New Security Technologies Make Airport Debut
Blogging has been light this week, with some on the team out for end-of-summer vacations and Bob's out taking care of his new baby. So this week, as one political convention comes to a close and another is about to start, we wanted to highlight a story on our website about two new technologies that have been deployed in the two convention city airports. Those traveling through Denver and Minneapolis-St. Paul might see these explosives and threat detection technologies that have previously been used in other modes of transportation and can be flexibly deployed to airports.
The technologies are passive millimeter wave, a mobile technology which has been used in maritime and mass transit to detect the characteristics of explosives hidden on the body. It is completely safe, non-invasive and does not store information. A hand-held spectrometer can penetrate sealed containers in seconds and identify a wide range of solid and liquid explosives using laser technology.
To learn about other ways TSA and other Department of Homeland Security components are working to keep convention travel and sites safe, check this out.
We'll get back into the regular swing of things next week, and we hope all of our readers enjoy a safe and fun Labor Day weekend.
Lynn
EoS Blog Team
Labels: technology
posted by Lynn at
7:59 PM
Subscribe in a reader
171 Comments:
Congratulations to Bob and his family on the new baby. Looking forward to hearing more about this new technology. Have a safe and happy Labor Day!
August 28, 2008 8:08 PM
Lynn, the August, 2008, DHS "Fact Sheet: Homeland Security Agencies Protect Political Conventions" you cited states:
"Since January, more than 2,300 TSA officers have supported Secret Service activities at more than 180 campaign events from coast to coast. In Denver, TSA is providing approximately 100 Transportation Security Officers to assist the Secret Service with screening at convention venues. In Saint Paul, TSA will provide approximately 50 officers to fill the same need."
How does assisting Secret Service at political party campaign events support TSA's mission of protecting the Nation’s transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce?
Also, after you acknowleged the false information your agency published regarding limits on the amount of cash people are allowed to carry, I asked:
"Thanks, Lynn, for taking some action in an attempt to stop your colleagues from continuing to misinform their employers, the public.
"You've said, in essence: "Oh, yeah, folks. Now that you mention it, we did indicate to you by way of our Web site (the one we repeatedly point to, both on our blog and at the airport, when you ask us what the rules are) that something that is completely legal for you to do while passing through our airport checkpoints (or anywhere else within the country) was in fact illegal. Oops -- sorry! Hope you didn't miss any flights over this! I sent a memo to our Web team to have them stop misinforming you real soon now." How do you expect us to feel about that? Does that seem like the actions of the government of the people, by the people, for the people, that you were taught to believe in?"
Any thoughts?
In the same comment, I also asked:
"where has TSA published a list of all the rules and regulations that TSA will subject someone to if that person wishes to cross a U.S. Government checkpoint at an airport en route to the gate from which his domestic flight will depart, not including laws that the person is required to abide by outside of the airport checkpoint (i.e., just those rules and regulations that apply only at the checkpoint). Please provide a URL or name of the government publication."
Have you had a chance to determine whether or not your agency is willing to show us the rules it requires us to follow, or if we are expected to keep guessing?
August 28, 2008 8:26 PM
So, did you actually subject delegates, and most importantly, Congressmen, Senators, and other important officials to the virtual strip searches and other carnivals, or was this done to other people so they could see what a "good job" you guys are doing?
Gotta love the posturing. Hitting up the 2 convention cities with the full theater. And the timing's impeccable too. That's important with a new president and administration coming. Don't want to look bad lest they cut TSA's funding.
August 28, 2008 9:02 PM
Lynn,
Can you really call it blogging if nothing is really being posted by TSA or if comments aren't being reviewed and posted (holiday week or not)?
Earl
August 28, 2008 9:05 PM
Travel tales:
Yesterday I was flying out of DCA. Go through screening, and the agent informs me, "Sir, your bag has been randomly selected for secondary screening."
"I'm an DHS employee, traveling under government Orders. Does that change your mind?" I ask.
"No," says she.
Good going, TSA! Waste one of your random screenings on the one guy who (a GS-15 with a TS/SCI clearance, who, if he wanted to do Evil would do a lot worse than bring something nasty on a plane) is guaranteed to NOT be a terrorist!
August 28, 2008 9:08 PM
Why are comments on existing threads not being posted?
I see no reason to roll out another "pat yourself on the back" story while so many other issues remain unanswered.
Have any disciplinary actions been taken against the TSI who attempted to damage some number of airplanes and place the lives of those who were to fly on this aircraft at risk after being warned by that companies mechanics that what he was doing could damage the aircraft?
Why are TSO's directed to refer people who have a large amount of cash to additional screening or interrogation? How does having a large amount of cash jeapordize the safe conduct of a flight? What law provides for this apparent civil rights violation?
Where has TSA published a list of rules that a person must conform to in order to pass through a U.S. Government TSA checkpoint?
I'm sure some of the others can fill in the gaps.
2 of 5 or 6 regular posters
August 28, 2008 9:28 PM
OK, is it just me or did that article say nothing about the new uniforms? If it's important enough to make the headline I figured there'd be some mention of it in the article.
August 28, 2008 9:45 PM
Does the introduction of these technologies, specifically in Denver and Minneapolis-St. Paul have anything to do with the presidential conventions being held there this week and next?
August 28, 2008 10:01 PM
I hope TSA is enjoying it's much deserved "end of summer" vacations; with all those terrorists you're catching, it's really time for you guys to take a breather. Well done.
August 28, 2008 10:26 PM
Thanks for doing what you all do! IT is very much appreciated!
August 28, 2008 10:56 PM
MM waves don't work on metal containers. The metal reflects the MM waves. So how RF can look inside of metal enclosures is a new one one me.
August 29, 2008 1:22 AM
Is this the machine that essentially strip searches you? I realize you said it's "non-invasive," but I got the impression from the newspaper coverage of a few weeks ago that the TSA just doesn't define x-ray strip searches as invasive.
If this new machine is not the strip search x-ray machine, then it sounds like it can do what needs to be done, but without the nudity. If this is correct, then why are some airports getting strip search machines rather than these machines?
August 29, 2008 3:12 AM
The technology revolution in the transportation is very interesting and helpful to employee working on the airport.
August 29, 2008 8:53 AM
Good Morning, glad you came back.
August 29, 2008 9:10 AM
Maybe you can deploy a camera sensing device to detect and aid in the arrest of law abiding citizens exercising their right to take photos from public places. Although not TSA, it is still a Homeland Security issue.
Photography now illegal?
It has already started in St. Paul MN. Numerous people have reported getting harassed taking pictures of the most innocent things.
War on Photography
This is what happens when paranoia takes over for common sense. In effect, the "terrist" (sic) have won.
August 29, 2008 11:17 AM
So... we can be screened without "breaking stride" and perhaps without consent. The "Passive" scanning will likely be done where and when. After you ask permission to scan me, or without my permission?
Sounds faster, but still can capture detailed images of my body. Get the Sales and Marketing folks going now...
August 29, 2008 3:11 PM
Maybe you could procure some bra detecting machines,
http://tinyurl.com/5dduju
so that you could stop harassing innocent people with your antics.
As if humiliating her wasn't enough, you then decided to search her carry on luggage, probably for no real reason, causing her to miss her flight.
And all this makes us safer? How?
August 29, 2008 4:23 PM
Congratulations to Blogger Bob, Mrs. Blogger Bob, and new baby Blogger Bob.
August 29, 2008 5:22 PM
So, after receiving lots of questions and criticism, you respond by saying "look we implemented it aren't we great?"
What about the questions and criticisms of this program?
This is SOP for the TSA. Given a problematic proposal, you go ahead and implement it over the objections of those who have come right out and told you that not only does the public you allegedly serve not want it, the public you allegedly serve expressly doesn't want it.
Instead I read today that the TSA also has the power to levy fines, and if someone asks how to contest the fine the result is that the fine is doubled. And that fines are issued to those who say derogatory things about the TSA in front of the agents. The working definition of the offense is "anything the agent at the scene doesn't like." That and the infamous "do you want to fly today" response which is allegedly against policy but is in fact a fact that a TSO can hold someone until after his plane has departed as long as they call it "suspicion" instead of "DYWTFT".
Read the Administrative Procedures Act, then compare it to your policies. See the discrepancy. Do you know which one should be changed? It's not the Act.
Federal Attitude Police
August 29, 2008 6:41 PM
The TSA: Not doing the right things. Not even doing right the things it does.
Pricless
August 29, 2008 10:32 PM
You guys surprised me. I assumed that after your henchman damaged 9 airplanes you'd be in full spin mode, filling the front page with posts on anything not related to the guy who damaged 9 airplanes. Instead, you left that topic at the top of the page for more than a week before posting this.
August 29, 2008 10:55 PM
I know some simple techmologies you might try: communication and consistency.
You-all just caused me to throw out 13 ounces of breast milk because you confiscated my gel packs in STL.
Per TSA : "Frozen gels/liquids are permitted if required to cool medical and infant/child exemptions. Frozen gels/liquids for any other purpose are not permitted." On my outbound trip from RIC, you let me and my wife take a couple gel packs to cool my 5 month old's breast milk. However, on the return leg, we when we packed the milk from 5 hours worth of breast pumping sessions, your TSA supervisor took the gel packs because "they are only permitted for medical purposes, not for infants."
So, sitting on the tarmac with broken generator, and the rest of the waits involved with post-TSA travel, the milk got warm and too-old.
Hey TSA, thanks for making my wife cry, you ineptly-managed, damaging, anti-mother, anti-apple-pie, and anti-American bureaucracy.
You want feedback? I got your feedback right here.
(One of the 6 or 7 who post here regularly.)
August 30, 2008 8:44 PM
Wow, how interesting. Basically you say: we are posting today and forget about us doing anything for this blog before next week. Lovely. If that is the way it is going to be administrated, it should not be up at all.
August 31, 2008 6:42 AM
No comments approved after 4 days later?
Although your post seems like it is explaining the lack of management this last week, you really didn't make it clear that you would be doing absolutely nothing until next week.
Way to communicate, TSA! If your internal communication is anything like your external communication, it is no wonder that your TSOs don't know your own rules.
August 31, 2008 1:14 PM
This is ridiculous. Post on Thursday and then disappear all through the weekend. This blog is not serious. Worse, in isn't solving anything: all we get is information on new policies and rules that make no sense. Our feedback is useless. I give up.
One of the more than 5 or 6 that regularly used to post here...
August 31, 2008 7:11 PM
Please comment on how you previously made untrue statements on this blog:
http://www.boingboing.net/2008/08/31/millimeter-wave-scan.html
"A couple of bloggers have advocated for the officer viewing the image to be out in the public area. We specifically require the remote location to protect the privacy of passengers using the machine. We just don’t think it’s appropriate for other passengers, airport, airline employees or just anybody walking by to see the images, much less snap a photo with a camera phone or anything else and post that image to TMZ.com or who knows where. That’s also why officers are not allowed to bring anything, including phones, bags or other items into the remote viewing location. "
August 31, 2008 8:59 PM
This article says these are not exactly in remote locations, violating TSA policies.
http://www.boingboing.net/2008/08/31/millimeter-wave-scan.html
August 31, 2008 10:08 PM
This jives with the policy about the scanner being in a private room... how??
August 31, 2008 11:02 PM
But... TSA promised that the screens for the passive millimeter wave scan machines would be placed in a SAFE, SECURE, REMOTE LOCATION, as referenced in this blog post: http://www.tsa.gov/blog/2008/05/you-asked-for-ityou-got-it-millimeter.html
"A couple of bloggers have advocated for the officer viewing the image to be out in the public area. We specifically require the remote location to protect the privacy of passengers using the machine. We just don’t think it’s appropriate for other passengers, airport, airline employees or just anybody walking by to see the images, much less snap a photo with a camera phone or anything else and post that image to TMZ.com or who knows where. That’s also why officers are not allowed to bring anything, including phones, bags or other items into the remote viewing location."
So can you explain to me why Denver's passive millimeter wave scan machine screens are out in the open? Other than the fact that the public has been totally lied to and misled by TSA yet again?
September 1, 2008 12:06 AM
Of all of the "security" measures TSA has introduced, does the fact that none of them would have prevented 9/11 bother any of you? I mean, isn't that basically your job description? Or is it just to waste as much tax payer's money as possible? If the latter, allow me to commend you on a job well done.
September 1, 2008 12:06 AM
This article on Boing Boing states that someone saw this device being used out in the open and not at all secure, and that he was able to view the screen to ascertain whether they were scanning his child.
http://www.boingboing.net/2008/08/31/millimeter-wave-scan.html
Seems like this is a violation of your own policies, scanning people under their clothes without their knowledge in an open area!
September 1, 2008 2:03 AM
Not a single comment? *tests to see if anyone can actually comment*
September 1, 2008 2:25 AM
Is that a picture of you guys scanning people walking around the terminal without their knowledge or consent?
Is that TSO in public view, against the policy that you guys have been ranting for months which requires them to be at a private remote location?
September 1, 2008 8:10 AM
I won't feel "safer" with this technology until I see what the operator's screen looks like. In other words, what do they see on their screen? Please make a sample image available.
September 1, 2008 12:49 PM
This is ridiculous. Either you have a site and take care of it, or you should close it down. Posting when you want to and not letting us through is not acceptable.
September 1, 2008 1:36 PM
Are we going to have another full day with no updates?
September 1, 2008 3:30 PM
technologies that effect our security are changing dramatically. Speciall ywhen it somes to Luggage checkpoints. I personally welcome strict security measures which are made by TSA. Transportation security helps our families and us to be very calm, and very sure about getting somewhere. Good job TSA. Moreover, I consider todays security measures very practical. For instance europe has worse security measures than we have her ein US.
September 1, 2008 7:24 PM
Is it true that this millimeter wave scanner can see through and under people's clothing?
If so, shouldn't there be more noticeable signage informing people that a TSA agent is looking at their mostly denuded form on a screen nearby?
September 2, 2008 12:52 AM
"Blogging has been light this week,...We'll get back into the regular swing of things next week,"
And no mention that blogging will be absolutely non-existent the next 5 days. That sounds like standard operating procedure for TSA planning and communication.
Regarding "we hope all of our readers enjoy a safe and fun Labor Day weekend": You made my wife cry this weekend. I don't know if my other post was lost in the delete-o-meter, but here's a couple more references that show that the TSA was wrong to toss the gel packs around our breast milk:
"Frozen gels/liquids are permitted if required to cool medical and infant/child exemptions. " - TSA
"Frozen gels/liquids are permitted if required to cool medical and infant/child exemptions. " - TSA #2
"Breast milk is a medical necessity and it is being classified as such. " and "Breast milk is in the same category as liquid medications. Now, a mother flying without her child will be able to bring breast milk through the checkpoint, provided it is declared prior to screening." - TSA #3
The TSA supervisor in STL who said the gel packs were only allowed for medical purposes, not our breast milk, was wrong and caused us damage.
I'll think of pouring the wasted breast milk down the drain whenever some TSA bozo asks me to give you a break.
If TSA can't even do the small tasks of management right (training your rules-enforcers to know your rules) why should we trust TSA on anything?
September 2, 2008 10:00 AM
Surely more than 5 people commented over the past several days, so where are the rest of the comments?
September 2, 2008 1:18 PM
Lovely. We spend days with no updates, then we get 5 new comments, all squeaky clean. Where are all the complaints? I sent one which seems to have disappeared!
September 2, 2008 1:33 PM
Blah blah blah! Here's our new thing that we'll sing the praises of until someone figures out how to defeat it. Then, to make it seem as though our flawed technology and procedures aren't to blame, we'll make up some random rules to compensate for our shortcomings. Watch, 2009 will be the year of banning nonsensical objects and of making up arbitrary rules!
September 2, 2008 1:49 PM
"We specifically require the remote location to protect the privacy of passengers using the machine. We just don’t think it’s appropriate for other passengers, airport, airline employees or just anybody walking by to see the images, much less snap a photo with a camera phone or anything else and post that image to TMZ.com or who knows where. That’s also why officers are not allowed to bring anything, including phones, bags or other items into the remote viewing location."
Christopher
http://www.tsa.gov/blog/2008/05/you-asked-for-ityou-got-it-millimeter.html
What happened to this policy?
September 2, 2008 2:04 PM
Someone anonymously wrote:
"Is that a picture of you guys scanning people walking around the terminal without their knowledge or consent?
"Is that TSO in public view, against the policy that you guys have been ranting for months which requires them to be at a private remote location?
As reported by eyewitness Mark Frauenfelder (Boing Boing: Millimeter wave scan machine at Denver Airport, August 31, 2008), the answers are "yes" and "yes". Frauenfelder wrote:
"I snapped this photo of a passive millimeter wave scan machine set up in the main entrance hall at Denver International Airport on Friday evening. The machine was swiveling back and forth, searching people who didn't even know they were being scanned. I'm sure some of the people scanned weren't passengers; they were simply coming to pick up or drop off friends and relatives.
"I wanted to see if they would scan my 11-year-old daughter as she walked by so I walked over to the desk with the computer monitor on it. I got a peek at the monitor for a second or two before one of the bald guys to the left of the TSA agent jumped in front of me and said I wasn't allowed to look. I couldn't tell which person was undressed on the monitor."
September 2, 2008 2:50 PM
That’s also why officers are not allowed to bring anything, including phones, bags or other items into the remote viewing location."
Christopher
http://www.tsa.gov/blog/2008/05/you-asked-for-ityou-got-it-millimeter.html
What happened to this policy?
Gone with the wind. Vanished. Defunct. No longer operative. Did you really expect TSA to honor its word?
September 2, 2008 2:57 PM
Do you people even read anymore. Get a clue, and read the entire article before posting comments about it. This new technology, The Passive Millimeter Wave explosive detector is NOT the Whole Body Imager that passengers walk through. This technology does not See Through Clothing. There is no naked image of the passenger. Please do yourself and the people that read and comment on this blog a service and educate yourself BEFORE commenting. Posting wrong or misleading comments only make you appear dumb or purposefully misleading.
September 2, 2008 3:03 PM
Does anyone at TSA/DHS understand that we are still waiting for the DIALOGUE promised on this and many other subjects?
A dialogue is TWO WAY, and involves responses to questions, not just a series of non sequitur posts by one side and questions from the other.
PLEASE hold that dialogue you promised, discuss the serious questions we have raised, don't just use this blog as a propaganda arm of DHS/TSA.
Thank you,
Tom (1 of 5-6)
September 2, 2008 3:25 PM
"We just don’t think it’s appropriate for other passengers, airport, airline employees or just anybody walking by to see the images, much less snap a photo with a camera phone or anything else and post that image to TMZ.com or who knows where."
If the images are so inappropriate, they should not be viewed by anyone, much less someone the person being screened cannot see.
September 2, 2008 3:39 PM
Before you guys get your panties in a bunch, some of you guys need to do some homework before you comment on the new piece of equipment.
SPO-20 PDF
SPO-20 QinetiQ
All it takes is a 5 second google search.
September 2, 2008 4:11 PM
Anonymous said...
This is ridiculous. Either you have a site and take care of it, or you should close it down. Posting when you want to and not letting us through is not acceptable.
Anonymous said...
Are we going to have another full day with no updates?
PEOPLE!!! The Bloggers get weekends and holidays off too ya know. Just because you spend your days off in front of your computer doesnt mean that they do. IF you dont like the site... dont use it. ty ;D
September 2, 2008 4:40 PM
I know some simple technologies you might try: communication and consistency.
You-all just caused me to throw out 13 ounces of breast milk because you confiscated my gel packs in STL.
Per TSA: "Frozen gels/liquids are permitted if required to cool medical and infant/child exemptions. Frozen gels/liquids for any other purpose are not permitted." and "Breast milk is in the same category as liquid medications." and Breast milk is in the same category as liquid medications. Now, a mother flying without her child will be able to bring breast milk through the checkpoint, provided it is declared prior to screening.
On my outbound trip from RIC, you let me and my wife take a couple gel packs to cool my 5 month old's breast milk. However, on the return leg, we when we packed the milk from 5 hours worth of breast pumping sessions, your TSA supervisor took the gel packs because "they are only permitted for medical purposes, not for infants."
So, sitting on the tarmac with broken generator, and the rest of the waits involved with travel, the milk got warm and too-old.
Hey TSA, thanks for making my wife cry, you ineptly-managed, damaging, anti-mother, anti-apple-pie, and anti-American bureaucracy.
You want feedback? I got your feedback right here.
------------------------------
Why would this get delete-o-metered? I didn't cuss, though I feel like it.
It also isn't off-topic like a plague of locusts, it is on topic because it points to a clear problem with your security technologies: if your TSAs can't effectively use your current communications technologies, what make you think that adding more technological gizmos will fix your severe management and training problem? The only people that these new technologies are good for is the companies selling you the equipment.
September 2, 2008 4:48 PM
Oh, and Bob:
Congratulations.
I hope you don't try to fly anywhere with the new kid. Or if you do, your TSA credentials help you carry healthy food for your kid and won't make your wife cry -- TSA makes travel awful.
September 2, 2008 4:53 PM
The technologies are passive millimeter wave, a mobile technology which has been used in maritime and mass transit to detect the characteristics of explosives hidden on the body. It is completely safe, non-invasive and does not store information. A hand-held spectrometer can penetrate sealed containers in seconds and identify a wide range of solid and liquid explosives using laser technology.
Sorry, but unless you're using something that causes the material to resonate at a specific frequency all you have is a radar like imaging system. IOW you strip search people without their knowledge. Don't you people at TSA ever learn? To do material identification requires something on the order of x-ray crystallography or neutron emission stuff, both of which require a radioactive, not RF source. Try again please.
September 2, 2008 4:54 PM
re: Strip search machines in Denver and Twin Cities.
Boingboing.net has a first hand account:
http://tinyurl.com/5ex6s9
So much for the strip search machines being, to quote the TSA, "a voluntary alternative to a pat-down during secondary screening."
September 2, 2008 5:16 PM
I appreciate that my writing style and content is not something you want people to see within the first dozen posts, but not wishing them to see it is not the same as violating one of the arcane rules. Is that why comments are so often approved out of order, in order to keep some of us from being heard as loudly as we could be?
I suppose that is so. Which feeds back into the comment that I hope is delayed but fear might have been outright deleted. I commented on your management style, because all of the concerns about the constitutionality of this procedure are not yet addressed so the TSA response is an entry saying "see we are implementing it."
That's surely effective public relations, much like having Blogger Bob do all the work. I used to criticize your lack of responses to comments, but when it is only one blogger doing all the work to answer the many who comment here he will be overwhelmed.
I think I also commented on your use of the FBI watch list in keeping a pilot from getting to the airplane he pilots, and commented on how you plan to expand your jurisdiction to private airplanes and private airports. I do not think either of those are good reports of the TSA, but am not surprised by either of them. I'm also not surprised by the lack of blog entries about them. My memory is cluttered right now though so it is possible I made other comments.
Oh, and I liked to an article by James Bovard on Lew Rockwell's website criticising your overly general regulations that make disagreeing with the TSA a crime because your overly general regulations result in fines that violate the American Procedures Act, and fines are doubled if you ask the TSA how to contest the fine which is also in violation of the American Procedures Act.
That's too controversial to be in the early comments, I agree. Best to bury it after comment 40 where only the determined will ever actually see how badly the TSA is performing these days.
September 2, 2008 6:23 PM
Anonymous wrote:
Is that TSO in public view, against the policy that you guys have been ranting for months which requires them to be at a private remote location?
Another Anonymous wrote:
I won't feel "safer" with this technology until I see what the operator's screen looks like. In other words, what do they see on their screen?
Peter Wang wrote:
Is it true that this millimeter wave scanner can see through and under people's clothing?
Bradley Booms wrote:
What happened to this policy?
This is a slightly different version of the same MMW technology that the portal devices use. The portal devices use the millimeter waves to create an image that's been described to me as "a shadow of someone's skin" (whatever that means; we've all seen the images by now way on down the list).
After doing some research on this device past the press release, it doesn't create an image. There's a normal video camera attached to it so that the operator knows who is being scanned, but the actual readout from the MMW stuff on the Standoff device itself is, like, a graph display.
From the Washington Times, 21 July 2008:
Operators can scan crowds from a remote location, controlling the machine with a joystick while watching a threat bar on a computer monitor.
If the MMW sensor detects a cold object under clothing, the threat bar spikes. If the threat bar jolts into the red, operators can notify security.
They didn't literally mean "cold" as in temperature, by the way. It's a statement about the amount of millimeter waves the human body gives off compared to an inanimate object.
I also read the privacy impact thing that the TSA conducted while doing testing of the technology; the company designed it as a means of detecting suicide bombers, so it was made to be controlled by remote. Every image I've seen of it with TSOs in it however, they have the controls right there at the device (presumably so people don't mess with it~).
Ostensibly, these devices are going to be set up in the public areas of an airport, where they can scan people walking by at up to sixty-five feet away.
Another Anonymous wrote:
If this new machine is not the strip search x-ray machine, then it sounds like it can do what needs to be done, but without the nudity. If this is correct, then why are some airports getting strip search machines rather than these machines?
The MMW Portals, the ones that you have to lift your arms and have the active scan, are a much more thorough screening procedure than the Standoff MMW devices, which is probably why they're going the route of having the MMW Portals at the checkpoints, and these in the public areas.
Also, it seems as this machine was designed specifically to guard against suicide bombers, then there would be a lot of otherwise prohibited items that it misses that the MMW Portals do not.
Let's see how many days this one takes to get posted, now ;) My money's on next Wednesday!
So, quick recap:
MMW Portal = checkpoint stuff
Standoff MMW = public area stuff
September 2, 2008 7:12 PM
Oh, just an add-on:
From the same Washington Times story:
TSA has conducted "test trials" of the much larger, 330-pound SPO-20 at the Staten Island ferry terminal and Pier 90 in New York City. The machines were also tested at Washington's Union Station during last year's Independence Day celebration. The tripod-mounted SPO-20 has a range of about 65 feet.
September 2, 2008 7:15 PM
So are the messages that have been posted over the last several days all in the bit bucket? Surely more than 16 new post have been submitted.
Why won't one of the Blog Ops tell us what is going on, what happened to the post on the various topics and if this is an indication of the Blog coming to an end.
September 2, 2008 8:49 PM
Anonymous said...
Is that a picture of you guys scanning people walking around the terminal without their knowledge or consent?
Is that TSO in public view, against the policy that you guys have been ranting for months which requires them to be at a private remote location?
September 1, 2008 8:10 AM
Now we're "screening" (i.e.: conducting suspicionless & warantless searches of anyone who happens to be at an airport, even those individuals who have no intention of entering the secure area. Where will it end? Will you screen us leaving our houses?
I'd like to know -- WE would like to know -- how you people legally and Constitutionally justify this?
September 3, 2008 9:47 AM
"About this Blog
This blog is sponsored by the Transportation Security Administration to facilitate an ongoing dialogue on innovations in security, technology and the checkpoint screening process."
Would anyone on the Blog Team care to comment on what has happened to this blog?
There is no ongoing dialogue.
Comments on the newest topics are not being posted in a timely manner if at all. Comments to older threads seem not to be posted at all.
What's here is an adbundance of TSA Propaganda. Thats about all that left now.
Many serious questions have been asked that deserve real answers, not political answers like those of the top ten questions.
TSA has proven beyond a doubt that not only can they not perform security screening in an effective manner that even running a blog is above their abilities.
I see no reason to continue to participate here, it serves no purpose.
September 3, 2008 10:12 AM
Please explain this technology. Does it show images like the other full body scanners? If so, do people know they are being scanned? Are they clearly given the option not to be scanned? Am I being seen naked by someone as I am waiting in line? It seems to be what they are doing!
September 3, 2008 10:16 AM
Now we're "screening" (i.e.: conducting suspicionless & warantless searches of anyone who happens to be at an airport, even those individuals who have no intention of entering the secure area. Where will it end? Will you screen us leaving our houses?
I'd like to know -- WE would like to know -- how you people legally and Constitutionally justify this?
They 'justify' it by security at any cost. The current cost is the Constitutional rights guaranteed us have been shredded.
September 3, 2008 10:48 AM
“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.”
Do you government agents have a warrant for this scanner?
A one in a billion terrorist isn't "probable cause".
September 3, 2008 11:04 AM
Bob Hansen wrote:
"Now we're "screening" (i.e.: conducting suspicionless & warantless searches of anyone who happens to be at an airport, even those individuals who have no intention of entering the secure area. Where will it end? Will you screen us leaving our houses?"
This is a good question. TSA, do you now feel that you have the right to search not only all the innocent people who want to board a commercial flight, but also those who happen to be in an airport? If so, why not set up a scanner on the highway and search everyone who comes near an airport? If you had sufficient resources, would you set up your remote-search machines at every highway entrance?
It is becoming increasingly clear that TSA's purpose is not to improve transportation security, but to facilitate DHS's restriction of movement based on blacklists and to conduct dragnet operations, stopping and/or searching everyone just to find the few criminals. That's unconstitutional.
Although there would certainly be some benefit to searching and interrogating everyone at every opportunity, the risks with such a situation far outweigh the benefits. Because of those risks, it is not allowed in this country, although TSA repeatedly edges closer to doing so. Patriotic Americans should resist this un-American practice.
September 3, 2008 11:53 AM
OK, Anonymous at 4:11 p.m., one of the PDF links you supplied says:
"Clothing is largely transparent,
making SPO systems powerful tools
in detecting IEDs worn under clothing."
That tells me that it looks through the clothing for weapons and if it looks through clothing, what else must it see.
I am very concerned that this is a warrant-less search and as such is not legal. Or has the TSA done one of it's magic tricks through a CFR and suddenly just because one enters an airport one has given consent to be searched by any means.
This is truly frightening. All this money wasted for the one in a billion chance to find a "terrorist." What a nation of wimps we have become.
September 3, 2008 12:13 PM
Tim Bogus said...
Does the introduction of these technologies, specifically in Denver and Minneapolis-St. Paul have anything to do with the presidential conventions being held there this week and next?
Wow Tim, nothing gets by you!!
September 3, 2008 12:16 PM
"On my outbound trip from RIC, you let me and my wife take a couple gel packs to cool my 5 month old's breast milk. However, on the return leg, we when we packed the milk from 5 hours worth of breast pumping sessions, your TSA supervisor took the gel packs because "they are only permitted for medical purposes, not for infants." "
That REALLY angers me. It's people like that who should be getting letters of guidance and possibly even fired. I am so tired of seeing TSOs, LTSOs, and even STSOs get on these power trips because god forbid the passenger ever be RIGHT... *sigh*
I am really sorry that happened to you and your wife.
September 3, 2008 12:35 PM
In response to Phil:
"where has TSA published a list of all the rules and regulations that TSA will subject someone to if that person wishes to cross a U.S. Government checkpoint at an airport en route to the gate from which his domestic flight will depart, not including laws that the person is required to abide by outside of the airport checkpoint (i.e., just those rules and regulations that apply only at the checkpoint). Please provide a URL or name of the government publication."
Phil,
I do see your point. There are pages on the TSA website what you can and can't bring, how to pack, and what you can do to get through the checkpoint quicker, etc., but it would be easier for people if there was one specific spot with rules and other info. The web team is working on streamlining that information to have one page where you can find the full list of rules and tips. I'll keep the blog posted on it.
Lynn EoS Blog Team
September 3, 2008 12:57 PM
In response to my and others' repeated requests to a pointer to the location where TSA publishes all the rules it requires people to follow at an airport checkpoint in order to avoid having their freedom of movement restricted by TSA's airport security guards, Lynn of the EoS blog team wrote:
"I do see your point."
I didn't make a point. I asked a question. You have yet to answer it.
Lynn continued:
"There are pages on the TSA website what you can and can't bring, how to pack, and what you can do to get through the checkpoint quicker, etc."
Lynn, I've made it perfectly clear that I'm not seeking tips, guidelines, and clues, and I'm not seeking outdated and internally-inconsistent Web pages. Your agency's Web site has been repeatedly shown -- here on your blog -- to contain inaccurate information. Clearly it is not and will not be the definitive source of the rules you require us to follow. That definitive source is what we want. Why do you insist on keeping us guessing? We want to be sure that we are in compliance with your rules, but you refuse to allow us to do so.
Please, I beg of you: If you are going to require us to follow your rules, show us the rules.
Lynn also wrote:
"it would be easier for people if there was one specific spot with rules and other info."
Doesn't that go without saying? You have effectively admitted that your agency has not yet made available to us a list of the rules it requires us to follow. Do you realize how ridiculous this is? How are can we possibly know if we are in compliance with your rules if you will not show them to us?
Please: Forget the "guidelines for travelers" pages and give us something that we, a judge, or an attorney can use to determine whether we are acting in a legal manner or not at a U.S. Government airport checkpoint. Are we required by law to do and refrain from doing things that we are not required to or not to do under other circumstances? Then tell us what those things are.
Why is this so difficult to understand?
September 3, 2008 1:14 PM
Yesterday I was flying out of DCA. Go through screening, and the agent informs me, "Sir, your bag has been randomly selected for secondary screening."
"I'm an DHS employee, traveling under government Orders. Does that change your mind?" I ask.
"No," says she.
Good going, TSA! Waste one of your random screenings on the one guy who (a GS-15 with a TS/SCI clearance, who, if he wanted to do Evil would do a lot worse than bring something nasty on a plane) is guaranteed to NOT be a terrorist!
___________________________________
Are you reading your own words? "Random", do you know the meaning of the word? If your are a so called DHS employee, you should know better than to complain about "random" screening.
September 3, 2008 1:19 PM
"Of all of the "security" measures TSA has introduced, does the fact that none of them would have prevented 9/11 bother any of you?"
Of course not. TSA gladly does bin Laden's work for him.
September 3, 2008 1:30 PM
Lynn, why is the Web team charged with informing the public of what is required of us? I understand that once you have some information to put on your Web site, you'll have your Web team put it there, but are you really leaving the policy-setting up to them?
Also, where can someone without Internet access gain access to the rules you impose on him?
When your rules change, in what manner will you communicate that change to the public?
Can't you just show us the rules we have to follow? Do you not have a list of rules? Do you expect to leave the decision of whether or not someone should be allowed to travel within his country by the only means that is practical up to any one of thousands of lowest-level-of-TSA airport screeners? That is what it seems to us that you are doing.
Until you publish the rules we are required to follow, we're going only on hearsay. Please don't make restriction of our right to travel hinge on hearsay. Just show us the rules so we can follow them.
September 3, 2008 1:30 PM
Oh, and Lynn, the second comment posted in response to your post asks, "How does assisting Secret Service at political party campaign events support TSA's mission of protecting the Nation’s transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce?"
Now that you've had nine days to ponder this question, Could you please answer?
We pay an enormous amount to have TSA protect our transportation systems. Please help us understand how searching people at political party conventions is a wise use of the money we give you to protect our transportation systems.
September 3, 2008 1:34 PM
Ok Blog team, where does the boundary stop where TSA can surveil the public?
At my home? At the entrance to the airport? At the security checkpoint of the airport?
Is TSA claiming that there is no limit to it's surveillance of the public? No probable cause or warrants required?
Can anyone say "Police State"!
September 3, 2008 1:41 PM
Quote from Grigori:"technologies that effect our security are changing dramatically. Speciall ywhen it somes to Luggage checkpoints. I personally welcome strict security measures which are made by TSA. Transportation security helps our families and us to be very calm, and very sure about getting somewhere. Good job TSA. Moreover, I consider todays security measures very practical. For instance europe has worse security measures than we have her ein US."
Can you explain why you feel that the measures are calming and practical? And why you think Europe has worse screening than we do in the US?
Robert
September 3, 2008 1:46 PM
In response to:
So are the messages that have been posted over the last several days all in the bit bucket? Surely more than 16 new post have been submitted.
The Blog team operates during the work week for the most part, and was off for the holiday weekend. We're back up and running now, albeit still short staffed with many on the team out this week.
Lynn
EoS Blog Team
September 3, 2008 1:47 PM
shashindra said...
The technology revolution in the transportation is very interesting and helpful to employee working on the airport.
August 29, 2008 8:53 AM
Is the airport broken?
September 3, 2008 1:51 PM
RB said...
"Have any disciplinary actions been taken against the TSI who attempted to damage some number of airplanes and place the lives of those who were to fly on this aircraft at risk after being warned by that companies mechanics that what he was doing could damage the aircraft?"
___________________________________
Why are you so worried about the disciplinary actions taken against this guy? Who cares. That is for him and his bosses to worry about, and no one else. Yes everyone has been made aware of what he did, but the planes were fixed. No serious harm done to anyone.
"Why are TSO's directed to refer people who have a large amount of cash to additional screening or interrogation? How does having a large amount of cash jeapordize the safe conduct of a flight? What law provides for this apparent civil rights violation?"
___________________________________
This web page below explains why you can not travel into or out of the U.S. with more than $10,000 cash.
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2001_hr/092601_roukema.html
This is from the 10th paragraph of the Prepared Testimony of the Honorable Marge Roukema (R-NJ)
Member of Congress
10:00 a.m., Wednesday, September 26, 2001 - Dirksen 538
"This statute makes it an offense to transport more than $10,000 in currency or monetary instruments into, or out of, the U.S. without filing a form with the U.S. Customs Service."
As long as the money is declared there is no problem.
Why is you and everyone else think that TSA has no right to check this. If a TSA agent comes across a large amount of money, they have every right to make sure that it is being transported legally.
TSA does not abuse the persons right to travel with as much cash as they want inside the U.S.
They simply ask the person how much they are carrying. If it is over $10,000 they simply check to make sure the proper steps have been taken. If they are not leaving the country then there are no steps. They don't question people for no good reason.
"Where has TSA published a list of rules that a person must conform to in order to pass through a U.S. Government TSA checkpoint?"
___________________________________
Go ahead and go to TSA.gov. It will tell you everything you need to know.
There all of your important questions have been answered.
September 3, 2008 1:56 PM
Quote from Anonymous: "Are you reading your own words? "Random", do you know the meaning of the word? If your are a so called DHS employee, you should know better than to complain about "random" screening."
Maybe he/she's beginning to see the idiocy that DHS and TSA are foisting on us by having to experience it first hand.
Only when the policy makers lay in the beds they make will they even begin to understand and possibly care.
Robert
September 3, 2008 1:58 PM
Anonymous said...
A one in a billion terrorist isn't "probable cause".
Nor is it reasonable.
September 3, 2008 2:02 PM
Bob Eucher said...
"Maybe you can deploy a camera sensing device to detect and aid in the arrest of law abiding citizens exercising their right to take photos from public places. Although not TSA, it is still a Homeland Security issue.
Photography now illegal?"
___________________________________
Why may I ask is this a homeland security issue?
And that is a rhetorical question, I really don't want to hear what you have to say.
All I have to say is it has nothing to do with homeland security.
September 3, 2008 2:06 PM
In response to those who want to know more about the SPO passive millimeter wave technology, which is not the same as the Whole Body imaging millimeter wave technology, I'm working on that piece now.
Lynn
EoS Blog Team
September 3, 2008 2:15 PM
Phil said...
Bob Hansen wrote:
"Now we're "screening" (i.e.: conducting suspicionless & warantless searches of anyone who happens to be at an airport, even those individuals who have no intention of entering the secure area. Where will it end? Will you screen us leaving our houses?"
This is a good question. TSA, do you now feel that you have the right to search not only all the innocent people who want to board a commercial flight, but also those who happen to be in an airport? If so, why not set up a scanner on the highway and search everyone who comes near an airport? If you had sufficient resources, would you set up your remote-search machines at every highway entrance?
It is becoming increasingly clear that TSA's purpose is not to improve transportation security, but to facilitate DHS's restriction of movement based on blacklists and to conduct dragnet operations, stopping and/or searching everyone just to find the few criminals. That's unconstitutional
___________________________________
I see. Someone who recieved a pass to get through security or a worker at the airport doesn't have the ability to carry something through to the sterile side for someone who is getting on a plane.
They couldn't be talked into, at some price, concealing something on themselves.
Hmmm.....I wonder why everyone is checked.
No one is checked unless they submitt themselves for screening.
TSA can not just randomly pick people outside of security to screen.
September 3, 2008 2:31 PM
Sandra said...
I am very concerned that this is a warrant-less search and as such is not legal. Or has the TSA done one of it's magic tricks through a CFR and suddenly just because one enters an airport one has given consent to be searched by any means.
You give the TSA too much credit. They won't bother with any C.F.R. magic they will simply break the law, make up some lame logic of "I feel this is right" then clam up with the excuse that everybody is on vacation.
Here is the deal, Kip is padding his resume. Kip is out at the end of this year so we are seeing a rush of poorly conceived and poorly executed policies.
This way Kip can list the 100% ID verification, the implementation of long range weapons and IED scanners, the implementation of personnel weapons and IED scanners, the implementation of moral boosting faux police uniforms, the implementation of mood music and fancy lights shows and so on as part of his accomplishments.
They all look benign and praise worthy until you pull off the shiny paper and bow and see that reality all you have is a huge box of poo.
Kip won't be around to clean up this mess, he will pass it on to the next guy to deal with.
I wonder what other foolishness we have waiting in the wings before Kip is gone.
Before anybody thinks I am with the "Kip is an idiot" crowd, I am not.
Kip has made improvements in the TSA by creating this blog, killing stupid over priced parties, reducing the amount of yelling at the checkpoints, attempting to speed normal electronics screening, and being accessible to criticism.
I just hope his resume padding does not destroy the good things he has done.
September 3, 2008 2:39 PM
I have repeatedly asked: where has TSA published a list of all the rules and regulations that TSA will subject someone to if that person wishes to cross a U.S. Government checkpoint at an airport en route to the gate from which his domestic flight will depart, not including laws that the person is required to abide by outside of the airport checkpoint (i.e., just those rules and regulations that apply specifically at the checkpoint). Please provide a URL or name of the government publication.
In response, someone anonymously quoted a portion of my question, then wrote:
"Go ahead and go to TSA.gov. It will tell you everything you need to know"
Sir or madam, I challenge you go to tsa.gov, or to the entire DHS site, or to all of the United States Government's sites, or to the whole Internet, and provide me with a URL or the name of a government publication where I can find all the special rules that TSA requires me to abide by at their airport checkpoints.
As multiple commenters here -- including TSA airport screeners -- have pointed out and as both Bob and Lynn of the EoS blog team have each acknowledged, the TSA Web site contains numerous falsehoods and inconsistent information. It is clear that the TSA Web site is not the place to look for accurate information of the sort we seek.
We're not asking for tips for travelers, suggestions on how to pack our bags, hints, clues, guidelines, or press releases. We're not asking to see TSA's super-secret procedures (those that thousands of lowest-level-of-TSA airport security guards who turn over at a rate of somewhere around 25% per year, are allowed to see), not the entire TSA "guidelines for travelers" page, the entire TSA Web site, the entire U.S. Government Web, or the whole Internet -- just a list of the rules TSA imposes on travelers at a U.S. Government airport checkpoint.
No one has yet even suggested that the rules we are required to follow are even defined anywhere, much less published so that those who are required to abide by them can do so.
TSA: Is there a list of rules we must follow at your checkpoints? Are you just making things up as you go? Why should we rely on some new-hire airport bag checker to tell us whether we're in compliance with the law or not?
September 3, 2008 2:43 PM
Please re-design your comment section to post comments in the order they are approved. Or, you could create a Posted order or Approved order. This will help us see everything without having to read through from the first post every time.
September 3, 2008 2:48 PM
Why is you and everyone else think that TSA has no right to check this. If a TSA agent comes across a large amount of money, they have every right to make sure that it is being transported legally
...............................
I disagree, TSA has no reason or right to know how much or why I may have a large sum of cash on my person.
Customs on the other hand does have the right and requires the filing of certain forms if transporting more than $10K cash. If the forms are not filed then a violation of law may have occurred.
So your position is that TSA has no boundaries on what you can do. Do I understand you correctly?
If that is your position then we have a problem.
September 3, 2008 2:48 PM
Anonymous said...
RB said...
"Have any disciplinary actions been taken against the TSI who attempted to damage some number of airplanes and place the lives of those who were to fly on this aircraft at risk after being warned by that companies mechanics that what he was doing could damage the aircraft?"
___________________________________
Why are you so worried about the disciplinary actions taken against this guy? Who cares. That is for him and his bosses to worry about, and no one else. Yes everyone has been made aware of what he did, but the planes were fixed. No serious harm done to anyone.
"Why are TSO's directed to refer people who have a large amount of cash to additional screening or interrogation? How does having a large amount of cash jeapordize the safe conduct of a flight? What law provides for this apparent civil rights violation?"
___________________________________
This web page below explains why you can not travel into or out of the U.S. with more than $10,000 cash.
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2001_hr/092601_roukema.html
This is from the 10th paragraph of the Prepared Testimony of the Honorable Marge Roukema (R-NJ)
Member of Congress
10:00 a.m., Wednesday, September 26, 2001 - Dirksen 538
"This statute makes it an offense to transport more than $10,000 in currency or monetary instruments into, or out of, the U.S. without filing a form with the U.S. Customs Service."
As long as the money is declared there is no problem.
Why is you and everyone else think that TSA has no right to check this. If a TSA agent comes across a large amount of money, they have every right to make sure that it is being transported legally.
TSA does not abuse the persons right to travel with as much cash as they want inside the U.S.
They simply ask the person how much they are carrying. If it is over $10,000 they simply check to make sure the proper steps have been taken. If they are not leaving the country then there are no steps. They don't question people for no good reason.
"Where has TSA published a list of rules that a person must conform to in order to pass through a U.S. Government TSA checkpoint?"
___________________________________
Go ahead and go to TSA.gov. It will tell you everything you need to know.
There all of your important questions have been answered.
September 3, 2008 1:56 PM
................................
If the person who answered the original posters is in fact an employee of the DHS/TSA then you folks have some very serious problems.
These kind of answers explain very well what is wrong at the checkpoints. Your people seem to think there are no limits to what they can do. A persons constitutional rights disappear when in the presence of TSA.
I have taken the liberty to forward this discussion to my congressmen/women.
September 3, 2008 2:54 PM
Anonymous said...
Yesterday I was flying out of DCA. Go through screening, and the agent informs me, "Sir, your bag has been randomly selected for secondary screening."
"I'm an DHS employee, traveling under government Orders. Does that change your mind?" I ask.
"No," says she.
Good going, TSA! Waste one of your random screenings on the one guy who (a GS-15 with a TS/SCI clearance, who, if he wanted to do Evil would do a lot worse than bring something nasty on a plane) is guaranteed to NOT be a terrorist!
................................
So some people should not have to clear security, is that what your saying? Which ones?
The fact that you think your special because you have a clearance means you could not be subverted. Now that's a solid plan!
I don't think a GS-15 would have posted what you did, it certainly makes one question your judgement and professionalism.
September 3, 2008 3:05 PM
Phil said...
"Oh, and Lynn, the second comment posted in response to your post asks, "How does assisting Secret Service at political party campaign events support TSA's mission of protecting the Nation’s transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce?"
Now that you've had nine days to ponder this question, Could you please answer?
We pay an enormous amount to have TSA protect our transportation systems. Please help us understand how searching people at political party conventions is a wise use of the money we give you to protect our transportation systems"
___________________________________
Wow, you people really have nothing better to do than to worry about things that just don't matter.
It is one government agency helping another government agency.
Transportation is still being protected. The checkpoints are still fully staffed.
Worry about something that matters!
September 3, 2008 3:14 PM
Quote from Anonymous: "Why is you and everyone else think that TSA has no right to check this."
Because it's not TSA's job to. This is a Customs issue and should be handled by people TRAINED and with the LEGAL AUTHORITY to do so.
Please tell me what law TSA derives the authority to enforce customs regulations.
"If a TSA agent comes across a large amount of money, they have every right to make sure that it is being transported legally.
Please show me where this falls under TSA's mandate. TSA has no "rights" to do anything. It's only allowed to do things under the limits of the constitution and law.
"TSA does not abuse the persons
right to travel with as much cash as they want inside the U.S.
They simply ask the person how much they are carrying. If it is over $10,000 they simply check to make sure the proper steps have been taken. If they are not leaving the country then there are no steps. They don't question people for no good reason."
What you're describing is not a good reason. And yes, you are harassing people simply for carrying "too much" cash. It's none of your business. YOU are not an LEO. YOU do not work for CBP or ICE. YOU do NOT have this authority. If I'm mistaken,s how me by what law and authority you have to do such searches.
Additionally, please tell me what the threat of carrying cash is to aviation security. Can you even do it?
Robert
September 3, 2008 3:15 PM
Why are you so worried about the disciplinary actions taken against this guy? Who cares. That is for him and his bosses to worry about, and no one else. Yes everyone has been made aware of what he did, but the planes were fixed. No serious harm done to anyone.
I fly as part of my work. That plane could be one I fly on. IF TSI/DHS has one of their personnel damage an aircraft and the aircraft crashes is DHS/TSI absolved from any and all responsibility for the deaths by the fact TSI made an 'honest' mistake and caused hidden damage to the aircraft? I want that individual fired.
"Where has TSA published a list of rules that a person must conform to in order to pass through a U.S. Government TSA checkpoint?"
___________________________________
Go ahead and go to TSA.gov. It will tell you everything you need to know.
You don't read much do you? That site is full of inconsistencies going back years. They might fix those inconsistencies when they get around to it. That site in no way is anywhere near accurate. Read some of the things that TSA can do to you when you make an honest mistake. I would have thought that fining people for not obeying the liquids rules would be the next logical step. After all you have had enough time to read the rules. TSA doesn't make me feel any safer than before 9/11.
September 3, 2008 4:09 PM
Lynn:
As Phil asked:
"Oh, and Lynn, the second comment posted in response to your post asks, "How does assisting Secret Service at political party campaign events support TSA's mission of protecting the Nation’s transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce?""
We are still waiting for a response to this question.
(And please note that a "response" means "answering the question," NOT a "I see your point..."
Your response, in other words, should begin, "Assisting the Secret Service at a political party campaign supports the TSA's mission by..."
It should NOT begin with waffly, evasive language that takes off on an unrelated topic, or worse, talks about "stopping bad guys."
September 3, 2008 4:25 PM
The obvious solution to the delayed posting of comments is to turn moderation off. It is a huge waste of your time and makes discussion harder. This site would really be better served as a forum with topics that can be discussed until finished instead of scrolling off the bottom to be buried and started by us so as to oppose off-topic messages. Blogger is not a good forum for this 'dialogue' that we are not having.
September 3, 2008 4:37 PM
TSO Rachel@ "That REALLY angers me. It's people like that who should be getting letters of guidance and possibly even fired. I am so tired of seeing TSOs, LTSOs, and even STSOs get on these power trips because god forbid the passenger ever be RIGHT... *sigh*
I am really sorry that happened to you and your wife."
Thank you for recognizing something is wrong and saying you are sorry. I know there are some good TSOs, but I think the root problem is worse than just a "few bad apples." The TSA administration seems like it encourages and excuses "mistakes" like this.
Lynn@ "I do see your point. There are pages on the TSA website what you can and can't bring, how to pack, and what you can do to get through the checkpoint quicker, etc., but it would be easier for people if there was one specific spot with rules and other info. The web team is working on streamlining that information to have one page where you can find the full list of rules and tips. I'll keep the blog posted on it."
Part of the problem is that the rules you post on the website are not what your TSOs actually enforce. Phil is repeatedly asking his question because TSA seems to have no authoritative set of rules that we can expect your TSOs to enforce. The TSO supervisor in STL thought he was doing the right thing when he took our gel packs and even advised his screeners that those were the rules. Publishing some rules and "tips" on the website won't fix that -- Your TSO's won't care about what some website says. Actually having the authoritative set of rules somewhere where you can use it to train your employees would be a first step. Sharing it with the public would be the next.
Sharing a bunch of tips and rules that aren't the ones that the TSOs actually enforce is just PR fluff.
It seems like TSA is proud of its lack of organization or control--As long as you continue like that, you will always get inconsistency, frustration, mistrust, and disrespect.
I for one will think of pouring out 13 ounces of breast milk whenever someone asks me to "give TSA a break".
September 3, 2008 5:00 PM
Anonymous asked:
Why may I ask is this a homeland security issue?
I know you don't want the answer, but I will offer it anyways:
Homeland Security Agencies Protect Political Conventions
And a quote from A choice of weapons
Instead, he says, two St. Paul officers disembarked together and approached him. Houk said he took pictures of them, but that they took his camera, citing the authority of the Department of Homeland Security and the preparations for the Republican National Convention.
It doesn't get much clearer than that. 2 police officers wouldn't lie now, would they?
September 3, 2008 7:16 PM
To Phil:
Laws that govern the TSA
TSA Security Regulations
Both of these links are on the TSA website. It does not explain the laws into normal terms but a lawyer should be able to help you. Hope this helps ^_^
September 3, 2008 7:51 PM
To Phil:
Transportation Security Laws
Aviation and Transportation Security Act
Title 49 U.S.C. Chapters 401-501
----------------------------------
Regulation
TSA Security Regulations
Here are the laws and regulations. Hopes this helps Phil. ^_^
You will need a lawyer to make your list of what laws affect you at the check point.
September 3, 2008 8:11 PM
Lynn said...
In response to:
So are the messages that have been posted over the last several days all in the bit bucket? Surely more than 16 new post have been submitted.
The Blog team operates during the work week for the most part, and was off for the holiday weekend. We're back up and running now, albeit still short staffed with many on the team out this week.
Lynn
EoS Blog Team
Lynn the maintenance of the blog has been haphazard for some time now, not just the past weekend. Post don't show up for days or never get posted even when all of your rules have been followed.
It really seems like TSA has cast this boat adrift.
You guys are in control, male it work!
September 3, 2008 11:29 PM
Anonymous@ "Why is you and everyone else think that TSA has no right to check this."
"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."
September 4, 2008 11:53 AM
This post has been removed by the author.
September 4, 2008 12:03 PM
Phil wrote: "I have repeatedly asked: where has TSA published a list of all the rules and regulations that TSA will subject someone to if that person wishes to cross a U.S. Government checkpoint at an airport en route to the gate from which his domestic flight will depart, not including laws that the person is required to abide by outside of the airport checkpoint (i.e., just those rules and regulations that apply specifically at the checkpoint)." Google 49CFR 1540, these are the rules and regulations regarding individuals at an airport accessing the "sterile or secured areas". This Code of federal Regs also goes through Security Responsibilities of employees and other persons, submission to screening and inspection, interference with screening personnel and carriage of weapons and incendiaries by an individual through a checkpoint.
I occasionally go to this website and I work for the TSA, but may not be 100% TSA all of the time. Somethings still don't make complete sense to me. Safe travels.
September 4, 2008 12:08 PM
Someone anonymously wrote:
"Phil is repeatedly asking his question because TSA seems to have no authoritative set of rules that we can expect your TSOs to enforce."
More specifically, I'm repeatedly asking the question because until it is answered or we stumble upon the information ourselves, we have no way of knowing whether we are in compliance with TSA's rules, and thus no way of ensuring that we do what must be done in order to avoid having our freedom of movement restricted by TSA's airport security guards.
"Actually having the authoritative set of rules somewhere where you can use it to train your employees would be a first step. Sharing it with the public would be the next."
I believe those steps should be reversed. When that list of rules is publicly-available, then we will know what to do and TSA's employees (our employees, really) will know what to ensure that we do. Think about it: We don't write laws in secret, then pass them to the police so that they can train their employees, then inform the public of what is expected of them.
It is mind-boggling that we -- in the United States of America -- are still required to abide by rules that we have never seen and are not allowed to see. We do not even know that such rules exist.
TSA: Where have you published a list of all the rules and regulations that TSA will subject someone to if that person wishes to cross a U.S. Government checkpoint at an airport en route to the gate from which his domestic flight will depart, not including laws that the person is required to abide by outside of the airport checkpoint (i.e., just those rules and regulations that apply specifically at the checkpoint). Please provide a URL or name of the government publication.
September 4, 2008 12:33 PM
[reposted with a correction: 3000 people die on U.S. highways each month, not each year]
I asked (on August 28, then again on September 3) how TSA's assistance of Secret Service at political party rallies helps the agency achieve its mission of protecting the nation's transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce.
Lynn has not responded. Lynn, could you please answer?
Someone anonymously wrote:
"Wow, you people really have nothing better to do than to worry about things that just don't matter. It is one government agency helping another government agency. Transportation is still being protected."
Wow, where should I start? Sir or madam, TSA spends over $6 BILLION of our tax dollars each year. We pay an enormous amount of taxes for TSA to protect our transportation systems. Providing security services for political parties at their rallies is a waste of our money -- it does matter.
It is not TSA's duty to assist other agencies. Their duty is to protect our transportation infrastructure. You wrote that "transportation is still being protected." It seems that TSA ignores all of our nation's transportation infrastructure except for that which supports commercial airlines. General aviation, trains, buses, and highways are given little to no attention. Maybe if TSA would focus on highway safety instead of searching people at political party rallies, we wouldn't have 3000 deaths per month on those highways.
September 4, 2008 12:56 PM
This post has been removed by the author.
September 4, 2008 1:02 PM
In another response to my requests for a list of the rules TSA requires people to follow at their airport checkpoints, someone anonymously wrote:
"[Here] are the laws and regulations. [...]
"You will need a lawyer to make your list of what laws affect you at the check point."
That page does not provide any information about what people are required to do or to refrain from doing at a TSA checkpoint. It references about 30 other pages.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume that the information many of us seek is included in one of the pages referenced by the index you referenced.
Instead of finding a lawyer to assist us, let's take just two rules that TSA seems to have imposed and try to find them in the information you referenced. Please direct me to 1) the place within that information where it is stated that someone cannot wear footwear other than socks through a TSA checkpoint, and 2) the place within that information that states that someone may not, when passing through the checkpoint, carry any liquids besides breast milk and saline solution outside his body unless the liquid is distributed into portions of no more than 3.4 oz each then enclosed in a resealable clear plastic bag.
Those are (roughly) rules we've been told we're required to follow at the TSA airport checkpoints, right? Where within the information you cited is that written? Maybe once we find those rules, we'll discover all the others.
TSA: You could avoid all this confusion if you would simply publish the rules you require us to follow at your checkpoints.
September 4, 2008 1:15 PM
Quote from Anonymous: "I see. Someone who recieved a pass to get through security or a worker at the airport doesn't have the ability to carry something through to the sterile side for someone who is getting on a plane.
They couldn't be talked into, at some price, concealing something on themselves.
Hmmm.....I wonder why everyone is checked.
No one is checked unless they submitt themselves for screening.
TSA can not just randomly pick people outside of security to screen."
So screen the workers then. Geez, is it that hard of a concept?
If you're not doing that and essentially think that anything can get thru, then you just admitted that TSA is NOT adequately securing the sterile area as it claims.
Or is this just another "layer" "just in case?" :rolleyes:
I'm not consenting to be screened outside the checkpoint, and to my knowledge, no court as ruled that implied consent lasts throughout my trip until I leave the airport.
I'm not submitting myself for this. I really would like to know where you're getting your authority for this and how you're getting around the 4th amendment issues with a warrantless search. Or is it just being ignored as usual?
Robert
September 4, 2008 1:23 PM
@Anonymous: Wow, you people really have nothing better to do than to worry about things that just don't matter.
It is one government agency helping another government agency.
Transportation is still being protected. The checkpoints are still fully staffed."
Usually you get help from an agency in that mission and is supposedly competent at the job it does. TSA is neither.
It's mission is to secure transportation thru screening. This isn't transportation. And it's certainly not competent at screening.
Earl
September 4, 2008 1:27 PM
Phil said: "It is mind-boggling that we -- in the United States of America -- are still required to abide by rules that we have never seen and are not allowed to see. We do not even know that such rules exist."
We're on double-secret probation.
September 4, 2008 1:31 PM
In yet another well-intentioned but failed attempt to direct us to the rules TSA requires us to follow at their airport checkpoints in order to avoid having our freedom of movement restricted by TSA staff, someone who claims to work for TSA anonymously wrote:
"Google 49CFR 1540, these are the rules and regulations regarding individuals at an airport accessing the `sterile or secured areas'."
Thank you, sir or madam. I searched 49 C.F.R. part 1540 (Civil Aviation Security: General Rules) for the words shoe, footwear, liquid, and identity, and found that none of them is included in that document. Thus the document must not include all the rules TSA requires us to follow at their checkpoints.
Unrelated but interesting: 49 C.F.R. part 1540 defines "sterile area" as "a portion of an airport defined in the airport security program that provides passengers access to boarding aircraft and to which the access generally is controlled by TSA, or by an aircraft operator under part 1544 of this chapter or a foreign air carrier under part 1546 of this chapter, through the screening of persons and property," and defines "screening function" as "the inspection of individuals and property for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries."
Someone posting comments here under the pseudonym of Trollkiller has repeatedly asked (I'll paraphrase) why TSA includes identification and interrogations as part of its screening function which restricts access to sterile areas. No one from TSA has responded to this question, leading reasonable people to suspect that TSA is operating outside the law.
TSA: Will you show us the rules you require us to follow? Will you explain why some your criteria for granting people access to sterile areas of airports fall outside those defined for you in 49 C.F.R. part 1540?
September 4, 2008 1:35 PM
No one is checked unless they submitt themselves for screening.
TSA can not just randomly pick people outside of security to screen.
September 3, 2008 2:31 PM
It seems that they can and are doing exactly that with these new machines.
Perhaps you should read the "New Security Technologies make Airport Debut" article again.
TSA is screening people prior to the checkpoint without cause or warrant. If you take someone to the airport and enter the unsecured area you could be screened without your knowledge.
September 4, 2008 2:00 PM
This post has been removed by the author.
September 4, 2008 2:10 PM
In response to my repeated requests for a pointer to the place where TSA has published the rules it requires us to follow at its airport checkpoints, someone anonymously provided links to some related information.
Those links included TSA's "Transportation Security Laws" page, which references the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (which calls for formation of the TSA and describes TSA's duties, but says nothing of what people must or must not do at an airport checkpoint, using the word "checkpoint" only once in its 51 pages), and also Title 49 U.S.C. Chapters 401-501 (which does not describe what passengers must and must not do at a TSA airport checkpoint). They also included TSA's "Security Regulations" page, which contains lots of information about TSA's regulatory history but does not list any rules TSA requires the public to abide by, and at least upon my initial examination, does not reference any other documents that list any such rules.
Sir or madam, if I have overlooked the list of rules that I seek on the pages you referenced, please correct me.
September 4, 2008 2:11 PM
Anon posted "Travel tales:
Yesterday I was flying out of DCA. Go through screening, and the agent informs me, "Sir, your bag has been randomly selected for secondary screening."
"I'm an DHS employee, traveling under government Orders. Does that change your mind?" I ask.
"No," says she.
Good going, TSA! Waste one of your random screenings on the one guy who (a GS-15 with a TS/SCI clearance, who, if he wanted to do Evil would do a lot worse than bring something nasty on a plane) is guaranteed to NOT be a terrorist!"
Wow, what a sad comment. You sound as though you are just mad because you aren't above the law! I get screened when I enter work, I get screened when I am flying (even in uniform), and my FSD gets screened when he is flying. That is a terrible attitude for a senior staff member (or at least someone that has a senior pay grade). Random is just that, RANDOM, if you get selected follow the process and keep moving. I agree that not alll of our rules make sense (I will not list as that would take me the rest of the day), but this was a case of the TSO doing just what they are supposed to do.
September 4, 2008 2:14 PM
Anonymous said...
To Phil:
Transportation Security Laws
Aviation and Transportation Security Act
Title 49 U.S.C. Chapters 401-501
----------------------------------
Regulation
TSA Security Regulations
Here are the laws and regulations. Hopes this helps Phil. ^_^
You will need a lawyer to make your list of what laws affect you at the check point.
We have a lawyer, her name is Francine Kerner, it is HER responsibility to make the TSA follow the law, and regulations it sets, AND to make those laws and regulations available in an understandable way to the public.
September 4, 2008 2:21 PM
Anonymous@ "Why is you and everyone else think that TSA has no right to check this."
"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."
___________________________________
Anyways..... When a peron submits their belonging to screening at a airport checkpoint, they are giving tsa the right to search their property.
When this unspoken permission is given there are no rights being violated.
September 4, 2008 2:33 PM
Just imagine if the IRS collected taxes based on unwritten rules.
How long would that last? Would Bob, Lynn, and any other TSA supporters be in favor of paying taxes when they did not know what the tax code was, just someone (entry level employee) telling them that this or that is certainly taxed?
Well Lynn, would you and your fellow TSA employees be ok with an unwritten tax code?
You should be if your ok with unwritten TSA rules.
It is exactly the same thing!
"where has TSA published a list of all the rules and regulations that TSA will subject someone to if that person wishes to cross a U.S. Government checkpoint at an airport en route to the gate from which his domestic flight will depart, not including laws that the person is required to abide by outside of the airport checkpoint (i.e., just those rules and regulations that apply only at the checkpoint). Please provide a URL or name of the government publication."
September 4, 2008 3:33 PM
Anonymous said...
Travel tales:
Yesterday I was flying out of DCA. Go through screening, and the agent informs me, "Sir, your bag has been randomly selected for secondary screening."
"I'm an DHS employee, traveling under government Orders. Does that change your mind?" I ask.
"No," says she.
Good going, TSA! Waste one of your random screenings on the one guy who (a GS-15 with a TS/SCI clearance, who, if he wanted to do Evil would do a lot worse than bring something nasty on a plane) is guaranteed to NOT be a terrorist!
August 28, 2008 9:08 PM
...............................
Seems like you should have been given a complete secondary, fined and delayed long enough to miss your flight. Thats what happens to regular "I'm not special" people.
Shouldn't you be thanking that TSO for not turning a blind eye to procedures just because you work for DHS?
Would that TSO be subject to discipinary action for not doing their job correctly.
But I'm a GS15! La tee fricken dah, boy I'm impressed.
Sounds like one GS-15 that needs to be fired NOW!
Somehow I'm not surprised. Why not come back on here and defend your actions?
September 4, 2008 3:41 PM
Miller said...
Why are you so worried about the disciplinary actions taken against this guy? Who cares. That is for him and his bosses to worry about, and no one else. Yes everyone has been made aware of what he did, but the planes were fixed. No serious harm done to anyone.
I fly as part of my work. That plane could be one I fly on. IF TSI/DHS has one of their personnel damage an aircraft and the aircraft crashes is DHS/TSI absolved from any and all responsibility for the deaths by the fact TSI made an 'honest' mistake and caused hidden damage to the aircraft? I want that individual fired.
___________________________________
Yeah, well that didn't happen, so get over it!
September 4, 2008 4:13 PM
Phil @ "I believe those steps should be reversed. When that list of rules is publicly-available, then we will know what to do and TSA's employees (our employees, really) will know what to ensure that we do. Think about it: We don't write laws in secret, then pass them to the police so that they can train their employees, then inform the public of what is expected of them."
I do agree with you: making the rules public first would be the American way to do things. But with the bass-ackwards way TSA manages things, I thought they'd recognize they aren't as well organized as any business.
It seems clear that TSA thinks itself above the law--they don't even seem to understand the questions. Maybe they'd listen to some business-101 and at least make a stab at improving their management.
From what I've read and seen, I don't think TSA has a list of actual rules and regulations it enforces on passengers. All they have is a mish-mash of memos derived from "good intentions", and we all know where that road leads.
September 4, 2008 4:27 PM
ORLANDO, Fla. -- A sick teenager said an over-zealous security screener at Orlando International Airport put his life in danger. After Channel 9 started making calls, the TSA opened an investigation into the matter.
James Hoyne, 14, has a feeding tube in his stomach and carries a back-up in a sealed clear plastic bag. Hoyne said two weeks ago a TSA officer insisted on opening the sterile equipment, contaminating his back-up feeding up tube which he later needed.
"I said 'Please don't open it' and she said 'I have to open it whether you like it or not. If I can't open it, I can't let you on the plane,'" Hoyne said of his conversation with the TSA screener.
TSA officials apologized to James and said they're looking into the incident to see what corrective steps need to be taken.
...................................
The story above happened some time ago, but no information from TSA was given to the public on what corrective action was implemented to ensure no such abuse ever happened again.
So TSA, what happened? Was the TSO disciplined? Were procedures put in place that protects the public from you people?
Kind of like the TSI thing at Chicago, you guys want to sweep every thing under the rug and never say what the final outcome was.
I think the public has a right to know when it's our lives being put in jeopardy but some unqualified pulic servant.
September 5, 2008 11:00 AM
Earl Pitts wrote:
"[TSA's] mission is to secure transportation thru screening."
Close, but not quite.
TSA's mission statement is: "The Transportation Security Administration protects the Nation’s transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce."
September 5, 2008 1:40 PM
Lynn, it has been eight days (I counted incorrectly in my previous comment) since I first asked, and you still have not answered.
How is searching people at political party rallies related to TSA's mission of protecting the Nation’s transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce?
September 5, 2008 2:04 PM
NoClu suggested that TSA redesign its blog's comment section in order to help readers "see everything without having to read through from the first post every time."
NoClu, I agree that TSA's lag in moderating comments makes reading them difficult. Note that you can follow comments for a given blog post using an RSS aggregator (a feed reader, like NetNewsWire, Akgregator, FeedDemon, Firefox's "Live Bookmarks", Safari's built-in RSS, or Google Reader).
To do so, you'll need both the blog ID for EoS (which is 2336044328955501444) and the post ID for a particular post (for this one, it is 6915629065863344340). Then you combine "http://www.blogger.com/feeds/" + blog ID + "/" + post ID + "/comments/devault" in order to arrive at the URL for the RSS feed for comments for a post.
For example, the RSS feed for comments for this post is at http://www.blogger.com/feeds/2336044328955501444/6915629065863344340/comments/default
To find the blog ID (which never changes) and a post ID (each is unique to a particular post), look in the URL for the "post a comment" link for a given post. In this case of this post, the target of the "post a comment" link is http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=2336044328955501444&postID=6915629065863344340. As you can see, the blog ID and post ID are visible in that URL.
Also note that blogger.com, which runs the EoS blog, allows blog administrators to have a link to the RSS feed automatically shown with each post, but TSA has apparently opted not to do so.
September 5, 2008 2:21 PM
What evolution of security? What dialog? We hear edicts and proclamations from on high at DHS. No dialog exists. Dialog supposes an exchange of ideas. Cleaning up some inconsistencies on the documentation (which should have been done before being posted to the web) really doesn't speak well of DHS.
This web site is symptomatic of TSA in general, poorly executed, runs sporadically, and answers to no one.
Either get with the program or pull the plug. FYI Flyer Talk does a much better job of handling TSA issues than does TSA.
September 5, 2008 3:07 PM
___________________________________
Yeah, well that didn't happen, so get over it!
Get over it? Nope. Next time you fly, ask yourself if TSI damaged this plane could this plane crash.
If you're a member of DHS then that is an incredibly flippant answer that shows total disregard to travel safety.
September 5, 2008 3:51 PM
As long as these rules are secret, than any and every penalty applied due to violation of these rules is itself a violation of the American Procdures Act.
Not that the TSA cares much about that act, since when a person called to inquire how to contest a fine, that fine was doubled in violation of the American Procedures Act.
I've got to finish my law degree. Maybe I'll even become a DA so that I can prosecute TSOs who enforce laws that don't exist or break laws that do exist.
September 5, 2008 4:03 PM
Quote from Phil: "Unrelated but interesting: 49 C.F.R. part 1540 defines "sterile area" as "a portion of an airport defined in the airport security program that provides passengers access to boarding aircraft and to which the access generally is controlled by TSA, or by an aircraft operator under part 1544 of this chapter or a foreign air carrier under part 1546 of this chapter, through the screening of persons and property," and defines "screening function" as "the inspection of individuals and property for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries."
This also implies that TSA has jurisdiction of the sterile area and not airside. This makes me question by what authority they're searching people on the outside absent consent
September 5, 2008 4:18 PM
@Phil: "TSA's mission statement is: "The Transportation Security Administration protects the Nation’s transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce."
Problem is that they're infringing on that freedom of movement for people and commerce.
September 5, 2008 4:19 PM
TSA: Where have you published a list of all the rules and regulations that TSA will subject someone to if that person wishes to cross a U.S. Government checkpoint at an airport en route to the gate from which his domestic flight will depart, not including laws that the person is required to abide by outside of the airport checkpoint (i.e., just those rules and regulations that apply specifically at the checkpoint). Please provide a URL or name of the government publication.
............................
Lynn, while you guys are getting the copies of the rules out we will also need a braille or text to speech version for a person who is not sighted. Surely TSA does comply with the Amercians with Disabilities Act. Don't you?
September 5, 2008 4:21 PM
In response to Phil:
This is how the those laws affect you as a passanger:
Under the law that created TSA, the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, the TSA administrator is responsible for overseeing aviation security (P.L. 107-71) and has the authority to establish security procedures at airports (49 C.F.R. § 1540.107). Passengers that fail to comply with security procedures may be prohibited from entering the secure area of airports to catch their flight (49 C.F.R. § 1540.105(a)(2).
The security procedure of taking your shoes off or the 311 is a security procedure. Failure to follow these procedures(or any other) may or maynot result with you not being allowed to enter into the sterile area as defined by the law.
Security procedures (such as the 311 or shoe removal) are listed in the TSA SOP. Currently the SOP is SSI and can not be viewed by the public or anyone with a proper clearance who does not have a "need to know".
To someone else who posted:
The 4th amendment does not apply to the adminstrative searches at the checkpoint. You are giving implied consent when you enter a US government checkpiont. A warrant is not needed when consent is given. Signage is posted in front of every TSA checkpoint that you will be searched/inspected. Also, you agreed to your bags being inspected as part of your Conditions Of Carriage contract that you have entered into with your airline when you purchased your ticket.
definition:
"Baggage means such articles, effects and other personal property as are necessary or appropriate for your wear, use, comfort or convenience in connection with your trip, whether checked in the cargo compartment or carried in the passenger compartment of the aircraft."
General Acceptance of Baggage:
"Only baggage as defined in the definition section will be accepted for transportation. All baggage is subject to inspection."
September 5, 2008 4:44 PM
Phil said "NoClu, I agree that TSA's lag in moderating comments makes reading them difficult. Note that you can follow comments for a given blog post using an RSS aggregator (a feed reader, like NetNewsWire, Akgregator, FeedDemon, Firefox's "Live Bookmarks", Safari's built-in RSS, or Google Reader).
To do so, you'll need both the blog ID for EoS (which is 2336044328955501444) and the post ID for a particular post (for this one, it is 6915629065863344340). Then you combine "http://www.blogger.com/feeds/" + blog ID + "/" + post ID + "/comments/devault" in order to arrive at the URL for the RSS feed for comments for a post.
For example, the RSS feed for comments for this post is at http://www.blogger.com/feeds/2336044328955501444/6915629065863344340/comments/default
To find the blog ID (which never changes) and a post ID (each is unique to a particular post), look in the URL for the "post a comment" link for a given post. In this case of this post, the target of the "post a comment" link is http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=2336044328955501444&postID=6915629065863344340. As you can see, the blog ID and post ID are visible in that URL.
Also note that blogger.com, which runs the EoS blog, allows blog administrators to have a link to the RSS feed automatically shown with each post, but TSA has apparently opted not to do so.
September 5, 2008 2:21 PM"
Phil, you almost made my head explode. I think I'll need sift through the comments for un-read info instead. :)
September 5, 2008 4:44 PM
In response to a different post, Bob of the EoS blog team wrote:
"By all means, discuss the DNC & RNC as far as TSA's involvement."
We're trying to discuss it, but you at EoS have clammed up.
I'm still baffled by the idea that TSA can protect the nation's transportation systems by searching people (and I use that lightly; it's a non-traditional, hands-off search that examines what is under people's clothing using "millimeter waves") at political party rallies.
Lynn cited an August, 2008, DHS "Fact Sheet: Homeland Security Agencies Protect Political Conventions" that states:
"Since January, more than 2,300 TSA officers have supported Secret Service activities at more than 180 campaign events from coast to coast. In Denver, TSA is providing approximately 100 Transportation Security Officers to assist the Secret Service with screening at convention venues. In Saint Paul, TSA will provide approximately 50 officers to fill the same need."
I'm bothered by the mission creep, and I'm concerned that such actions contribute to creation of a hostile environment that is unsafe for peaceful protesters, police, and the press on whom we rely to be our eyes and ears.
However, I will admit that such a practice is likely quite effective at conditioning the public to put up with the sort of warrantless searches, random interrogations, and dragnet operations that TSA seems set on conducting.
Lynn, Bob: We're all waiting. How is TSA action that is the subject of this post -- using your wave scanner machines to search people in the crowds at a political party rally -- part of your agency's job of securing our transportation infrastructure?
September 5, 2008 4:53 PM
Bob, instead of making NoClu's head explode, why don't you just enable the Blogger option to include a link to the RSS feed for a post's comments? Doing so would probably further the dialog.
September 5, 2008 4:57 PM
Anonymous, the problem isn't with the screening or necessarily questioning the ability to search bags. The problem comes with the scope of the search. The problem is that a search is consented to on one ground and then TSA expands it from an administrative search to a criminal search.
And of course, the ability for TSA to require ID and deny travel based on not showing ID or refusing to identify themselves when previously just undergoing a secondary screening was sufficient. This is ripe for a legal challenge because TSA told a judge it wasn't required which is a very large reason why the judge ruled against Gilmore.
The question isn't "can TSA search bags." It's established that they can and I think that everyone agrees that it needs to be done to some degree. The questions are: Is TSA exceeding its authority and scope of the search? In what areas? And by how much?
With some of the recent developments, these definitely need to be addressed as it seems that TSA doesn't care if it has legal authority or not to do some of these things.
Robert
September 5, 2008 5:03 PM
IRT what Anonymous posted about the TSO opening the 14 yr old's feeding tube sterile package.
Yes, it would be interesting to know what became of the "investigation", but more importantly where can I find the rules & regulations that state that a TSO MUST open obvious personal medical devices BEFORE one can be ALLOWED on an airplane?
In fact this is from your website: Any medication and/or associated supplies that cannot be cleared visually must be submitted for X-ray screening. Where does it say it MUST be opened? The TSO was clearly violating TSA rules.
IF this rule is not written anywhere, how is the traveling public supposed to know to make other arrangements prior to traveling?
Please, tell us where ALL the rules are? It seems some of the rules can affect our very lives.
BTW, your ID page, TSA acceptable ID is still contradictory. It states that ID's NOT having expiration date, and gender may be subject to additional screening. You then state that Military ID's, meet this criteria, which a retired military member's ID does NOT have those two items. What do I believe?
Also the information about insulin still remains unchanged. On the same webpage, it states: Insulin in any form or dispenser must be clearly identified. and then it states:
We recommend, but do not require, that your medications be labeled to assist with the screening process.
As a law abiding individual, and wanting to get through your checkpoints with the least amount of trouble I would like your publication on ALL the rules that I must follow to clear a TSA checkpoint and be able to fly within the borders of the USA.
September 5, 2008 6:43 PM
TSO Tom said... Congratulations to Bob and his family on the new baby. Looking forward to hearing more about this new technology. Have a safe and happy Labor Day! August 28, 2008 8:08 PM
Thanks! I’m all alone back in Virginia now, but I get to pick up my family and bring them here in a few weeks. I miss that tiny little critter. She was born on 8/22 at 4:54 PM. She weighed 5.9 lbs and was measured at 18.5”. I now have three women in my life. I still have my trusty dog Clarence!
Phil said... How does assisting Secret Service at political party campaign events support TSA's mission of protecting the Nation’s transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce? August 28, 2008 8:26 PM
For years now we have assisted the Secret Service, FEMA and Customs. We’re all under the DHS umbrella. After Katrina, we had TSA employees assisting FEMA with various tasks. The folks in NOLA weren’t complaining about mission creep.
As far as the recent conventions, we are used as a force multiplier. We are outstanding at what we do and by working with the Secret Service and Law Enforcement; we can help make these events much safer. Whether it’s screening somebody at a checkpoint or deploying our Behavior Detection Officers to watch the crowd, we are a welcome addition to these events and our DHS components appreciate the help.
Perhaps you should look at the DHS mission statement and strategic goals. Remember, after 9/11, the primary reason for the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security was to provide the unifying core for the vast national network of organizations and institutions involved in efforts to secure our nation. While you’re citing the TSA’s specific mission statement, you’re forgetting that we fall under the DHS.
You can read about the mission and strategic goals, but I’ll cut and paste them for you.
Mission We will lead the unified national effort to secure America. We will prevent and deter terrorist attacks and protect against and respond to threats and hazards to the nation. We will ensure safe and secure borders, welcome lawful immigrants and visitors, and promote the free-flow of commerce.
Strategic Goals
Awareness -- Identify and understand threats, assess vulnerabilities, determine potential impacts and disseminate timely information to our homeland security partners and the American public.
Prevention — Detect, deter and mitigate threats to our homeland.
Protection — Safeguard our people and their freedoms, critical infrastructure, property and the economy of our Nation from acts of terrorism, natural disasters, or other emergencies.
Response — Lead, manage and coordinate the national response to acts of terrorism, natural disasters, or other emergencies.
Recovery — Lead national, state, local and private sector efforts to restore services and rebuild communities after acts of terrorism, natural disasters, or other emergencies.
Service — Serve the public effectively by facilitating lawful trade, travel and immigration.
Organizational Excellence — Value our most important resource, our people. Create a culture that promotes a common identity, innovation, mutual respect, accountability and teamwork to achieve efficiencies, effectiveness, and operational synergies.
Earl Pitts said... Lynn, Can you really call it blogging if nothing is really being posted by TSA or if comments aren't being reviewed and posted (holiday week or not)? Earl
August 28, 2008 9:05 PM
Earl, of course we can. Are you aware that some blogs don’t even allow comments?
Anonymous said... Travel tales: Yesterday I was flying out of DCA. Go through screening, and the agent informs me, "Sir, your bag has been randomly selected for secondary screening." "I'm an DHS employee, traveling under government Orders. Does that change your mind?" I ask. "No," says she. Good going, TSA! Waste one of your random screenings on the one guy who (a GS-15 with a TS/SCI clearance, who, if he wanted to do Evil would do a lot worse than bring something nasty on a plane) is guaranteed to NOT be a terrorist! August 28, 2008 9:08 PM
I’m not sure what you do for DHS, but I’d like to know so I can see if I could just stroll into your office. Heck, I’m DHS and I had to be screened to get into the DOT building.
RB said... Why are TSO's directed to refer people who have a large amount of cash to additional screening or interrogation? How does having a large amount of cash jeopardize the safe conduct of a flight? What law provides for this apparent civil rights violation? August 28, 2008 9:28 PM
We are not looking for cash, but if we come across it during a search and you’re flying out of the country, we have to notify Customs. We don’t have the power to detain you, but we can report you to Customs. Check out the US Customs page and scroll down to Outbound Examinations. You will see that you have to declare any cash in excess of $10,000.00 prior to exiting the country.
Gunner said... Congratulations to Blogger Bob, Mrs. Blogger Bob, and new baby Blogger Bob. August 29, 2008 5:22 PM
Thanks Gunner!
Anonymous said... I know some simple technologies you might try: communication and consistency. August 30, 2008 8:44 PM
As a new father that has watched his wife nurse both children, I am sincerely sorry that this happened to your wife. Have you contacted the airport through Got Feedback? I spoke with the Customer Support Manager and was told that they are looking into the incident. If you haven’t contacted them with your info, please do so.
Anonymous said... This article says these are not exactly in remote locations, violating TSA policies. http://www.boingboing.net/2008/08/31/millimeter-wave-scan.html August 31, 2008 10:08 PM
Please see my latest blog post. This is not the same as a MMW portal.
Anonymous said... Of all of the "security" measures TSA has introduced, does the fact that none of them would have prevented 9/11 bother any of you? I mean, isn't that basically your job description? Or is it just to waste as much tax payer's money as possible? If the latter, allow me to commend you on a job well done. September 1, 2008 12:06 AM
I strongly believe the BDO program would have thwarted the 9/11 hijackers.
Anonymous said... The obvious solution to the delayed posting of comments is to turn moderation off. It is a huge waste of your time and makes discussion harder. This site would really be better served as a forum with topics that can be discussed until finished instead of scrolling off the bottom to be buried and started by us so as to oppose off-topic messages. Blogger is not a good forum for this 'dialogue' that we are not having.
September 3, 2008 4:37 PM
While this would make the blog team’s life much easier, it just won’t happen. Do you really want to read SPAM and hate filled messages? We also can’t take the chance of an employee releasing SSI.
Phil said... Maybe if TSA would focus on highway safety instead of searching people at political party rallies, we wouldn't have 3000 deaths per month on those highways.
September 4, 2008 12:56 PM
I’ve seen this comment so many times. So, I’m guessing that all these folks were on the highways because they didn’t want to fly? I wonder how many are due to drunk drivers, people texting while driving, blown tires, wildlife in the middle of the road, faulty mechanics, falling asleep at the wheel, not stopping for a train signal, pulling out in front of somebody, low blood sugar, heart attacks, inclement weather…
1)I don’t buy that thousands of folks are dying behind the wheel because they refuse to fly.
2)What do you expect the TSA to do about all of these deaths? Isn’t that what the DOT is for? Here is their mission statement: Serve the United States by ensuring a fast, safe, efficient, accessible and convenient transportation system that meets our vital national interests and enhances the quality of life of the American people, today and into the future. It sounds like you should visit their blog.
NoClu said... Phil, you almost made my head explode. I think I'll need sift through the comments for un-read info instead. :) September 5, 2008 4:44 PM
NoClu…PLEASE take deep breaths. I don’t want our blog to be responsible for an exploded head. Look for an RSS feed for comments next week. :)
Thanks,
Bob
EoS Blog Team
September 5, 2008 8:36 PM
No idea why you're all jumping over the Anonymous GS-15.
Let's say n people pass through checkpoints, and m (where m < n) are traveling under government orders with clearances. I'm going to select q (q < m) people at random for screening. If I select from the entire population, n, for random screening, then I screen q/n percent. If the probability of someone being a terrorist is p, then the probability of my finding a terrorist with random screening is pq/n.
Now suppose I remove the m people with clearances and orders from the population. The probability of any of those people being terrorists is, by the government's definition, zero (hence granting them orders and clearances).
So the probability of catching a terrorist is now pq/(n-m) > pq/n.
Eliminating people already vetted improves your chances of catching terrorists.
So what's your problem with this? As we've seen before, there's already a lot of folks who don't go through screening (pilots, workers, etc.). What's the difference if we add an additional class the government has already vetted? It'll move the lines along faster and improve the odds of catching bad guys. Military, defense contractors, govvies--as long as they have a clearance and are on official business, why not let them through?
September 5, 2008 10:30 PM
Bob said...
TSO Tom said... Congratulations to Bob and his family on the new baby. Looking forward to hearing more about this new technology. Have a safe and happy Labor Day! August 28, 2008 8:08 PM
Thanks! I’m all alone back in Virginia now, but I get to pick up my family and bring them here in a few weeks. I miss that tiny little critter. She was born on 8/22 at 4:54 PM. She weighed 5.9 lbs and was measured at 18.5”. I now have three women in my life. I still have my trusty dog Clarence!
Phil said... How does assisting Secret Service at political party campaign events support TSA's mission of protecting the Nation’s transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce? August 28, 2008 8:26 PM
For years now we have assisted the Secret Service, FEMA and Customs. We’re all under the DHS umbrella. After Katrina, we had TSA employees assisting FEMA with various tasks. The folks in NOLA weren’t complaining about mission creep.
As far as the recent conventions, we are used as a force multiplier. We are outstanding at what we do and by working with the Secret Service and Law Enforcement; we can help make these events much safer. Whether it’s screening somebody at a checkpoint or deploying our Behavior Detection Officers to watch the crowd, we are a welcome addition to these events and our DHS components appreciate the help.
The Navy and the Air Force are both part of DOD yet you do not see the Air Force manning Navy Ships.
How does working a convention or any other event where people gather support the mission of Transportation Security?
You did not answer the question.
Perhaps you should look at the DHS mission statement and strategic goals. Remember, after 9/11, the primary reason for the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security was to provide the unifying core for the vast national network of organizations and institutions involved in efforts to secure our nation. While you’re citing the TSA’s specific mission statement, you’re forgetting that we fall under the DHS.
You can read about the mission and strategic goals, but I’ll cut and paste them for you.
Mission We will lead the unified national effort to secure America. We will prevent and deter terrorist attacks and protect against and respond to threats and hazards to the nation. We will ensure safe and secure borders, welcome lawful immigrants and visitors, and promote the free-flow of commerce.
Strategic Goals
Awareness -- Identify and understand threats, assess vulnerabilities, determine potential impacts and disseminate timely information to our homeland security partners and the American public.
Prevention — Detect, deter and mitigate threats to our homeland.
Protection — Safeguard our people and their freedoms, critical infrastructure, property and the economy of our Nation from acts of terrorism, natural disasters, or other emergencies.
Response — Lead, manage and coordinate the national response to acts of terrorism, natural disasters, or other emergencies.
Recovery — Lead national, state, local and private sector efforts to restore services and rebuild communities after acts of terrorism, natural disasters, or other emergencies.
Service — Serve the public effectively by facilitating lawful trade, travel and immigration.
Organizational Excellence — Value our most important resource, our people. Create a culture that promotes a common identity, innovation, mutual respect, accountability and teamwork to achieve efficiencies, effectiveness, and operational synergies.
Earl Pitts said... Lynn, Can you really call it blogging if nothing is really being posted by TSA or if comments aren't being reviewed and posted (holiday week or not)? Earl
August 28, 2008 9:05 PM
Earl, of course we can. Are you aware that some blogs don’t even allow comments?
Anonymous said... Travel tales: Yesterday I was flying out of DCA. Go through screening, and the agent informs me, "Sir, your bag has been randomly selected for secondary screening." "I'm an DHS employee, traveling under government Orders. Does that change your mind?" I ask. "No," says she. Good going, TSA! Waste one of your random screenings on the one guy who (a GS-15 with a TS/SCI clearance, who, if he wanted to do Evil would do a lot worse than bring something nasty on a plane) is guaranteed to NOT be a terrorist! August 28, 2008 9:08 PM
I’m not sure what you do for DHS, but I’d like to know so I can see if I could just stroll into your office. Heck, I’m DHS and I had to be screened to get into the DOT building.
RB said... Why are TSO's directed to refer people who have a large amount of cash to additional screening or interrogation? How does having a large amount of cash jeopardize the safe conduct of a flight? What law provides for this apparent civil rights violation? August 28, 2008 9:28 PM
We are not looking for cash, but if we come across it during a search and you’re flying out of the country, we have to notify Customs. We don’t have the power to detain you, but we can report you to Customs. Check out the US Customs page and scroll down to Outbound Examinations. You will see that you have to declare any cash in excess of $10,000.00 prior to exiting the country.
Why do you have to notify Customs? Control of money is simply not part of your job. I am very familiar with filing customs forms, TSA is not Cusotms! How about some reasoning that will stand up to a little scrutiny about this abuse of a citizen. Again your remarks do not answer the question.
Gunner said... Congratulations to Blogger Bob, Mrs. Blogger Bob, and new baby Blogger Bob. August 29, 2008 5:22 PM
Thanks Gunner!
Anonymous said... I know some simple technologies you might try: communication and consistency. August 30, 2008 8:44 PM
As a new father that has watched his wife nurse both children, I am sincerely sorry that this happened to your wife. Have you contacted the airport through Got Feedback? I spoke with the Customer Support Manager and was told that they are looking into the incident. If you haven’t contacted them with your info, please do so.
Anonymous said... This article says these are not exactly in remote locations, violating TSA policies. http://www.boingboing.net/2008/08/31/millimeter-wave-scan.html August 31, 2008 10:08 PM
Please see my latest blog post. This is not the same as a MMW portal.
What law permits TSA to scan anyone outside of the secure area without obtaining a search warrant?
Anonymous said... Of all of the "security" measures TSA has introduced, does the fact that none of them would have prevented 9/11 bother any of you? I mean, isn't that basically your job description? Or is it just to waste as much tax payer's money as possible? If the latter, allow me to commend you on a job well done. September 1, 2008 12:06 AM
I strongly believe the BDO program would have thwarted the 9/11 hijackers.
Evidence
Anonymous said... The obvious solution to the delayed posting of comments is to turn moderation off. It is a huge waste of your time and makes discussion harder. This site would really be better served as a forum with topics that can be discussed until finished instead of scrolling off the bottom to be buried and started by us so as to oppose off-topic messages. Blogger is not a good forum for this 'dialogue' that we are not having.
September 3, 2008 4:37 PM
While this would make the blog team’s life much easier, it just won’t happen. Do you really want to read SPAM and hate filled messages? We also can’t take the chance of an employee releasing SSI.
Phil said... Maybe if TSA would focus on highway safety instead of searching people at political party rallies, we wouldn't have 3000 deaths per month on those highways.
September 4, 2008 12:56 PM
I’ve seen this comment so many times. So, I’m guessing that all these folks were on the highways because they didn’t want to fly? I wonder how many are due to drunk drivers, people texting while driving, blown tires, wildlife in the middle of the road, faulty mechanics, falling asleep at the wheel, not stopping for a train signal, pulling out in front of somebody, low blood sugar, heart attacks, inclement weather…
1)I don’t buy that thousands of folks are dying behind the wheel because they refuse to fly.
2)What do you expect the TSA to do about all of these deaths? Isn’t that what the DOT is for? Here is their mission statement: Serve the United States by ensuring a fast, safe, efficient, accessible and convenient transportation system that meets our vital national interests and enhances the quality of life of the American people, today and into the future. It sounds like you should visit their blog.
So highway safety is not part of the national transportation systems.
NoClu said... Phil, you almost made my head explode. I think I'll need sift through the comments for un-read info instead. :) September 5, 2008 4:44 PM
NoClu…PLEASE take deep breaths. I don’t want our blog to be responsible for an exploded head. Look for an RSS feed for comments next week. :)
Thanks,
Bob
EoS Blog Team
September 5, 2008 11:33 PM
Bob @ "As a new father that has watched his wife nurse both children, I am sincerely sorry that this happened to your wife. Have you contacted the airport through Got Feedback? I spoke with the Customer Support Manager and was told that they are looking into the incident. If you haven’t contacted them with your info, please do so."
Thanks for the sympathy.
I did contact do the "got feedback?" thing with my flight, security lane, and time, but not with my name or email. Since the milk is gone, there isn't a dang thing TSA can do to make us whole.
The best I can hope for is that you-all do a better job of training your people to your ill-defined and effectively secret rules. I don't have much hope about that.
As for the relevance of the approximately 3000 people that die in traffic every month, compare that to the BTS statistics for US Air Carrier deaths (monthly average=9) and ask yourselves what the point of TSA is? You are spending billions to imperfectly (50%? 20%?) solve a tiny problem, when much more significant transportation problems exist. With your rad safety and security mojo, even if you saved only 1% of the 3000 people that die in a month of traffic accidents, that's 30 lives saved. How many lives does TSA save in a month? Prove it. (At least to the same standard that the economists who show that TSA costs lives.)
September 6, 2008 5:36 PM
"We are outstanding at what we do"
No, you aren't. Your screenings are absurd, your employees routinely fail tests to see if they can detect bomb parts and dangerous items, one of your employees damaged a bunch of aircraft in Chicago, and your policies are indefensible from a security standpoint.
"I strongly believe the BDO program would have thwarted the 9/11 hijackers."
You also strongly believe that 3.5 ounces of shampoo can bring down a 747.
"What do you expect the TSA to do about all of these deaths?"
Stop the shoe screenings that don't make anyone safer, drop the 3.4-1-1 policy that doesn't make anyone safer, teach your employees to stop shouting, stop the electronic strip searches, stop the pointless gate screenings, stop the endless ID checks to confirm that the name on one's ID matches the name on one's easily altered boarding pass.
All of these things do nothing to enhance security, and thus ending them would do nothing to harm security. Yet ending them would make air travel a far less wretched and unpleasant experience.
Congratulations on your child. I sincerely hope that someday you get to experience the same miserable treatment the poster whose wife was forced to dump her breast milk gets from a power-hungry thug in a phony uniform.
September 6, 2008 10:15 PM
Anonymous said... Why do you have to notify Customs? Control of money is simply not part of your job. I am very familiar with filing customs forms, TSA is not Cusotms! How about some reasoning that will stand up to a little scrutiny about this abuse of a citizen. Again your remarks do not answer the question.
Why? Because it’s in our SOP. It's mandated. Also, because we are under the same DHS umbrella as Customs. We help each other out at times.
Anonymous said... Thanks for the sympathy. I did contact do the "got feedback?" thing with my flight, security lane, and time, but not with my name or email. Since the milk is gone, there isn't a dang thing TSA can do to make us whole. The best I can hope for is that you-all do a better job of training your people to your ill-defined and effectively secret rules. I don't have much hope about that. September 6, 2008 5:36 PM
That’s one of the purposes of Got Feedback. The airport will look into the incident and retrain the individual involved. I wouldn’t be surprised if an airport wide briefing goes out to the Officers at that airport.
Anonymous said... As for the relevance of the approximately 3000 people that die in traffic every month, compare that to the BTS statistics for US Air Carrier deaths (monthly average=9) and ask yourselves what the point of TSA is? You are spending billions to imperfectly (50%? 20%?) solve a tiny problem, when much more significant transportation problems exist. With your rad safety and security mojo, even if you saved only 1% of the 3000 people that die in a month of traffic accidents, that's 30 lives saved. How many lives does TSA save in a month? Prove it. (At least to the same standard that the economists who show that TSA costs lives.) September 6, 2008 5:36 PM
Like I’ve said before, I can’t remember the last time an auto accident grounded every airline in the US and crippled our economy. Look, life is precious. Our TSOs are dedicated to keeping folks safe. Many TSOs will tell you that they screen each flight as if their family and friends were on it. But, it’s no secret that if this would happen again, it would be disastrous for the airlines as well as our economy.
Anonymous said... Congratulations on your child. I sincerely hope that someday you get to experience the same miserable treatment the poster whose wife was forced to dump her breast milk gets from a power-hungry thug in a phony uniform. September 6, 2008 10:15 PM
You know how to make me feel all warm and fuzzy don’t you?
Bob EoS Blog Team
September 7, 2008 1:49 AM
the SPO is essentially a camera with a few extra bells and whistles it does NOT see under clothing as has been stated NUMEROUS times already. Lots of places of business have cameras to observe who is coming in and out of the establishment. Banks for an obvious example have cameras everywhere, never heard an issue with that...
September 7, 2008 6:54 PM
Anonymous said...
the SPO is essentially a camera with a few extra bells and whistles it does NOT see under clothing as has been stated NUMEROUS times already. Lots of places of business have cameras to observe who is coming in and out of the establishment. Banks for an obvious example have cameras everywhere, never heard an issue with that...
Wait, the "few extra bells and whistles" IS the ability to "see under clothing". It can "see" or detect if someone is carrying something UNDER their clothing. Granted, it does not show a naked person, but in effective it looks beneath one's clothing, or conducts a search.
Lots of banks and businesses are NOT the US Government. The 4th Amendment applies to the US Government. The cameras at banks/businesses are NOT searching us for objects under our clothing.
Just as a search at a sports events for food/drink/weapons, is not unconstitutional because it is NOT the US Government.
But when it is the US Government, then the US Constitution certainly applies. This is very close to an an unwarranted search, and I would be curious what would happen to someone that did trigger the machine.
September 8, 2008 9:42 AM
Someone asked why it is TSA's policy to notify customs. Bob responded:
"Because it’s in our SOP. It's mandated."
Bob, that's not an answer. I think you know that when people here ask why "you" do something, they are almost always asking why TSA does so, not why an individual TSA employee does so.
When we ask, "why do you do this?" please don't respond by telling us that you do it because it's your standard operating policy.
"Also, because we are under the same DHS umbrella as Customs. We help each other out at times."
Right. And both you and the FDA are under the same U.S. Government umbrella. This information is not helpful.
Why does TSA use the money we give it to protect our transportation infrastructure to search people at political party conventions?
September 8, 2008 11:00 AM
Anyways..... When a peron submits their belonging to screening at a airport checkpoint, they are giving tsa the right to search their property.
When this unspoken permission is given there are no rights being violated.
September 8, 2008 1:23 PM
Bob @"Like I’ve said before, I can’t remember the last time an auto accident grounded every airline in the US and crippled our economy. Look, life is precious. Our TSOs are dedicated to keeping folks safe. Many TSOs will tell you that they screen each flight as if their family and friends were on it. But, it’s no secret that if this would happen again, it would be disastrous for the airlines as well as our economy."
Bob, if you are counting lives, traffic accidents kill far more americans than commercial flights, even with terrorism. If you are counting economics, asking 2,000,000 people per day spend an additional hour per day on security adds up to another 9/11 worth of transportation delay every week.
You can wave your hands about how TSA is worth any cost, but economists are experts at assessing societal costs, benefits, and tradeoffs, and they find TSA expensive, in both dollars and lives.
And just how effective is TSA anyway? Are you guaranteeing that another 9/11 will not happen with your magic BDOs? Or do you need a TSA 10 times as burdensome to avoid disaster?
September 9, 2008 11:10 AM
Phil said... Someone asked why it is TSA's policy to notify customs. Bob responded: "Because it’s in our SOP. It's mandated." Bob, that's not an answer. I think you know that when people here ask why "you" do something, they are almost always asking why TSA does so, not why an individual TSA employee does so. When we ask, "why do you do this?" please don't respond by telling us that you do it because it's your standard operating policy."Also, because we are under the same DHS umbrella as Customs. We help each other out at times." Right. And both you and the FDA are under the same U.S. Government umbrella. This information is not helpful. Why does TSA use the money we give it to protect our transportation infrastructure to search people at political party conventions? September 8, 2008 11:00 AM
Phil, I went on to give more of an answer after that, but you didn’t like my answer. What does the FDA have to do with anything? The FDA is a part of the Department of Health and Human Services, not the DHS.
Anonymous said... Are you guaranteeing that another 9/11 will not happen with your magic BDOs? September 9, 2008 11:10 AM
Sir, if they were magic BDOs, they would be wearing cloaks. And I would be foolish to guarantee that another 9/11 would never happen. However, I can tell you that thousands of folks around the world are doing their best everyday to make sure it never happens again.
Bob
TSA EoS Blog Team
September 9, 2008 1:31 PM
Bob, you did not go on to provide more of an answer than that. The entirety of your answer was:
"Why? Because it’s in our SOP. It's mandated. Also, because we are under the same DHS umbrella as Customs. We help each other out at times."
I quoted all of that.
We asked why TSA would be counting money carried by passengers and reporting its findings to Customs and Boarder Patrol. You responded by saying that TSA does so because 1) it is your policy to do so (hey, thanks for pointing that out), and 2) you and CBP are both part of DHS (so what? you and FDA are both part of the federal government, but that doesn't mean you should be out there testing cattle).
To clarify my reference to FDA: If you can justify TSA doing the job of CBP because they are both part of DHS, you may as well justify TSA doing the job of FDA because they are both part of the United States Government. How far up the hierarchy do you feel it is appropriate to climb in order to find such a connection?
You at TSA operate in a very touchy area. What you do borders on -- if not crosses the line into -- unconstitutionality. We're putting up with warrantless searches and restriction of freedom of movement from you. Now you're not only working towards enhancing transportation security, you're conducting dragnet operations for all sorts of unrelated crimes and searching people at political party rallies, air shows, and football games. I think this is reason for alarm. Your agency is out of control and repeatedly extending its reach.
September 9, 2008 2:10 PM
"you're conducting dragnet operations for all sorts of unrelated crimes and searching people at political party rallies, air shows, and football games."
Umm, point of order? At the DNC and RNC, the Secret Service was the authority in charge of the whole thing. TSA was there. Fema was. The Coast Guard. FBI. Peace officers from dozens of locals. So if this is all coordinated by the secret Service, how is TSA "out of control and repeatedly extending its reach."? We were there at the Secret Services request. TSA didn't barge in and demand that we screen poeple. Methinks your blatant dislike (I'm being mild) of TSA is blinding you to who was really in charge at these two events. TSO-Joe
September 9, 2008 3:14 PM
Bob @ "Sir, if they were magic BDOs, they would be wearing cloaks. And I would be foolish to guarantee that another 9/11 would never happen. However, I can tell you that thousands of folks around the world are doing their best everyday to make sure it never happens again."
Bob, I know there are thousands of hardworking folks doing their best at this, and devoting their careers to it, but it is really unclear that it is actually worth doing. We both know you can't guarantee 100% security. The cost is not insignificant: maybe 2,800,000 person-hours of time per day, and the benefit better be more than 2585 lives per year. TSA can't show that. The highway workers and police can do a good job of their statistics and show that they are actually saving lives. TSA, not so much. How can anyone tell the difference between TSA wasting time searching for snowglobes and TSA actually stopping terrorists?
"Bottom line is [it] matters," isn't reasoning for a policy, it is wishful thinking. And wishful thinking seems to be the basis of lots of TSA's non-rules.
September 9, 2008 5:20 PM
Bob said...
Anonymous said... Why do you have to notify Customs? Control of money is simply not part of your job. I am very familiar with filing customs forms, TSA is not Cusotms! How about some reasoning that will stand up to a little scrutiny about this abuse of a citizen. Again your remarks do not answer the question.
Why? Because it’s in our SOP. It's mandated. Also, because we are under the same DHS umbrella as Customs. We help each other out at times.
............................
Bob, if your comments would stand up to the light of the day I would be surprised. But again all you can do is repeat the party line.
By your justification if TSA decided to give "finger waves" to all passengers then it would be ok because its part of your SOP.
Simply put it is none of TSA's business how much cash I may have on my person. The fact that your under the DHS umbrella has no bearing on this discussion.
When TA can do its core task well then you will have done something!
September 11, 2008 11:05 AM
Responding to - Anonymous said...
Travel tales:
Yesterday I was flying out of DCA. Go through screening, and the agent informs me, "Sir, your bag has been randomly selected for secondary screening."
"I'm an DHS employee, traveling under government Orders. Does that change your mind?" I ask.
"No," says she.
Good going, TSA! Waste one of your random screenings on the one guy who (a GS-15 with a TS/SCI clearance, who, if he wanted to do Evil would do a lot worse than bring something nasty on a plane) is guaranteed to NOT be a terrorist!
___________________________________
Well yippee for you. I to am a GS-15 and carry several security clearances, none of which are tattooed on my forehead for all to see. It has been proven time and time again over the last couple hundred years that occasionally even the most trusted in our midst betray the vary people and country they have sworn an oath to defend. In nearly every case they carried the highest of clearances and multiple background checks.
I have no problem with random checks and with your position and clearances neither should you. You should thank them for doing their job and not falling for a "do you know who I am" comment and proceed on.
As for a wasted check, I am sure there are plenty to go around.
September 12, 2008 10:01 AM
Bob, I know there are thousands of hardworking folks doing their best at this, and devoting their careers to it, but it is really unclear that it is actually worth doing. We both know you can't guarantee 100% security. The cost is not insignificant: maybe 2,800,000 person-hours of time per day, and the benefit better be more than 2585 lives per year. TSA can't show that. The highway workers and police can do a good job of their statistics and show that they are actually saving
Anonymous said
lives. TSA, not so much. How can anyone tell the difference between TSA wasting time searching for snowglobes and TSA actually stopping terrorists?
"Bottom line is [it] matters," isn't reasoning for a policy, it is wishful thinking. And wishful thinking seems to be the basis of lots of TSA's non-rules
Who are you or anyone else to put a price on a human life. If TSA saves one life a year it's worth it. I can bet that if it was one of your loved one who's life was saved you would be praising the effort. Unless you don't feel that the life of your loved one is that precious.
There is no fool proof way to prevent anything. But if the measures taken prevents even one tragedy no matter who's family member is saved it's worth it.
September 15, 2008 10:33 PM
Someone anonymously wrote:
"Who are you or anyone else to put a price on a human life. If TSA saves one life a year it's worth it. I can bet that if it was one of your loved one who's life was saved you would be praising the effort. Unless you don't feel that the life of your loved one is that precious."
We spend six billion dollars per year on TSA. Would it be worth $12 billion to save three lives? $600 billion to save 100 lives? No.
Additionally, you are likely not considering opportunity cost. What else could we do each year with that six billion dollars?
See "The terrifying cost of feeling safer" (by Ross Gittins, The Sydney Morning Herald, August 28, 2008). Gittins writes:
"Sandler and his colleagues conducted an analysis of the costs and benefits of five different approaches to combating terrorism. I must warn you that, because of the dearth of information, this study is even more reliant on assumptions than usual. Even so, in three cases the cost of the action so far exceeds the benefits that doubts about the reliability of the estimates recede.
"Because the loss of life is so low, they measure the benefits of successful counter-terrorism measures in terms of loss of gross domestic product avoided. Trouble is, terrorism does little to disrupt economic growth, as even September 11 demonstrated.
"Using the case of the US, Sandler estimates that simply continuing the present measures involves costs exceeding benefits by a factor of at least 10. Adopting additional defensive measures (such as stepping up security at valuable targets) would, at best, entail costs 3.5 times the benefits. Taking more pro-active measures (such as invading Afghanistan) would have costs at least eight times the benefits.
"According to Sandler, only greater international co-operation, or adopting more sensitive foreign policies to project a more positive image abroad, could produce benefits greater than their (minimal) costs.
"What's that? You don't care what it costs because no one can put a value on saving a human life? Heard of opportunity cost? Taxpayers' money we waste on excessive counter-terrorism measures is money we can't spend reducing the gap between white and indigenous health -- or, if that doesn't appeal, on buying Olympic medals."
September 16, 2008 10:42 AM
Anonymous @"Who are you or anyone else to put a price on a human life. If TSA saves one life a year it's worth it. I can bet that if it was one of your loved one who's life was saved you would be praising the effort. Unless you don't feel that the life of your loved one is that precious."
As Phil noted, TSA has put a price on lives. I count 6B$ and a billion person-hours year for however many people they pretend to save. Save The Children could save at least 1,600,000 million children with those resources, and I'm sure their families find them far more precious.
As for my own family, yes, I do think they are precious, but I don't think TSA's boarding-pass scribbling, shoe-sniffing, and gel-pack taking does anything that makes my family safer. The armored cockpit doors, and the post-9/11 situational awareness of passengers and flight crew did far more to make hijacking jets an unattractive terrorist target than any of TSAs idiotic layers of security.
TSA itself is a negative effect of 9/11: Because of 20 suicide hijackers, we will tax ourselves 2500 lives worth of economic damage every year for the forseeable future. And still TSA can't promise us "safety".
September 16, 2008 5:23 PM
Anonymous said Travel tales: Yesterday I was flying out of DCA. Go through screening, and the agent informs me, "Sir, your bag has been randomly selected for secondary screening." "I'm an DHS employee, traveling under government Orders. Does that change your mind?" I ask. "No," says she. Good going, TSA! Waste one of your random screenings on the one guy who (a GS-15 with a TS/SCI clearance, who, if he wanted to do Evil would do a lot worse than bring something nasty on a plane) is guaranteed to NOT be a terrorist! August 28, 2008 9:08 PM
Actually I think they did a good thing. It's time our lords and masters felt what us lowly serfs were being put through, and you just got a taste of it.
Moreover, I believe that the DHS is a terrorist organization, and that all DHS employees are terrorists, so therefore they actually screened a terrorist that day.
September 17, 2008 11:15 AM
"Moreover, I believe that the DHS is a terrorist organization, and that all DHS employees are terrorists, so therefore they actually screened a terrorist that day."
I think libatians are terriost and I'm glad they searched YOU.
September 18, 2008 6:06 PM
Dear anonymous TSO,
What are "libatians"?
What is "terriost"?
Why do you assume I was searched?
September 22, 2008 2:39 PM
"I think libatians are terriost and I'm glad they searched YOU."
How did this libertarian bashing comment sneak past the dele-o-meter... this is a personel attack on someone who posted and a group of people. It maybe mispelled(on purpose or not) but I figured it out.
September 23, 2008 4:34 AM
Anonymous said...
"I think libatians are terriost and I'm glad they searched YOU."
How did this libertarian bashing comment sneak past the dele-o-meter... this is a personel attack on someone who posted and a group of people. It maybe mispelled(on purpose or not) but I figured it out.
September 23, 2008 4:34 AM
.......................
Just like much of what TSA does, censorship is only applied when it benefits the Blog owners.
So much for the concept of open and honest discussion!
September 24, 2008 9:55 PM
Every Body Hush And Read !!!!!!!!
The vast majority of you are sorry, sad babies; crying about much of nothing.
Let 9/11 happen again and TSA won't hear the end of it.
We should have been tougher and we weren't doing our jobs.
You complain and some are valid but most aren't.
We need consistency, yes I agree.
The problem is some airports are too lenient; too many of them don't follow SOP (Standard Operating procedures).
As far as the rules go they are posted all over the airports and on TSA.gov; quit whining, follow them and it will be a painless process.
The breast milk incident was very wrong and instead of taking it and whining about it later after the fact like a chump; you should have got the manager involved; you were right but some times you have to fight for it the right way I.E. "you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar"
I say hate us go right ahead but at the end of the day if you make it home upset and ready to blog all night BUT safe and in one piece I have done MY JOB correctly.
Regardless of you think about it.
Hey at least you’re alive to think it!!!!!!!
From the strictest and busiest airport in the world
ATL TSO
September 25, 2008 6:32 AM
Every Body Hush And Read !!!!!!!!
The vast majority of you are sorry, sad babies; crying about much of nothing.
Trampling of both human rights and Constitutional rights isn't 'much of nothing.'
Let 9/11 happen again and TSA won't hear the end of it.
We should have been tougher and we weren't doing our jobs.
Screening processing in place let the terrorists succeed. Airline's policies in dealing with terrorists let the terrorists succeed.
Out of the millions and millions of fliers how many terrorists has TSA caught? Must be thousands just at ATL. What, you haven't caught even one?
You complain and some are valid but most aren't.
We need consistency, yes I agree.
The problem is some airports are too lenient; too many of them don't follow SOP (Standard Operating procedures).
We've asked for many things from TSA and witnessed, first hand the condescending attitude from DSH.
As far as the rules go they are posted all over the airports and on TSA.gov; quit whining, follow them and it will be a painless process.
Uh, no. Whining? Excuse me, you work for us. I've flown through ATL and know what it is like. I also know that you separated from a tour flight returning to Mn a minor for extra screening. She missed her flight because of your inability to follow rules and regulations dealing with minors. You turned her loose without any adult supervision. Don't you dare lecture me about following rules and regulations.
The breast milk incident was very wrong and instead of taking it and whining about it later after the fact like a chump; you should have got the manager involved; you were right but some times you have to fight for it the right way I.E. "you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar"
I say hate us go right ahead but at the end of the day if you make it home upset and ready to blog all night BUT safe and in one piece I have done MY JOB correctly.
Regardless of you think about it.
Hey at least you’re alive to think it!!!!!!!
Security at any cost is too expensive and you prove it yourself.
From the strictest and busiest airport in the world
ATL TSO
From one of the worst airports in the world you mean. Many of the TSOs at ATL are sloppily dressed. Why expand your mission when you routinely fail in your primary mission?
September 28, 2008 2:31 PM
From the strictest and busiest airport in the world
ATL TSO
Another fine example of a TSA professional!
Is it any wonder why TSA is a failed organization?
The problem does not lie with the public but with your employees.
September 28, 2008 8:45 PM
Terrorists win! "Land of freedom" R.I.P!
I am very happy to live outside the USA. And believe me - I will never take a flight to the Bad New World.
I pity on all good people over there, behind an iron curtain...
October 27, 2008 5:36 AM
Terrorists win! "Land of freedom" R.I.P!
I am very happy to live outside the USA. And believe me - I will never take a flight to the Bad New World.
I pity on you all good people over there, behind an iron curtain...
October 27, 2008 5:44 AM
okay so you scanned me, I am a 47 year old women traveling with my husband and was asked to step through the scanner.
Afterwards I told my husband I felt violated, someone saw me naked and I was embarrassed. I didn't like the air blowing from below and had to shut my eyes.
Someone once told me freedom was not free
October 27, 2008 8:32 PM
Bob,
Since it is the TSA's position to limit off-topic comments, and thus keep discussion of these new MMW applications out of the most recent blog entries, I'm going to see if you will hold yourself to your implied word that you will answer comments that appear in older blog entries.
I requested the constitutional basis for these scans of people not attempting to access the secure or sterile areas of the airport. Please provide it.
October 28, 2008 5:04 PM
Bob,
Since it is not TSA policy to limit off topic comments in the most current blog entry, I'm going to see if you hold yourself to your implied word and hope that you will answer this on-topic (for this blog entry) comment.
I requested the constitutional and legal basis for the MMW scans of people not attempting to access the secure or sterile areas of the airport.
October 28, 2008 5:06 PM
No answer from Bob yet, Ayn. Please phrase that in the form of a question and put it on tsafaq.net.
November 4, 2008 6:48 PM
Of course there is no answer yet.
Unanswered questions from previous blog entries were plaguing current blog entries, so a policy was formulated to have comments be topical.
That way unanswered questions can be safely ignored.
November 6, 2008 1:13 PM
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home