bus is not a valid alternative for traveling anywhere more than a few hundred miles. I live in Maryland. If I want to visit my elderly grandmother in Colorado, I can either fly for 6 hours or drive for 4 days. Trains and buses take even longer. This means that removing my option to fly is a very effective restriction on my Constitutional right to travel.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Bob says: " Some might think this is TSA’s way of getting back at clever passengers. That’s not the case at all. It’s just security."
No, it was "just security" when we could be checked out and board a plane.
Making sure that nobody can hide their genitals and nipples isn't "just security," it is a power-hungry agency out of control.
Please stop fighting the public on this!

And then bad people with intent to kill us used aircrafts as missles and killed 3000 of our brother and sister Americans and things changed. It's sad to see that there are people out there who have forgotten that day and act like it's still September 10, 2001 today...

1916home.net said...

Its a sad state of the country we live in when everyone has to post anonymously. In a free society, we should be able to voice our opinions openly without any repercussions. Obviously, thats not the case anymore. We have achieved the level of fascism here in America with secret service paying people visits now for commenting about the president. Whats next - a Soviet system where people will just be taken away?

Did the TSA blog cover the pilot recently who did a youtube video on how easy it is for anyone with a security card to pass through doors? Those baggage guys have those tags and they come and go as they please. I think thats far more important that junk touching.

There are 50,000 car accident deaths a year and you arent patting Americans down each time we get into a car.

There are 300,000 people a year dying each year of malaria. Those dont get patted down, groped and searched.

And how many died in 9/11? 3,000 or so? Just saying.

Clearly, the pat downs are more of an intimidation measure than anything else.

-1916home.net

Anonymous said...

TSA security is no big deal. Anyone that been through the intake section of a prison system knows the reality of security. It keeps both the inmates and the staff safe.

I think that if time permits, TSA staff should give full body cavity searches on each crew member and passenger on a flight. There'd be no missed items then.

Keep on keepin' on, TSA!

Anonymous said...

Why does the TSA even have a blog?

Anonymous said...

Some day, this period will be viewed as the time when this nation reached a historical low point - when citizens - even the aged, disabled and toddlers - were being sexually groped and invaded, and their most intimate parts viewed by total strangers, on the million to one chance that they were a terrorist.
By the way, what's TSA planning to do when a real terrorist hides something in a body cavity? Will we all be subject to proctological or gynecological exams before we can fly? (I can imagine Blogger Bob's answer: "We can't reveal that at this time.") I would not put such an outrage past the ham-handed fools that are currently running the TSA. You should all be ashamed of yourselves.

Dave said...

Are the AIT machines more cost effective than requiring all passengers to be strip searched?

Ayn R. Key said...

I’m getting at the products folks have created that are designed to shield private areas of passengers going through our Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT).

Could you be a little more descriptive please? I'm not sure I know exactly what you are talking about.

avxo said...

Anonymous wrote: "This makes good sense and only the deliberately ignorant will fail to understand. The machine is designed to detect things under cloths that should not be there, might be dangerous, etc."

Except it doesn't really work. A recent study published in the Journal of Transportation Security concludes:

"It is very likely that a large (15-20 cm in diameter), irregularly-shaped, cm-thick pancake with beveled edges, taped to the abdomen, would be invisible to this technology, ironically, because of its large volume, since it is easily confused with normal anatomy. Thus, a third of a kilo of PETN, easily picked up in a competent pat down, would be missed by backscatter "high technology". Forty grams of PETN, a purportedly dangerous amount, would fit in a 1.25 mm-thick pancake of the dimensions simulated here and be virtually invisible."

But wait! There's more!

The authors go on to say: "The images are very sensitive to the presence of large pieces of high Z material, e. g., iron, but unless the spatial resolution is good, thin wires will be missed because of partial volume effects. It is also easy to see that an object such as a wire or a box-cutter blade, taped to the side of the body, or even a small gun in the same location, will be invisible."

But hey, it's only a small gun. Let's focus on the crotch area instead.

Anonymous said...

Fortunately, my company has opted out. Out of commercial air travel. Because of this and your agency. We are no longer allowed to fly on commercial jets. Trains, buses and private cars and aircraft. Our risk management and accounting department has determined it is now worth the risk in dealing with your agency on company business.

And I will wear whatever underwear I please when I travel.

Anonymous said...

So if scanning and/or patting down is CRITICAL to security, why aren't you patting people down at airports that don't have these scanners? How stupid do you think these terrorist are that they wouldn't go to a small regional airport, get through the metal detectors, and fly to a major airport...pat downs and scanners easily avoided by the ones you are really trying to catch.

Geez said...

Your choice of topics is baffling. If you are so interested in helping people out with their wardrobe choices why not go further and list other items that might trigger a patdown? If you can inform the public that wearing one type of clothing might lead to a patdown why not others?

TO several other commenters - you don't seem to understand what the machines do or what the clothing do The machines don't detect explosives, only anomalies, hence the number of people that get patdowns after the scanners for dangerous items like pocket lint and fabric folds. If supposed modesty-preserving briefs are form fitting and normal fabric except for a small area over the genitals, it's hard to imagine why this would be anomalous unless the genital outline was expected.

Russell said...

Bob,

You used the phrase; "private areas". And they are just that, private. The TSA is invading our privacy. Here's hoping that 2011 will bring policy changes that will restore our dignity when we choose to travel.

RRS

Anonymous said...

Bob you and your TSA agents can try till your blue in the face you will never get me in one of your machines. Not a stinking one of you are trained in radiology. What gives the TSA the right to use machines they are not qualified to use. I am looking forward to the day when the TSA starts losing all the law suits. Ten years from now when frequent flyers who get cancer comes after this agency and the government, what are you going to be blogging then.

Anonymous said...

If there is something shielding an area and we don’t know what’s under it, we have to conduct a pat-down.

Does this include Feminine Hygiene products and adult diapers? If so, exactly what kind of 'pat down' will be done?? I imagine this pat down must be pretty invasive to determine the difference between a maxi pad and a maxi pad with a C-4 liner. Or will you be swabbing, and testing for explosive residue, the 1 in 4 women who are on their periods??


What about men who wear an athletic supporter w/cup? What kind of 'pat down' can determine if the cup is lined with explosive? Again, I imagine it's a pretty invasive one. If I am wrong on that, please explain.

Anonymous said...

This is friendly advice the way an enhanced pat-down is a friendly touch.

Concerned Observer said...

What other products might result in a pat-down? Feminine hygiene pads? The string from a tampon (for which a pat-down would do NOTHING since the tampon is within a body cavity)? Adult diapers? Fart-filtering underwear(yes, they do exist)? A bandage on one's abdomen from a chest tube (which could result in an extremely painful pat/rub down)? What about slimming undergarments? And what about a transsexual who has recently had the male-to-female surgery and has bandages?

TSOs have consistently disrespected their fellow human beings who have medical restrictions, whether is be prosthetics, breast milk (oh, look, another story about breast milk... http://www.anktangle.com/2011/01/tsa-x-rayed-my-breastmilk.html ), or the simple fact that they cannot stand long enough for a body scan. TSOs are NOT FOLLOWING POLICY and since you have stated that what you post on here may not be reality because it is JUST POLICY, then this blog is largely irrelevant, more so because you now refuse to (or perhaps are forbidden to) address the real, hard questions.

It is sad that it is TSO West who is giving the most constructive answers here when you should have access to the information we not only want by legally deserve to have. It is not consent when your choices are 1) go through the Backscatter x-ray machine (of which everyone seems to be poorly informed about... I found no rat-tests using them), 2) receive a rubbing "pat down," or 3) be threatened with an $11,000 fine and not fly (which results in a loss of money). THIS is why a portion of the flying public is resorting to anti-AIT underwear. This is the issue that should be dealt with, not the underwear and flying pasties.

Anonymous said...

so even if we, as private, free American citizens try to protect our privacy and have a little bit of modesty in our nation's public airports, the TSA still has the right to humiliate us at will, all in the name of so called safety? Here's a tip for catching terrorists: Bomb, chemical, and lie detecting dogs are cheaper and more efficient, and use profiling! I know that people don't like it, but it's damn effective.

Anonymous said...

Wasn't the point of the Xray backscatter machines to see dangerous items in the underwear anyways?

So, why, when you see the underwear are you now opposed to it?

Anonymous said...

Hundreds of Millions of American citizens flying since 911.

70% failure rate of the TSA finding test weapons.

ZERO AMERICANS ATTEMPTING TO BOMB OR HIJACK AIRLINES.

THE ODDS OF AN AMERICAN ATTEMPTING TO HURT YOU ON YOUR FLIGHT. ZERO!!!!


The odds that the TSA / Homeland Security is doing this for reasons other than to really keep Americans safe? 100%
THAT IS WHAT EVERY GOVERNMENT DOES AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE BILL OF RIGHTS WAS WRITTEN TO DEFEND US AGAINST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is about MONEY for Chertoff and his criminal cronies. Money for Napolitano and Pistole after they leave office and become LOBBYISTS.

And also about the government's desire to grab more and more power and control over the public.

Anonymous said...

And, still, the basic questions that should be trivial for the keepers of this blog to answer, go unanswered:

1. Is a TSO required to identify him/herself when asked?

2. How can the public determine the disciplinary action taken when TSOs violate the law/policy?

These two items, and dozens more, will be investigated by the 112th Congress. Please write your Representative and Representative Mica to demand that the conduct of the TSA be brought in line with the law.

RB said...

Well if TSA would release the Strip Search Machine images proving they are just chalky outlines or fuzzy images as stated in TSA's legal filings in the case brought by EPIC then we would know that we nothing to be concerned about.

So show us the proof TSA, publish the actual Strip Search Machine images in exactly the same sizes and resolutions that TSA employees view when conducting Electronic Strip Searches.

TSA can put this discussion to rest in one easy posting.

RB said...

And then bad people with intent to kill us used aircrafts as missles and killed 3000 of our brother and sister Americans and things changed. It's sad to see that there are people out there who have forgotten that day and act like it's still September 10, 2001 today...

January 7, 2011 7:58 PM

..............


A person dies about every 13 minutes in auto accidents, a number that easily outpaces the number of people who have died from terrorist acts in the US every year. If you need help with the math thats about 35,000 dead people each year from traffic related fatalities.

Perhaps we should spend the money wasted on TSA to improve our roadways, improve traffic safety and reduce those deaths that happen every day, every week, every month and every year.

TSA has done nothing to improve public safety for all the billions of dollars poured down that agencies sewer.

Anonymous said...

If you were really concerned about security, you wouldn't have restaurants with steak knives in the secure area, nor would you allow shops to have things like cork screws.

This is absurd.

Anonymous said...

In all the time TSA has been around, they haven't caught a single terrorist. Instead, they harass law abiding citizens and strip us of our rights. Air travel is a necessity for many people, but now those people must choose between high res naked images that are of questionable safety, or being thoroughly groped. How many trauma victims have you people re-traumatized?

kimm said...

"...Anonymous said...
This is an outright lie. I have personally had my belongings removed from my line of sight while being made to use the AIT and/or being subjected to a pat-down..."

Agreed. When I was hassled due to my brace, I was unable to see any of my things, and they were left on the belt for anyone to grab. My money, phone, plane tickets, id were all in my bags that were left, unattended, all because of my brace.

So I was hassled for my leg AND my property was put at risk and out of my sight.

Concerned Observer said...

Anonymous said...

This is friendly advice the way an enhanced pat-down is a friendly touch.

January 7, 2011 11:17 PM

-----

I second this statement.

In any case, I am more than a little curious as to whether or not I might be subjected to a pat-down if I am menstruating and I am wearing a pad or a tampon. The scanner will definitely detect an anomaly if I am wearing a pad, from the images I have been able to locate online, even the supposedly less intrusive ones.
The more crisp images have the potential to display the string from a tampon if I don't make an effort to hide it. If I might get a pat-down for this, what would be the point? The only thing that could confirm that the tampon is not a threat is if a cavity search is done.
If menstruating women are a problem for the TSA, perhaps there should be TSA issue pads and/or tampons that women can trade for at the gate... and the "potentially dangerous" trade-ins can go in the bin with the 20 or 30 "potentially dangerous" bottles of water beside the box of embroidery scissors and nail clippers with tiny blades.

Another note, because my first comment was deleted (perhaps due to the reference to the new Jan. 1 breastmilk blog post by a mother), this one will be screen capped.

Anonymous said...

"And then bad people with intent to kill us used aircrafts as missles and killed 3000 of our brother and sister Americans and things changed. It's sad to see that there are people out there who have forgotten that day and act like it's still September 10, 2001 today..."

Yes, 3000 airplane deaths is a tragedy. And since then, over 300,000 people have died in car crashes, 130,000 have been murdered, and about 65000 have died from melanoma skin cancer. You (and most of the country) have lost all perspective of the actual risk of terrorist attacks. With
about 87000 flights per day, there would need to be 870 planes taken down EACH DAY for flying to be less than even 99 percent safe. Hardly worth taking a naked picture of my wife and kids over.

Anonymous said...

So much for the land of the free and the home of the brave, right?

More like the land of the restrained and the home of the cowardice.

Sometimes the best thing to do when something bad happens is... nothing. Life goes on. But, yeah, 9/11 happened, and look where we are now.

Those terrorists must be laughing at us right now from how we're reacting.

Remember guys, THE TERRORISTS HATE US BECAUSE OF OUR FREEDOMS!!!

lol

Anonymous said...

I believe that we have a right to travel (conflicts with people who say you give up your liberties when you purchase a ticket). I believe that performing a pat down that would include touching of genitals is unwarranted under most circumstances. I believe that the scanners violate our rights against unreasonable searches.

Therefore, when the TSA wishes to perform unconstitutional searches then they are giving up their rights to detain us from our traveling activities.

The TSA can either: a) perform their duty and be in compliance with our pre-constitutional and constitutional rights or b) do nothing.

I shall not and cannot, being a veteran sworn to defend the constitution, permit the TSA to twist and distort our founding fathers great work. The conclusion is to refuse a nude-o-screen and to refuse the enhanced pat down and continue on my travels and to arrest anyone for kidnapping who wishes to hinder my travels.

The notion that the TSA officers are doing their job would be a defense to present to a judge ; this defense does not exist until it is brought up in court.

The attempted subversion of the constitution by the TSA is a greater safety risk to the people of this country than the violation results of the TSA. So, from the viewpoint of safety itself, these pat downs do not pass the test. And, in any event, the aspect of safety is not a proper consideration when examining our constitutional rights (otherwise we could not own dangerous guns or speak freely).

For domestic travel of US citizens, the current TSA methods are unconstitutional & a soldier does not need any court to make this assessment .. it is quite clear on the face of the facts.

Anonymous said...

I understand that about two million people fly in the US per day. When I see the small amount of complaints on this website I think that TSA must be doing something right. The complaints are from a very small minority of little people.

How many have said they won't fly anymore? A dozen? Will that change anything? Time these people get with the program and participate to help the lines through.

We live in a different time now. Obedience to government authority is necessary to defeat terrorism.

Anonymous said...

I am clearly confused... I could have sworn terrorism was when you ruined a large number of innocent peoples day. Apparently that is just the standard procedure of the TSA

Anonymous said...

What about the lead-lined underwear that prostate cancer patients with radioactive implants have to wear? Do you want us to take it off and expose you to gamma radiation we emit? Would be glad to do it and share some radiation with you!

Anonymous said...

rb said:
"Perhaps we should spend the money wasted on TSA to improve our roadways, improve traffic safety and reduce those deaths that happen every day, every week, every month and every year."

ive seen areas that have put in red light cams to stop people from breaking the law and make the streets safer. how well did that go over?

Anonymous said...

kimm said:
"Agreed. When I was hassled due to my brace, I was unable to see any of my things, and they were left on the belt for anyone to grab. My money, phone, plane tickets, id were all in my bags that were left, unattended, all because of my brace.

So I was hassled for my leg AND my property was put at risk and out of my sight."

did anything turn up missing? did you ask a tsa person to get your items for you because you couldnt see them?

Anonymous said...

The truth is, the Patriot Act did nothing but start a seed that runs fully against the spirit and letter of the U.S. Constitution. I swore to defend it against all enemies, foreign and domestic, as did many military and police officers.

All the Patriot Act did was to start turning the guns on the American people. We are now all enemies of the state, guilty until proven innocent in a corrupt court.

This Homeland Security and TSA are a travesty. The real terrorists are the ones who planned this all along. We The People are watching. We The People are resisting.

God is watching.

"Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither." - Benjamin Franklin

Aside from all of this, the real security is the fact that the pilots all have firearms and locked doors. This has been going on for ages.

All who work for the US Government just remember who the real masters are. We The People.

It is our right to not be detained and searched.

The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Anonymous said...

Shoe bomber? Travelers must take off their shoes. Underwear bomber? Travelers must go through x-ray machines. So what service exactly is the TSA providing us if they are only implementing these policies after the fact? We have just been lucky so far that these attackers have been incompetent. Let's face it - if you're not requiring body cavity searches then there's a hole (LOL) in your security. It's just a matter of time before some idiot smuggles something onto a plane. I guess we'll just have to hope he's as incompetent as the last couple of guys.

Rock said...

Bob, another simple question that has a yes or no answer to it.

If the TSA officer needs to move me, and wants to separate me from my property (get it out of my sight) and I'm not being arrested or detained, and I allowed to say NO? Do I have the right to keep my property on my, or at least within sight?
And by right I mean actual right, legally. According to the TSA.

This should be easy - yes or no.

(p.s. I've been separated from my stuff before.)

Anonymous said...

"Anonymous Said....
I understand that about two million people fly in the US per day. When I see the small amount of complaints on this website I think that TSA must be doing something right. The complaints are from a very small minority of little people.

How many have said they won't fly anymore? A dozen? Will that change anything? Time these people get with the program and participate to help the lines through.

We live in a different time now. Obedience to government authority is necessary to defeat terrorism.

January 8, 2011 4:15 PM"

What country are you from? Obviously not the United States. Nazi Germany perhaps. We the People of the United States are not supposed to be obedient to our government, it's supposedly the other way around, that is why we have a constitution which in theory limits the governments interference into the peoples lives. PLEASE READ IT.

If you wish to live in country where the government can control your life and provide a nanny state please feel free to move there.

Anonymous said...

"Anonymous Said.....
kimm said:
"Agreed. When I was hassled due to my brace, I was unable to see any of my things, and they were left on the belt for anyone to grab. My money, phone, plane tickets, id were all in my bags that were left, unattended, all because of my brace.

So I was hassled for my leg AND my property was put at risk and out of my sight."

did anything turn up missing? did you ask a tsa person to get your items for you because you couldnt see them?

January 8, 2011 8:14 PM"

Like this person I have been separated from my belongings on more than one occasion and had items go missing on a couple.

Why on earth would I ask the possible thief to watch or bring those belongings to me given them an easier way of stealing.

I don't believe all TSA personnel are guilty of being thieves but I am absolutely positive it happens more often than the TSA will ever admit.

Anonymous said...

Do I have the right to keep my property on my, or at least within sight?
And by right I mean actual right, legally. According to the TSA.


Good question

Bob, I'd also like to remind you of the purpose of this blog

The purpose of this blog is to facilitate an ongoing dialogue on innovations in security, technology and the checkpoint screening process.

Failure to answer is a violation of the TSA's own Comment Policy

RB said...

Anonymous said...
rb said:
"Perhaps we should spend the money wasted on TSA to improve our roadways, improve traffic safety and reduce those deaths that happen every day, every week, every month and every year."

ive seen areas that have put in red light cams to stop people from breaking the law and make the streets safer. how well did that go over?

January 8, 2011 8:13 PM

..........
About as well as TSA calling itself a security agency!

Anonymous said...

"We live in a different time now. Obedience to government authority is necessary to defeat terrorism."

As opposed to, say, the Cold War, two World Wars, etc?

You are scared and that leads you to forfeit your liberties. Man up and insist that government obey the citizenry.

The TSA implements security theater intended to convice the public that its secure. Airports are sieves, as shown by the patriot pilot (btw, notice there's been no discussion on this blog of his concerns).

TSA is now a huge government bureaucracy of 65000+ employees. Like most bureacracies, the TSA will work to protect and grow itself. Safety for the traveling public is secondary.

MarkVII said...

Unfortunately, this situation is aggravated by issues that could have been dealt with long ago, but weren't.

The issue of being separated from one's belongings during screening is as old as this blog, but the ongoing reports show it was never effectively addressed. Never mind that a passenger can ask that their belongings be kept close by, there are no guarantees -- because checkpoint personnel are not held accountable.

The issue of who's going to see the images and what's going to be done with them is as old as WBI, later renamed AIT. For all the assurances, there's a lot of folks who clearly aren't convinced -- because the TSA lacks credibility. The TSA has yet to demonstrate that it can make the basics work reliability, so why should the reassurances about WBI/AIT carry much weight with the public?

And that leads us to where we are today -- the public isn't convinced that the TSA is handling this imagery properly, and TSA proof underwear hits the market.

It all comes back to competence, integrity, and accountability -- or the lack thereof.

Mark
qui custodiet ipsos custodes

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said

Obedience to government authority is necessary to defeat terrorism.

January 8, 2011 4:15 PM

---

Obedience is a virtue for trained dogs and brainless cattle. You can submit to whatever abuse, groping, and humiliation you want, you poor victim of Stockholm syndrome. I choose freedom over elusive security. Let's face the simple facts (for mentioning these Bob loves to delete my posts): TSA has not prevented any attacks. If they had, they would have been trumpeting their "victory". Stop wasting our tax money!

Anonymous said...

Remember the post (Message In a Carry-On) about the artist who designs metal plates for baggage with messages that appear on the X-ray monitor? This is very similar to that.

To paraphrase - slightly - Bob's message in the post that he references: If an officer can’t get a good look at what’s in the underwear, it’s “bag check” time.

Wimpie said...

"We live in a different time now. Obedience to government authority is necessary to defeat terrorism."

Do you like under a bridge?

Statistically, there is NO TERRORISM in America! Never has been.

Number of people opting out of flying: Thousands. Number of people who have genuine contempt of OUR government: Thousands. The numbers are going up - not down. Get the message?

Philip said...

I don't understand how and why concealing genitals is grounds for suspicion of any kind. Can you explain, or is that a sensitive security detail?

GSOLTSO said...

Philip sez – “I don't understand how and why concealing genitals is grounds for suspicion of any kind. Can you explain, or is that a sensitive security detail?


Philip, concealing any area of the body from screening can create a situation where items that are dangerous can be concealed as well. Bob is not talking about someone using metallic paint to write “I love the TSA” on their chest to make a statement, he is referring to active attempts to circumvent security process. If you have something that can prevent screening from proceeding, it can just as easily be used to conceal bomb components or weapons.

West
TSA Blog Team

SSSS for some reason said...

"..We live in a different time now. Obedience to government authority is necessary to defeat terrorism."


Are you going to say the same thing when you are required to offer a DNA sample to buy your ticket.

Are you going to say the same thing when you are required to do a breathalizer just to get your car to start.

Are you going to say the same thing when you are required to file your travel plans with the local Law Enforcement just so you can travel outside of your local City/Town/Parrish?

Are you going to say the same thing when that same Government Authority comes knocking on your door telling you to 'come with us.'?

It is the beginning of the proverbial slippery slope that all citizens are responsible to guard against.

And I wish I knew the source of this quote because it is appropriate in regards to the TSA.... Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not.

Anonymous said...

West Said -

"If you have something that can prevent screening from proceeding, it can just as easily be used to conceal bomb components or weapons."

West - If someone is going to hide bomb parts from the TSA they are going to stick them in a cavity, not use special undies.

The scanners were rolled out to the public to detect "explosives". Now official statements are backing off and we are told they detect "anomalies" not explosives.

Unfortunately because they are based upon a person looking at a screen, they are less effective at detecting metal then the metal detectors that the TSA wants to replace them with.

If you want to find metal, you need metal detectors and wands. If you want to find explosives you need dogs. If you want to find terrorists you need an intelligence network that starts before you hit the airport.

The public is asking for real security. The scanners are simply a billion dollar knee jerk reaction that is compromising safety and bankrupting our country.

Anonymous said...

"If you have something that can prevent screening from proceeding, it can just as easily be used to conceal bomb components or weapons."

Of course, TSA's strip-search technology has yet to find a single bomb component. But you already know that.

Anonymous said...

"Philip, concealing any area of the body from screening can create a situation where items that are dangerous can be concealed as well. Bob is not talking about someone using metallic paint to write “I love the TSA” on their chest to make a statement, he is referring to active attempts to circumvent security process. If you have something that can prevent screening from proceeding, it can just as easily be used to conceal bomb components or weapons.

West
TSA Blog Team"

I would expect a real terrorist to try and draw as little attention as possible to themselves. People who are being difficult aren't going to be terrorists. The real terrorists will be very polite and cooperative.

GSOLTSO said...

Anon sez – “Unfortunately because they are based upon a person looking at a screen, they are less effective at detecting metal then the metal detectors that the TSA wants to replace them with.

If you want to find metal, you need metal detectors and wands. If you want to find explosives you need dogs. If you want to find terrorists you need an intelligence network that starts before you hit the airport.”

AIT gives the ability to find metal as well as non- metallic items. I do know that AIT operators have found metal items, with the addition of non metal items during the normal course of screening. I agree with you 100% that we need an intelligence network to find terrorists before they get here, good thing we have the FBI, CIA, NSA and several other alphabet soup agencies working on that to help us. There is always room for improvement, and hopefully those agencies and DHS will continue to get better and share intel back and forth to help keep the bad guys out of the airports.

West
TSA Blog Team

GSOLTSO said...

Anon sez – “I would expect a real terrorist to try and draw as little attention as possible to themselves. People who are being difficult aren't going to be terrorists. The real terrorists will be very polite and cooperative.”

True, but they have, could and would use someone else to distract and take attention from them. Many times throughout history folks have used misdirection and diversions to keep the main focus of their action from being discovered. Let's also not discount the fact that random psychotics can also show up and may be difficult to deal with in the process of trying something *bad*.

West
TSA Blog Team

Anonymous said...

"True, but they have, could and would use someone else to distract and take attention from them. "

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

All the more reason the TSA should stop focusing on things that don't matter.

Current checkpoint rules make it far to easy to distract a TSO with harmless items

RB said...

Philip, concealing any area of the body from screening can create a situation where items that are dangerous can be concealed as well. Bob is not talking about someone using metallic paint to write “I love the TSA” on their chest to make a statement, he is referring to active attempts to circumvent security process. If you have something that can prevent screening from proceeding, it can just as easily be used to conceal bomb components or weapons.

West
TSA Blog Team

January 10, 2011 8:08 AM

.............
What is very disturbing is that TSA has no concept of personal modesty or privacy.

Strip Search Machines do not detect weapons of any kind so they are not what Congress directed TSA to spend money on.

TSA is so far off the charts on this that I do not understand how anyone is expected to believe that TSA is only trying to protect the public from terrorist who might use an airplane or other mass transportation means to attack America.

We have far more to fear from TSA than any terrorist.

RB said...

True, but they have, could and would use someone else to distract and take attention from them. Many times throughout history folks have used misdirection and diversions to keep the main focus of their action from being discovered. Let's also not discount the fact that random psychotics can also show up and may be difficult to deal with in the process of trying something *bad*.

West
TSA Blog Team

January 10, 2011 12:25 PM

.........
Since TSA has zero experience with any real terrorist how can you make the above statement and expect anyone to take you seriously?

Anonymous said...

"AIT gives the ability to find metal as well as non- metallic items. I do know that AIT operators have found metal items, with the addition of non metal items during the normal course of screening."

West - I really appreciate you answering questions.

My point is this. We all know that a 9/11 style attack is no longer on the table. Guns and knives are no longer going to take down airliners. So we are talking about bombs and detonators.

If i want to hide a metallic or non metallic object from security a bad guy will put it between skin or in a cavity. These objects will not show up on an AIT scanner.

So consider someone who wants to smuggle wire or a blade. He tapes it inside his leg, between his "junk". Or sticks it in a cavity. Now lets say that person is selected for AIT.

While YES an AIT scanner can detect anomalies, it will not pick up metal stuck in said above places. A metal detector will pick up metal stuck to the outside of the body. That and the metal detector is automated making it more reliable, while the AIT requires human detection. Fatigue, boredom, mood all play a role in operators effectiveness.

Because of this the AIT scanner, while it may detect metal, is less effective overall then the traditional metal detector. And it cannot detect explosives just "anomalies". So using it as a primary detection method increases the chance that a metal object will get through.

It does however seem to catch potheads hiding dime bags. But that is not what you guys are for, and that is not what our tax money should be spent on.

With the money that was spent on these we could have bought a lot of dogs and put a lot of boots on the ground.

If the TSA really wants to continue to use these machines they need to be used as secondary screening and only after, not in place of, metal detectors. Everyone should go through the detector. If it goes off they get the wand. Then people can be selected to go through the AIT. This will assure that no metallic objects get through.

Dan said...

For those of you that support this nonsense, I have but one question: Why does your cowardice trump my liberty?

Anonymous said...

None of this changes the fact that the TSA has never once stopped a REAL threat from getting onto a plane.

The only people they've kept off planes are medical patients, parents of small children and the occasional pothead.

Such threats to national security!

Anonymous said...

Sam,

Where in the Constitution does it state specifically that you have a right to a specific mode of travel? Does it maybe just state travel as a right, and not the means by which you travel? The means of travel is not a right. Just the ability to travel is a right. There is a difference. How you get somewhere is not the same as the ability to choose to go.

Anonymous said...

What a disgrace you people are. You are threatening to grab peoples genitals if they don't wear the correct underwear. I don't know how you "feel it's only fair". It's fair to give people a choice and what you are doing is giving a thinly veiled threat.
___________________________________
People do have a choice. To fly or not to fly.

Anonymous said...

West says:

"True, but they have, could and would use someone else to distract and take attention from them. Many times throughout history folks have used misdirection and diversions to keep the main focus of their action from being discovered. Let's also not discount the fact that random psychotics can also show up and may be difficult to deal with in the process of trying something *bad*."

If the TSA is worried about being distracted with actions of travelers and missing the actual terrorist, then perhaps they shouldn't create their own distractions by holding travelers such as Ms. Amato (and many others) and creating a scene of their own making.

Anonymous said...

Wimpie said:
"Statistically, there is NO TERRORISM in America! Never has been."

what about the OKC bombing? what about the car bomb in times square last year? what about 9/11? what about the first attempt on the twin towers with car bombs?

Anonymous said...

True, but they have, could and would use someone else to distract and take attention from them. Many times throughout history folks have used misdirection and diversions to keep the main focus of their action from being discovered.
----------------------------------------

Fantastic point, West! The fact that such things could theoretically happen is a great reason to spend billions of dollars. After all, it's not like that money is desperately needed to fight things that actually kill people every single day or anything...
-------

"Let's also not discount the fact that random psychotics can also show up and may be difficult to deal with in the process of trying something *bad*."
---------------------------------------
I have no idea what you are talking about. Was this in response to another comment that I might have missed? Do you deal with a lot of "random psychotics" at checkpoints?

Anonymous said...

anon said:
"I don't believe all TSA personnel are guilty of being thieves but I am absolutely positive it happens more often than the TSA will ever admit."
how often is that? so the tsa people are the theives and not the other people around your items?

Anonymous said...

anon said:
"Those terrorists must be laughing at us right now from how we're reacting."

are you referring to the govt or how the citizens are critizing the govt? id say that they are laughing more at the outrage of them using our rights against us to try and bring harm to us, aka the underwear bomber. these terriorists are spreading terror by making americans feel uncomfortable when traveling. not from fear of them but from fear of being touched. they are winning by turning citizens against the govt. look at the big picture.

Anonymous said...

"About as well as TSA calling itself a security agency!"

well said rb, another postively positive spin on things.

Anonymous said...

Blogger GSOLTSO said...

Philip sez – “I don't understand how and why concealing genitals is grounds for suspicion of any kind. Can you explain, or is that a sensitive security detail?


Philip, concealing any area of the body from screening can create a situation where items that are dangerous can be concealed as well. Bob is not talking about someone using metallic paint to write “I love the TSA” on their chest to make a statement, he is referring to active attempts to circumvent security process. If you have something that can prevent screening from proceeding, it can just as easily be used to conceal bomb components or weapons.

West
TSA Blog Team
-------------------------------

But a terrorist can conceal a bomb in their anus or vagina to circumvent AIT. How does AIT help in this situation? Which is the next logical step for terrorism?

Anonymous said...

Blogger GSOLTSO said...
True, but they have, could and would use someone else to distract and take attention from them. Many times throughout history folks have used misdirection and diversions to keep the main focus of their action from being discovered. Let's also not discount the fact that random psychotics can also show up and may be difficult to deal with in the process of trying something *bad*.

West
TSA Blog Team
-------------------------------

Like the TSA using AIT to take the focus off of the fact that they have no idea who they are looking for, they only know who they are looking at.

Anonymous said...

What is the TSA response to the information published by the Journal of Transportation Security? I keep hearing about the short comings.

What is the TSA response to radiation concerns, keeping in mind that general consensus of unaffiliated experts is condemn ANY radiation as safe?

Carl said...

This is theatre. Alert citizens have thwarted bombings like the shoe bomber, not the TSA. Those same citizens are now treated like criminals: prodded, groped and searched without just cause and against founding principles and common sense.

Since you may get a groping even if you submit to nude photos of yourself, one might as well opt for the groping.

I'm so disappointed.

Anonymous said...

So you are looking at our genitals!

Anonymous said...

Regarding people being concerned about eventual cavity searches...Yes, you will have to have one, but it won't be any worse than going through the current AIT machine. http://www.smithsdetection.com/1025_5598.php
You just have to love technology, it isn't going away.

Anonymous said...

"It’s just security."

Actually, it's just security theatre.

Anonymous said...

Look at the majority of these comments. They are overwhelmingly against your invasive policies. Why is this being allowed to continue? Why do I feel more afraid of my government than of terrorists?

The government should obey the people, not the other way around.

Retired SF COL said...

On January 10, 2011, at 12:25 PM, West said (inresponse to Anonymous:

"True, but they have, could and would use someone else to distract and take attention from them. Many times throughout history folks have used misdirection and diversions to keep the main focus of their action from being discovered. Let's also not discount the fact that random psychotics can also show up and may be difficult to deal with in the process of trying something *bad*.

West
TSA Blog Team"

I have planned these types of special operations. The scenario you describe: "...misdirection and diversions to keep the main focus of their action from being discovered..." is only effective in the planning stages. It is useless in the execution phase, which, in this scenario, would happen at the checkpoint. Every saboteur, covert operative, and terrorist, including everyone from Islamic extremists to abortion clinic bombers, understand this. Apparently, the TSA does not.

Anonymous said...

West,

Even though I disagree with you, I appreciate you answering some of the comments. I believe the anger expressed by many commenters, which has included me, would be lessened if we had more dialogue with the TSA, rather than feeling like we're yelling into a whirlwind.

Anonymous said...

My god, you people have no decency.

http://blog.gladrags.com/2010/11/24/tsa-groin-searches-menstruating-woman/

"But what ultimately happened is that I was subjected to search so invasive that I was left crying and dealing with memories that I thought had been dealt with years ago of prior sexual assualts. Why? Because of my flannel panty-liner. These new scans are so horrible that if you are wearing something unusual (like a piece of cloth on your panties) then you will be subjected to a search where a woman repeatedly has to check your "groin" while another woman watches on (two in my case - they were training in a new girl - awesome)"

Anonymous said...

I have read all kinds of things about how the same sex pats you down. However, does the same gender view your scan?

Anonymous said...

So yes - your scanners do, in fact, show genitalia - and yes, your pat-downs do, in fact, involve touching genitalia. At least you've finally admitted how invasive your procedure is.

Horrifying.

Anonymous said...

This means that removing my option to fly is a very effective restriction on my Constitutional right to travel.

January 7, 2011 7:32 PM

Because there were airplanes 230 years ago, right? OH I get it now. You just bend the constitution to your convenience... how nice.

Concerned Citizen #655321 said...

"Some might think this is TSA’s way of getting back at clever passengers. That’s not the case at all. It’s just security."

That's the most hilarious thing I've read all day. Holy smokes. Good one, Bob.

RB said...

This blog has been dark since January 10, 2011 12:25 PM. (last posting in the most current thread)

It is now January 12, 2011 1:15 Central.

Is this anyway to run a professional operation?

Two Moderators are listed Bob being one and Lynn another. Also listed, at least in name as a Blogger, is Nico who has been very out of sight since claiming Strip Search Machine images were safe for little kids to view.

TSA, if you can't even run a blog then why not pull the plug?

Anonymous said...

I asked this question yesterday I do not see it posted. Let me ask again. If I step in a scanner is the same gender as I am viewing the scan? or is that only for pat downs.

Anonymous said...

True, but they have, could and would use someone else to distract and take attention from them. …
West
TSA Blog Team


Two implication of this statement come to mind:

• that the TSA has documented instances of actual terrorists using diversionary tactics to test security, presumably unsuccessfully, but as nobody is allowed to enter the security checkpoint without completing the screening process, this must have resulted in undocumented arrests;

• the vigilant and exhaustive attention that the TSA will give to those who don't follow its rules, the overwhelming majority of which will never be a security threat, is in fact a reaction that actual terrorists can predict, provoke, and use to compromise airport security.

Interesting.

Anonymous said...

West from the TSA: "Philip, concealing any area of the body from screening can create a situation where items that are dangerous can be concealed as well."

Even if you are able to see the exterior of a person's body, you can't see past their skin. It seems like the logical next step for someone who hides a bomb under their clothes, once you've taken away that option, is for them to hide it inside their body. So how are you stopping bombs that someone has swallowed or has had surgically implanted? Are you going to x-ray every passenger next? You have to stop somewhere, and we're telling you that you have to stop now. We're America, you work for us, we're telling you to stop.

Trying to prevent terrorists from bringing their tools on board an aircraft is an exercise in futility unless you have perfect security. Even if you made every passenger strip down and get on the plane without any belongings or clothes, a determined group of terrorists could still cause a disturbance and even potentially destroy the plane. You can't just stop the tools; you have to stop the terrorists from getting on the plane. TSA doesn't do that.

TSA does detain and search citizens of the United States for questionable reasons, though. I'm pretty sure we have laws against that sort of thing...

Anonymous said...

Yeah, I'm not flying anymore, so this doesn't matter. Thanks TSA.

Anonymous said...

We live in a different time now. Obedience to government authority is necessary to defeat terrorism.

Obedience to governemtn authority is necessary? Are you kidding? The is still a free country and there is no reason why someone can't protest what the govenement is doing. You might get put on a watch list which is a scary thought but we live in different times right?

Anonymous said...

West,

I find your comment about random "pscotics" offense. Obviously you're trying to use the shooting in AZ as a reason to demonize the mentally ill. I'm sure if there was a "pscyotic" he would probably start killing everyone in line in the hudge logjam. Also, so you know, the mentally ill are not more prone to violence than anyone else. To imply that someone who is psycotic is a terrorist is disgusting

GSOLTSO said...

I do not pretend to have all the answers, nothing out there is foolproof or 100%, but the TSOs and workforce have to work within the framework we are given, and currently the AIT gives a better chance at detecting more items than just metal. I understand the anger, and the frustration that many of the flying public feels. I can see both sides of this argument and currently I agree with the AIT being the screening of choice because of the better chance it gives us of finding *bad* items.

West
TSA Blog Team

Anonymous said...

BB, you understand you are now telling people what kind of underwear they can wear now? Sanitary napkins are also an issue I hear, so women shouldn't travel on their period if they don't want their genitals touched?

I hope one day you can see what the organization you work for is doing, and that you helped. I'd have a hard time doing that, no matter how much they paid me.

Anonymous said...

"I can see both sides of this argument and currently I agree with the AIT being the screening of choice because of the better chance it gives us of finding *bad* items."

Except it's not finding any more bad items than previous screenings did, it's more invasive, it's dangerous, and it does things like leave people covered in their own urine.

Sandra said...

The pressure put on by National Opt Out day is beginning to have the desired impact:

From WaPo:

"..Pistole said both the passenger and security personnel would see the image, rather than the current system where images are viewed by an officer in a private room. Pistole said he also is reviewing pat-down procedures that have raised objections."

Anonymous said...

Seeing or feeling my genitalia doesn't make anyone any safer when someone can just shove their explosives up their...

We are supposed to believe that foreign terrorists who have thousands of dollars to spend on flight schools and living for years in the US can't take advantage of lax security for ground crews or even compromise underpaid TSA employees? Perhaps you should start each day off with an invasive cavity search during your team huddle, since you apparently don't know where to draw the line between personal dignity, privacy, politeness to tourists and guests of our country, and security.

Your policies are ridiculous, insensitive, intrusive, immoral, and un-american.

Anonymous said...

West,

Please clarify your remark about "random psychotics." Are you suggesting that "random psychotics" have actually attempted to attack airliners and/or security checkpoints, or are you merely referring to the possibility that they *could*?

Anonymous said...

"True, but they have, could and would use someone else to distract and take attention from them. Many times throughout history folks have used misdirection and diversions to keep the main focus of their action from being discovered."

West
TSA Blog Team

And since the TSA response to someone who is being difficult is to focus extra attention on them and do extra screening, the TSA will help a terrorist who is trying to create a diversion.

Your own words argue against the TSA.

Anonymous said...

"I can see both sides of this argument and currently I agree with the AIT being the screening of choice because of the better chance it gives us of finding *bad* items."

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

"As per the report, the scanners failed to detect 100 grams of RDX hidden in socks.

Further, small quantities of PEK/PETN/RDX (plastic explosives) kept concealed along the body’s contours could not be detected."

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Scanners-at-Delhi-airport-fail-to-detect-explosives-guns/Article1-650061.aspx

A police officer shares that the colleagues must sometimes search 100 percent of the scanner passengers by hand. On average the failure rate is 75 percent. The machine, which should reveal hidden weapons and explosives on the body or in the clothing, has apparent problems with precision. http://www.general-anzeiger-bonn.de/...id=830423&r=lf

TSORon said...

Dan asked...
For those of you that support this nonsense, I have but one question: Why does your cowardice trump my liberty?

----------------------------
A better question Dan is, why do you think that your liberty is more important than that of everyone else around you?

It isn't, which is why every passenger boarding a commerical aircraft is screened to the same level.

Jeff said...

Here is the text of the 4th Amendment:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

What you are doing is unconstitutional and immoral. I will not fly until these practices are abolished.

Anonymous said...

Except it's being demonstrated by testing that the scanners *can't* find bad items. You don't even need a body cavity to hids plastic explosives and weapons from it. Innocent people are even getting items past it that they didn't intend to.

The public is frustrated with the TSA because they're finally starting to realize that the TSA is not making them safer, and all it's doing is violating their basic rights and dignity to keep itself funded.

Anonymous said...

TSORon said:

"...why do you think that your liberty is more important than that of everyone else around you?

It isn't, which is why every passenger boarding a commerical aircraft is screened to the same level."

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

Yes, the TSA disregards everyone's freedoms and liberties.

Jim Huggins said...

TSORon writes:

A better question Dan is, why do you think that your liberty is more important than that of everyone else around you?

It isn't, which is why every passenger boarding a commerical aircraft is screened to the same level.


Except that isn't true.

Some passengers receive invasive patdowns or AIT screenings; others merely receive WTMD checks. That's hardly "screening to the same level".

Plenty of passengers receive full or partial exemptions to screening: senior members of Congress, cabinet secretaries, law enforcement officers, members of the military, and so on.

Airline employees who present themselves in uniform receive much more permissive screening (e.g. exemptions to the limits on liquids) than ordinary passengers, whether or not they're flying as employees or passengers on a flight.

And shall we talk about the number of TSA employees who have gotten caught breezing through a checkpoint in uniform and then boarding a commercial flight, simply to avoid having to go through screening? How many other employees are doing this on a regular basis, given that we've probably only caught a few of them?

No, not every passenger is "screened" to the same level.

Anonymous said...

A Friendly Message to 'Blogger Bob,' (and I mean this very sincerely as opposed to sarcastically):
Stop playing apologist for an agency helping to turn our country into a high-tech police state to the benefit of a few big players in the security industry and get a different job. Do you have any idea how much money Mr. Chertoff is making off of this 'AIT' technology? Maybe you should do some research.

TSORon said...

Jim Huggins said...
No, not every passenger is "screened" to the same level.
-------------------------
Actually Jim, they are. “Level” does not imply that the same methods are used, only that the screening covers all the same areas to the same degree. But you already knew that.

Dan said...

TSORon:

Are you seriously arguing that the false security that your agency supplies is more important than liberty? Really?!? Really?!?!?

Anonymous said...

TSORon said...

"A better question Dan is, why do you think that your liberty is more important than that of everyone else around you?

It isn't, which is why every passenger boarding a commerical aircraft is screened to the same level."

January 13, 2011 7:50 PM
----------------------------


True, Dan's liberty is not more important than mine or yours. However his liberty, as well as mine, yours and everybody else's is each more important than the cowardice of some.

Personal liberty is among the key tenants on which this country was founded and is the reason why we should all want to live here.

TSOJP said...

Jeff said...
Here is the text of the 4th Amendment:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."


Jeff,let me remind you that this constitutional amendment specifically refers to the right of the state to enter your home or personal property and seize your belongings with out having a warrant supported by probable cause. The exception is that in no way under U.S Law when in a Public place and when the safety of the public and or property could be placed at risk (especially threats against any mode of transportation) does a person have any reasonable expectation of total privacy. This applies especially in the exceptions to the fourth Admendment which does state in artice U.S 444, 419, 543, that security checkpoints, Highway traffic checkpoints, and sobreity checkpoints and any checkpoints involving public tranist transportation are exempt. On top of this we have a supreme court ruling United states vs Akai, which states that The Majority of the supreme court held and agreed making Law that Once a person enters tha secure area of an airport the constitutionality of a screening search does not depend on consent.   "That legal conclusion rests firmly on Supreme Court precedent and on the government's interest in ensuring the safety of passengers, airline personnel, and the general public." (UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Daniel Kuualoha AUKAI, Defendant-Appellant.


No. 04-10226.)

Therefore Jeff, I would suggest that there is plenty of legal backing for what the TSA does, and that if one dosent wish to undergoe the screening procedures that he/she may choose other modes of travel.

Anonymous said...

I am not at all afraid of *bad* objects in the hands of *good* people. The VAST majority of people fall into that category. Indeed many objects TSA considers *bad* have gotten through security with no ill effects. (I might even feel safer if a few more *good* people had *bad* items.) At the same time, *bad* people can create all kinds of problems even without *bad* items. It only makes sense to look for PEOPLE who are likely to pose a threat rather than for items that are harmless by themselves. And searching all of the people as though they are equal threats and spending time and energy on things like breast milk, medicine (something we have had some trouble with), tiny scissors, etc. seems to make is much less likely that security and intelligence agents will be able to find real threats in all of the noise.

Meanwhile, TSA agents can be very scary. All three of my daughters have been frightened of them for years—since long before the latest, more invasive measures came into play. Although my family has come in contact with professional, even polite agents from time to time, we seem to have had at least one bad experience each trip, and each of my girls has been reduced to tears at least once due to a TSA interaction. (And we have only made very small attempts at reporting these problems out of fear.) Since the new rules, none of the girls wants to fly again, even to see their grandparents. (The one most upset is actually my teenager, so modified rules for kids under 12 is not at all comforting. By the way, she is also extremely interested in an answer to the question about how wearing feminine products might affect screening.)

People wear clothes and parents teach their kids that no one can touch them without the consent for good reasons. Clearly violating innocent people’s efforts to conceal their bodies and remain untouched by strangers constitutes unreasonable search. We must stop permitting such invasive security methods as a primary level of security and begin to use methods that actually have a chance at stop violent terrorism rather than supporting the obvious cousin that is in place under the guise of security itself.

Anonymous said...

How are TSO's trained to handle mentally ill people that a psyhcotic? Of course you should know that 90% of those who have psycosis are not violent. Has the TSA provided Crisis Intervention Training to the TSO's? Has there ever been someone psychotic where the TSA had to restrain them? Or does the TSA ask law enforcement for help? Or are you just trying to spread fear of the mentall ill to the general public?

Anonymous said...

TSOJP said...
(UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Daniel Kuualoha AUKAI, Defendant-Appellant.


No. 04-10226.)

Therefore Jeff, I would suggest that there is plenty of legal backing for what the TSA does, and that if one dosent wish to undergoe the screening procedures that he/she may choose other modes of travel.

January 14, 2011 3:40 PM

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


Interesting cherry-picking of the ruling there... The ruling also states:

A particular airport security screening search is constitutionally reasonable provided that it "is no more extensive nor intensive than necessary, in the light of current technology, to detect the presence of weapons or explosives [ ] [and] that it is confined in good faith to that purpose." Davis, 482 F.2d at 913.

This ruling was rendered BEFORE the enhanced AIT and pat-down procedures were in place. No court case has ruled whether or not these procedures are legal.

Also, the ruling states: like the Third Circuit, we find these search procedures to be minimally intrusive. See Hartwell, 436 F.3d at 180 (holding similar search procedures to be "minimally intrusive," explaining that the procedures are "well-tailored to protect personal privacy, escalating in invasiveness only after a lower level of screening disclosed a reason to conduct a more probing search").

Bolding for emphasis - neither AIT nor the enhanced pat-downs are well-tailored to protect personal privacy nor do they meet the criteria that are escalated only after certain criteria has been met.

Jim Huggins said...

I wrote: No, not every passenger is "screened" to the same level.

TSORon responds: Actually Jim, they are. “Level” does not imply that the same methods are used, only that the screening covers all the same areas to the same degree. But you already knew that.

No, Ron, I don't ... and your screening does not, in fact, cover all areas to the same degree.

You're about to tell me that all of these exceptions to the screening rules are fine, because they're "trusted" individuals who have been thoroughly vetted. But all that means is that they've been found to be trustworthy in the past, not the present.

As my financial advisor tells me all the time ... past performance is not indicative of future results.

The fact remains: people who move through the checkpoint are screened unequally, if at all.

Anonymous said...

It's very odd to hear the "find another travel" canard from the actual TSA people. Given that the TSA is desperately trying to find a way to force itself into Amtrak and even local public transportation, how long will it be until the TSA is telling the public "If you don't like the violation, don't travel at all"?

Anonymous said...

TSORon said...
Jim Huggins said...
No, not every passenger is "screened" to the same level.
-------------------------
Actually Jim, they are. “Level” does not imply that the same methods are used, only that the screening covers all the same areas to the same degree. But you already knew that.
January 14, 2011 1:13 PM


But a quick stroll through a WTMD (which, hello!, ONLY DETECTS METAL) is NOT "covering all areas to the same degree" as a scanner that sees you down to your skin and displays an image of such to a person in a back room somewhere. And a touchy-feely 'pat'-down is different too. They are NOT THE SAME LEVEL of screening, as you very well know.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for continuing to violate our 4th amendment rights TSA!

Anonymous said...

One of the things that becomes perfectly and completely apparent reading the TSA blogs is that the overwhelming majority of people who post here are against the current scanners and invasive body searches. The citizens bring up valid arguments against the abuse that the TSA is inflicting upon the citizens of this country. Posters point out the criminal and vindictive acts perpetrated upon citizens by TSA agents and the way that Americans are losing their freedom from the invasive overreach of government.

And how does the TSA respond?

The TSA ignores, misleads, misquotes, mischarecterizes and even outright lies about what is going on.

The TSA has lost every argument and every last possible, legitimate, moral claim to be serving the public good.

Anonymous said...

This is an OUTRAGEOUS TWISTING OF THE CLEARLY EXPRESSED INTENT OF THE 4TH AMENDMENT AND EVERY OTHER ASPECT OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS THAT WAS WRITTEN TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE OF OUR NATION FROM OUR GOVERNMENT.

WHAT THE TSA IS DOING IS NOT REASONABLE IN ANY WAY. FORCING PEOPLE TO SUBMIT TO A DIGITIAL STRIP SEARCH OR TO HAVE THEIR GENITIALS, BUTTOCKS AND BREASTS SEARCHED IS UNREASONABLE AND YOU KNOW IT, AND IF YOU DON'T YOU SHOULD. OUR RIGHTS ARE IN FAR MORE DANGER FROM OUR OWN GOVERNMENT THAN THEY ARE FROM ANY OTHER GROUP ON EARTH.

Jeff,let me remind you that this constitutional amendment specifically refers to the right of the state to enter your home or personal property and seize your belongings with out having a warrant supported by probable cause. The exception is that in no way under U.S Law when in a Public place and when the safety of the public and or property could be placed at risk (especially threats against any mode of transportation) does a person have any reasonable expectation of total privacy. This applies especially in the exceptions to the fourth Admendment which does state in artice U.S 444, 419, 543, that security checkpoints, Highway traffic checkpoints, and sobreity checkpoints and any checkpoints involving public tranist transportation are exempt. On top of this we have a supreme court ruling United states vs Akai, which states that The Majority of the supreme court held and agreed making Law that Once a person enters tha secure area of an airport the constitutionality of a screening search does not depend on consent.   "That legal conclusion rests firmly on Supreme Court precedent and on the government's interest in ensuring the safety of passengers, airline personnel, and the general public." (UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Daniel Kuualoha AUKAI, Defendant-Appellant.



Therefore Jeff, I would suggest that there is plenty of legal backing for what the TSA does, and that if one dosent wish to undergoe the screening procedures that he/she may choose other modes of travel.

Anonymous said...

Let's be clear, according to the TSA, anything that prevents a clear image of a persons genitals will require a physical search of that person's gentitals, right?

So then we must obviously conclude that the TSA is creating and viewing graphically clear images of children's genitals, right?

How can the TSA possibly justify this policy. No wonder this topic is being effectively censored by the TSA.

Prove me wrong and publish this comment.

Anonymous said...

Sandra said:
"The pressure put on by National Opt Out day is beginning to have the desired impact:"

huh? you mean the day nothing happened? i thought tsa had a big head.

Anonymous said...

jim higgins said:
"And shall we talk about the number of TSA employees who have gotten caught breezing through a checkpoint in uniform and then boarding a commercial flight, simply to avoid having to go through screening? How many other employees are doing this on a regular basis, given that we've probably only caught a few of them?"

please provide more information on this i am very interested in where you got this info.

Anonymous said...

it seems with all of these complaints about people being able to smuggle things through inside their bodies that the bloggers are asking for machines and/or procedures that will check this? it appears that we are concerned with this method of concealment so the tsa should go ahead and do it. it seems as if the ait are not good enough. the tsa should be proactive and go ahead get this going.

Anonymous said...

TSOJP said:
"This applies especially in the exceptions to the fourth Admendment which does state in artice U.S 444, 419, 543, that security checkpoints, Highway traffic checkpoints, and sobreity checkpoints and any checkpoints involving public tranist transportation are exempt. "

Stick to going through passenger's underwear, JP. In NO way does "artice" U.S. 444, 419, 543 provide exceptions to the Fourth Amendment.

Seriously, where do we get government employees who thing the US Code provides "exceptions" to the Constitution?

A combination of a poor public school system, shockingly low qualifications for employment as a TSO and, apparently, no proper training by the TSA provides a dangerous combination of ignorance and power.

Anonymous said...

You don't like it, stop flying. I don't like it but I'd like to get to where ever in a few hours vs. a day or two. Then again, if someone were to organize a month, or, week when we all say don't fly. I can do that. Cause some financial damage to TSA and the airlines would be fun after all the damage they've done to us.

Think about it...

Jim Huggins said...

I wrote: "And shall we talk about the number of TSA employees who have gotten caught breezing through a checkpoint in uniform and then boarding a commercial flight, simply to avoid having to go through screening?"

Anonymous responded: "
please provide more information on this i am very interested in where you got this info.
"

My web search skills are pathetic, but I found one reference to an incident at JFK:

TSA Screener Arrested at JFK

I'm sure there are others.

Anonymous said...

"Cause some financial damage to TSA and the airlines would be fun after all the damage they've done to us. "

The problem with that is, the TSA gets their money from federal funding. Their income is based on how much the government thinks they can get away with, and on how scared the public is.

Not flying will damage the airlines' bottom lines (Not a bad thing by any means!) but will only indirectly affect the TSA.

txrus said...

Anonymous asked on January 16, 2011 7:41 PM ...
jim higgins said:
"And shall we talk about the number of TSA employees who have gotten caught breezing through a checkpoint in uniform and then boarding a commercial flight, simply to avoid having to go through screening? How many other employees are doing this on a regular basis, given that we've probably only caught a few of them?"

please provide more information on this i am very interested in where you got this info.
*******************************
Google Wanda Weems.

Given the descriptions of her reactions upon being pulled off the plane by the PAPD, it is highly unlikely she was the first screener to attempt this.

I sincerely doubt she has been the last, either.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
jim higgins said:
"And shall we talk about the number of TSA employees who have gotten caught breezing through a checkpoint in uniform and then boarding a commercial flight, simply to avoid having to go through screening? How many other employees are doing this on a regular basis, given that we've probably only caught a few of them?"

please provide more information on this i am very interested in where you got this info.

January 16, 2011 7:41 PM

Try Google. A search for 'TSA employees bypass screening' brings up plenty of results, including:

http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=99941&catid=339
"The Transportation Security Administration (TSA)...policy says screeners can arrive for work and walk behind security lines without any of their belongings examined or X-rayed.
"Lunch or a bomb, you can walk right through with it," said Mike Boyd, an aviation consultant in Evergreen. "This is a major security issue." "

and
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travel-safety-security/604281-tsa-agent-pbi-skips-screening.html
"I was in line last week when a TSA person was ushered in through the gate where the wheel chairs go through. He did not have to pass through the WTMD. I thought that was standard procedure.
Are they exempt from their own rules?"

and how about this:
http://boingboing.net/2010/11/29/tsa-scans-uniformed.html
"TSA scans uniformed pilots, but airside caterers bypass all screening"

-that's right. The TSA has to see you naked with your shoes off, but workers at the airport.. well, one said this: "All I need is my Port Authority ID, which I swipe through a turnstile. The 'sterile area' door is not watched over by any hired security or by TSA. I have worked at JFK for more than three years now and I have yet to be randomly searched. Really the only TSA presence we notice is when the blue-shirts come down to the cafeteria to get food."

Al Ames said...

So Anon, what are we supposed to do when TSA decides to harass us to get on a bus, train, subway, or driving our cars? Yes, all four have happened. If we don't like it, we're just supposed to stay home?

How about we work to get the government to stop infringing on our rights to travel? If you don't like your constitutional rights, how about YOU leave the country?

Al

Ayn R. Key said...

TSORon wrote:
A better question Dan is, why do you think that your liberty is more important than that of everyone else around you?

I also care about their liberty. That's why I not only want the TSA to stop violating my 4th amendment rights, I want it to stop violating their 4th amendment rights.

Anonymous said...

TSOJP said...
Jeff said...
Here is the text of the 4th Amendment:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."


Jeff,let me remind you that this constitutional amendment specifically refers to the right of the state to enter your home or personal property and seize your belongings with out having a warrant supported by probable cause.
---------------------------------------

Given that you went to the trouble of reprinting the text itself, I'm somewhat surprised by statement that the amendment "specifically refers to the right of the state to enter your home or personal property." In fact, as a quick reading reveals, it "specifically refers" to individuals' rights "to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." Your characterization is flagrantly inaccurate.

Graham said...

Wouldn't it be fairly simple to have the scanner morph the image into a different shape -- a big square, say -- that wouldn't offend anyone, but would still allow trained personnel to identify suspicious items?

Anonymous said...

"My web search skills are pathetic, but I found one reference to an incident at JFK"

agreed

TSORon said...

Ayn R. Key quipped...
I also care about their liberty. That's why I not only want the TSA to stop violating my 4th amendment rights, I want it to stop violating their 4th amendment rights.
---------------------------------------
I’ll tell ya what Ayn, when the TSA as an organization begins violating your 4th Amendment rights you let me know. According to the SCOTUS the policies of the TSA do not, but you already knew that.

Anonymous said...

TSORon said...
According to the SCOTUS the policies of the TSA do not, but you already knew that.
January 21, 2011 5:26 PM

And today's logical fallacy is: Argument from authority- "a fallacy of defective induction, where it is argued that a statement is correct because the statement is made by a person or source that is commonly regarded as authoritative. ...This is a fallacy because the truth or falsity of a claim is not related to the authority of the claimant...."

The Constitution once held that blacks were only 3/5ths of a person. They are not, and just because an Authoritative source claims something are does not make it true.

We are guaranteed "to be secure" "against unreasonable searches and seizures", unless there is a warrant.

Making us take our shoes off (because of a failed bomb plot) is unreasonable. Especially so because the failed 'shoe bomber' was NOT flying domestically- he was flying TO the US.

Making us throw away our water bottles (and buy the sames exact one for 4x the price after passing security) is unreasonable.

Using technology to see us naked through our clothes is unreasonable. Especially when the machines can trivially be fooled.

Running your hands up our inner thighs and 'touching our junk' is unreasonable. Period.

And I'm not even going into all the specific incidents. Nipple ring lady, breast milk lady, shirtless boy, etc.

Do you sense a pattern here? The TSA is doing things which are neither Reasonable nor Effective.

Ayn R. Key said...

Ayn R. Key quipped...
I also care about their liberty. That's why I not only want the TSA to stop violating my 4th amendment rights, I want it to stop violating their 4th amendment rights.

TSORon blithered...
I’ll tell ya what Ayn, when the TSA as an organization begins violating your 4th Amendment rights you let me know.

Ok, I'm letting you know. With the new Nude-O-Scope policy, where the choice is "show your junk" or "touch your junk" it is happening right now with your full knowledge and approval.

Anonymous said...

TSORon said:
"I’ll tell ya what Ayn, when the TSA as an organization begins violating your 4th Amendment rights you let me know. According to the SCOTUS the policies of the TSA do not, but you already knew that."

Put up or shut up, Ron. Please provide your cites for the Court ruling on the new scanners. Or are you just assuming that the "reasonableness" standard is being applied correctly?

I'll warn you, it's a virtual lock that I know the law better than you but give it a shot anyway. :)

Anonymous said...

TSORon said:
"It isn't, which is why every passenger boarding a commerical aircraft is screened to the same level."

Preposterous. Some are not even screened at all, such as senior members of Congress.

Anonymous said...

TSORon incorrectly disseminated more untrue information:

"According to the SCOTUS the policies of the TSA do not, [violate the 4th ammendment"

Ron, that is not true.

That is one more untruth from a member of the TSA.

Which TSA case has appeared before the SCOTUS that found your scans and gropes are not unreasonable?

Jesse Ventura thinks they are invasive and unreasonable.(So do a lot of us.) I will be looking forward to seeing where his case goes.

Anonymous said...

Most of the people I have personally heard supporting the TSA stance do not even have a passport nor intend to. )I always ask when they start going on about how much safer they feel.) It's easy for someone who doesn't fly to say they are ok with it. I personally have been "scanned" twice and felt completely violated each time to extent of nausea. My next trip I will opt out if asked to be scanned. At least I can see the face of the person violating me. I just don't understand why they can't use explosive sniffing dogs. They are much more reliable especially coupled with metal detectors. My guess is the company that makes the equipment has a connection for selling it on taxpayer money!

RB said...

Well, based on this report it sounds like we should all be wearing a cup when anticipating an encounter with TSA and their Sexual Assault Pat Down.


http://www.statepress.com/2011/01/28/hands-on-spm-gets-tsad/



All the touching was extremely professional (don’t get me wrong, she did her job perfectly). However, maybe it was the height difference or her way of keeping me from misinterpreting the procedure, but somewhere during that pat down, she honestly karate chopped my, ahem, lady parts. Hard. Not just once or twice, but four times. I was so thrown off the first time that I actually let out a little yelp.

I don’t know if she was looking to dislodge something or expecting a certain reaction, but it startled me. I kept my composure while she finished feeling the lining of my underpants and everywhere else. I quickly gathered my things and sat quietly at my gate, no longer feeling smug about denying the scan.

Anonymous said...

I noticed the following too. I guess when you don't bother to read, or simply don't know how to read and comprehend what you have read, the notion that the 4th Amendment only applies to a citizen's home might make sense. But to the rest of us, it just makes you look willfully ignorant and vindictive.

Anonymous said...
TSOJP said...
Jeff said...
Here is the text of the 4th Amendment:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."


Jeff,let me remind you that this constitutional amendment specifically refers to the right of the state to enter your home or personal property and seize your belongings with out having a warrant supported by probable cause.
---------------------------------------

Given that you went to the trouble of reprinting the text itself, I'm somewhat surprised by statement that the amendment "specifically refers to the right of the state to enter your home or personal property." In fact, as a quick reading reveals, it "specifically refers" to individuals' rights "to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." Your characterization is flagrantly inaccurate.

Jeff Buske said...

I had no idea our protective products would generate so much lively discussion.

1) We still don't know the x-ray dose. But, my medical x-ray, electrical engineering background combined with reading mfg patents and knowledge of x-ray detectors indicates the dose is larger.

2) We have known for 100+ years x-rays can cause cancer, and minimizing exposure is best.

3) All people have a fundamental right to protect ones body and future generations DNA. That is why we made our products, overuse of medical and now security x-rays all add to the growing cancer rates we see.

4) Please encourage TSA personnel to follow procedures, report bad behavior so it can be corrected.

5) Wearing our protective products does not require a full pat-down just the "anomaly" area. Genital pat-down IF REQUIRED should be done same sex and with back of hand with fresh gloves. Get a travel partner as a witness report abusive behavior, TSA is working hard to maintain high standards.

Love or hate TSA/DHS it was give the difficult task by congress, we are concern they selected dangerous ionizing radiation (x-rays) as the primary inspection tool of choice.
Happy landings! Jeff Buske, Rocky Flats Gear

Jeff Buske said...

Anonymous "Jeff,let me remind you that this constitutional amendment specifically refers to the right of the state to enter your home or personal property and seize your belongings with out having a warrant supported by probable cause.

The exception is that in no way under U.S Law when in a Public place and when the safety of the public and or property could be placed at risk (especially threats against any mode of transportation) does a person have any reasonable expectation of total privacy. This applies especially in the exceptions to the fourth Admendment which does state in artice U.S 444, 419, 543, that security checkpoints, Highway traffic checkpoints, and sobreity checkpoints and any checkpoints involving public tranist transportation are exempt."

__________________________________

Hi, don't know if you are responding to me?
With regard to the 4th amendment:
Your Body like your labor is your most fundamental personal property. With your twisted logic you lose your rights when you exit your home? I think not. Your home is an extension of your person. Last time I checked at a minimum probable cause was required for an arrest, search or seizure of your body or body parts. At full warrant is better.

With regard to claimed exemptions:
1) Statutes/regulations don't trump the Constitution.

2) Your reference if correct to US law would only apply to federal property or territory (DC, Guam, Porto Rico). As most highways, airports, train stations are state property your reference to US law does not apply to non-federal zones.

3) I don't see a reference to department of homeland security in the Constitution did miss something?

4) In the same review don't see a reference to internal federal police powers in the Constitution did miss something?

5)People using our radiation protective undergarments is in response to overly intrusive searches and the fundamental right to protect ones body from radiation. People simply peacefully asserting their rights, and now TSA in a lather because they "can't see" peoples privates when they travel is breath taking. Jeff Buske

Anonymous said...

TSOJP said:
"Jeff,let me remind you that this constitutional amendment specifically refers to the right of the state to enter your home or personal property and seize your belongings with out having a warrant supported by probable cause. The exception is that in no way under U.S Law when in a Public place and when the safety of the public and or property could be placed at risk (especially threats against any mode of transportation) does a person have any reasonable expectation of total privacy. "

Just so you know, "U.S. Law" does not modify the Constitution. Additionally...oh, never mind, too much to cover here and not enough time. Akai is not the panacea you seem to think it is. Read the decision and you'll see that

It's a good thing you have a job, JP. You'd have a very hard time practicing law.

Anonymous said...

Tammy Banovac had a hard time even *with* electronically transparent undies.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20024321-504083.html

What bizarro world makes the TSA think that they've demonstrated they can be trusted?

Anonymous said...

...but you guys can't even detect freaking guns, right?

That's why I haven't flown since 9/11. This monumental nonsense you're putting the American public through doesn't even really protect us.

The TSA has been more destructive to this country and its economy than the terrorists.

Anonymous said...

I've noticed several posts about this, but none of them have been answered.
Are pads and tampons detectable? I'm sixteen, and the idea of being pulled away in front of my dad and brother because I'm wearing a pad is humiliating. Regardless of the answer, I at least want to know what to expect. PLEASE respond! Half the population is affected by the answer.

Anonymous said...

I know this is an old blog but if someone is still reading it, I am a survivor of sexual trauma and have not been able to fly since I learned what these advanced imaging machines do. I feel disgusted with myself having flown multiple times a few years ago not knowing that I was exposing myself to strangers as part of security. The thought of my body being observed causes panic attacks that prevent me from traveling now. A pat down is worse. A stranger touching me in this manner would be dangerous for myself as well as the TSA worker. The governments policy is re-traumatizing. I hope an alternative is developed because without some modesty allowed, I and people like me may never be able to travel freely.