This question keeps popping up on our blog as well as other forums around the internet. Will children be screened by Whole Body Imagers (WBI)?
Yes and no.
Anybody can opt out of WBI screening. Adults, children, Klingons, etc… If you opt out of WBI screening, you will receive a patdown search in lieu of the WBI screening.
Children are allowed to be screened by the WBI if they’re able to stand motionless with their arms outstretched and feet shoulder width apart for 5 seconds. (If your child is like my 4 year old, they can’t stand still for a single second unless they’re watching that yellow sponge guy who shares my name)
Things to remember:
- Children do not have to be screened by the WBI. (Anybody can opt out)
- Parents carrying infants or children will not be screened by the WBI.
- Parents accompanying children may opt out of WBI screening to prevent separation of family.
- WBI screening is still in the pilot phase and has not been deployed at all checkpoints.
- Did I mention you can opt out?
Bob
EoS Blog Team
184 comments:
Why is TSA failing to inform citizens at airports that the virtual strip search is optional?
Why does TSA refuse to share images of TSA employees being virtually strip searched at the same size and resolution the machine's operator sees?
Why is the signage regarding the virtual strip search machines so small and out-of-the-way at checkpoints where it is being deployed?
Why do you want to take naked pictures of travelers?
Why do you want to take naked pictures of children?
Why should we trust anything you say about this technology, given how you lie to us about shoes and liquids?
What steps does TSA take to ensure travelers know that they can opt out of being strip searched? Is each person told, individually, what the machine does and that it is optional?
Thank you. I hope that the wider TSA team will also follow these standards of practice.
I also think that this program should go away entirely.
Better question is what steps is the TSA taking to ensure the screeners AT the checkpoints know this is 'optional'? Do they even know what 'optional' means? It does NOT mean the screener then gets to yell, 'Do you want to fly today?' if the passenger declines.
You see Bob, we've got Lynn saying putting shoes directly on the belt is 'optional' yet we then have screeners yelling at us nationwide that shoes CANNOT be in the bins & even taking shoes out of the bins themselves.
Maybe the real question is whether you, Lynn, et al really understand what 'optional' means? Because it doesn't mean squat as long as the screeners on the front line think differently.
TSA needs to ensure professionalism with the use of WBI's. Personally, if it makes getting through the security checkpoints quicker and I don't have to remove my shoes and jacket, I'm all for it!
TSA - why don't you standardize a family line? The likelihood of someone being a terrorist is minimized if you do selective screening. I know the ACLU types will object (that's their job) but 'comon...an 80yr old grandma traveling with her grand kids and family members are not a threat. Why not just have them walk through one level of security check (metal detector) while keeping their shoes and jackets on. This will really speed things up.
Why don't the TSA offer a frequent flier / pre-screen option to whisk through security checkpoints? I don't mind giving you my name, SSN, address, phone number, blood type, etc BEFORE my trip so that you can pre-screen me. When I show up to travel, just have a line for those who have already been pre-screened and subject me to a level one security check.
Bob ... one question:
WBI screening is still in the pilot phase and has not been deployed at all checkpoints.I can read this a couple of different ways. Has a decision been made as to whether or not WBI screening will, eventually, be deployed at all checkpoints? (And, if so, what is it?)
Calling this a "pilot" is a little ambiguous. It could be that TSA is still trying to decide whether or not to deploy WBI at all checkpoints, or TSA is trying to decide how to deploy WBI. Can you provide any insight?
Jim, WBI will not be deployed at all checkpoints.
The pilot is helping us determine things such as public acceptance, throughput, etc.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
+1 to all those who asked why the TSA is not fully disclosing to passengers what this machine does and that its use is optional. Could it possibly be because you don't want them to know so that you can report that 99% of travelers will "choose" the virtual strip search over a pat down?
As you know from F/T, the travelers who have approached others who have gone through the MMW (or WBI as it has apparently been renamed) and explained to them what just happened, have found that those travelers were very upset at what was done without their knowledge.Your "signage" does not count as full disclosure.
To me, four-year olds are not the issue here, but pubescent girls are. So is anyone who is wearing an ostomy bag, a sanitary napkin or an adult diaper. Are you going to make everyone wearing one of those item remove them for inspection? A heck of a lot can be packed away in the crotch of an adult diaper.
As well, grossly obese people with rolls of fat can easily hide something that can't be seen by this machine. Are you going to make them pick up their fat rolls so you can take a look around?
Further as a poster in the "bare it all" thread wrote:
"what's to stop any terrorist from just choosing another checkpoint at the airport he/she might be transiting through, a checkpoint that does not demand either a strip search or a pat down?"
Lastly, why did it take you so long to answer this question?
Bob said...
"Jim, WBI will not be deployed at all checkpoints.
The pilot is helping us determine things such as public acceptance, throughput, etc."
Let's see ....
Introduce it as an option to the patdown for secondary.
Then make it an "optional" primary.
Then just guide the passengers to it without mention of options.
Then change the primary to magnetometer PLUS patdown.
Don't educate the public - keep the "samples" as small and difficult to see as possible.
If the public finds out, spin what the screeners actually see.
Then, get an "unbiased" sampling of public opinion.
Well, I'm impressed.
Irish
Bob
You think you would have learned from the backscatter machines and the uproar it brought, but it doesn't seem that TSA listens to anyone.
Considering TSAs track record you dont listen unless theres egg on your face. Even with that considering the number of issues and incidents by your own staff that havent been dealt with (alivin crabtree, the screener in florida,etc).
Then lets not even get into the skirting of the implied consent rules and 4th amendment
Bob,
Why did you edit my post into something taken completely out of context?
That is unprofessional and unethical. You, as a public affairs professional, ought to know that.
I'm happy to hear that adults can opt out (and that parents can opt their children out). Thank you for making that clear on this blog.
Do you also make this fact clear to those about to be screened? Do you verbally tell people, and is it before or only if/after they ask?
Being upfront about the fact that people have a choice will actually benefit TSA-- increased passenger confidence, comfort, and a positive perception of what is going on.
Dave, I know not of what you speak... Please explain.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
If anyone can opt out, then why did the CNN story say "When given a choice" 99% of the people opt for the new technology? That seems to suggest that some people are not given a choice.
Also, in six of the pilots, the WBI is used as the primary screening device rather than being used as an alternative to a pat-down in a secondary screening. This creates the impression that people don't have a choice. And, from experiences of family and friends in Vegas, they certainly aren't notified that they have a choice (or that the device does something other than the old metal detector that used to be used).
"If you opt out of WBI screening, you will receive a patdown search in lieu of the WBI screening."
Translation: if I decline to let you take naked pictures of my daughter, you're going to grope my daughter.
Wow, thanks for the "choice".
How is being felt up an 'option' to strip-searches?
Andrea McCauley, a TSA spokesperson, told NBC News today that shoes must go on directly on the belt and not on a bin.
Lynn, an official TSA blogger on this site, says the opposite--it's optional.
So, Bob, when you smugly snark, "Have I mentioned it's optional," I have to ask you to keep your smug snarkiness to yourself.
You act like TSA is capable and well-managed enough to get the word out to all the pilot airport checkpoints that this is OPTIONAL. By this time tomorrow night, I am sure a PAX will write in to this very blog to say it was NOT optional at their airport. Just make sure you post that PAX testimonial and respond to it when it comes in.
Bob, if TSA can afford $170,000 for these machines, they can afford some poster paper. Print the MMW images life-size and put them on the outside of the machine so people can see what they're lining up for. If it really is as accepted as you keep claiming, then such a poster shouldn't affect anything. If, however, as others have claimed, it's being "accepted" because passengers don't know any better, this will more accurately assess public opinion.
I really think you should do this NOW before investing more money in these machines.
I'm tempted.
I'm tempted to buy the cheapest ticket on Expedia that I can find simply to go through screening with my kid.
That way, as soon as screening is finished I can call 911 and report a producer of child pornography and have the entire TSA branch at the nearest airport arrested at once.
I wonder if I should...
Bob, at least you didn't try to claim that the MMW WBI is not a Strip Search.
Will TSO's and all airport workers be screened with the MMW WBI?
If not why not?
When will TSA secure
checked baggage?
When will TSA inspect all cargo placed on passenger aircraft as mandated by Congress?
..........................
For the person who said the following: "Anonymous said...
TSA needs to ensure professionalism with the use of WBI's. Personally, if it makes getting through the security checkpoints quicker and I don't have to remove my shoes and jacket, I'm all for it!"
....................
I see that Bob and Krewe has not responded to this but you still have to remove your shoes, even with the Strip Search.
The new policy is a Strip Search or Body Grope, your choice!!
Ayn,
Really? No smiley faces or sarc tags??? It would be kind of hard to report somebody for something you allowed, don't you think? You are the child's legal guardian. You can opt your child out of WBI screening.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
Bob said...
Ayn,
Really? No smiley faces or sarc tags??? It would be kind of hard to report somebody for something you allowed, don't you think? You are the child's legal guardian. You can opt your child out of WBI screening.
Bob
Thats what im talking about BOB!!! I think some of these clueless folks need a dose of their own 3.4 oz serving sized medicine :). Maybe if you did that Anarchy the police might take YOU in for some questioning. lol.
ps. good post btw bob. not much wiggle room for most of these guys.
Isn't this ironic, after numerous previous posts we've read of TSOs eager to call a LEO over if they catch kiddy porn in a carryon bag???
"It would be kind of hard to report somebody for something you allowed, don't you think? You are the child's legal guardian. You can opt your child out of WBI screening."
Bob, what steps does TSA take to ensure that every passenger knows that he or she can opt out of being virtually strip-searched?
Why does TSA refuse to post images of virtual strip-search scans at the same size and resolution operators of the virtual strip-search scanners see at checkpoints or online?
Bob said...
Dave, I know not of what you speak... Please explain.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
May 19, 2009 7:45 PM
**************
Bob,
Since you asked in public, I'll respond in public. I posted a reply to Nico in the nail clipper topic and reminded him that many of us here on this blog had challenged Nico to post full-size images of himself and his family as seen by the strip search machine operator. I also reminded him that we had made the same challenge to Kip Hawley.
I posted this in advance of this new post about strip searching children. You didn't see fit to post my request on the nail clipper thread. When I made the same request of Nico on this thread, you edited out, among other things:
1. My challenge for him to post pictures of his entire family:
2. A reminder that he had been challenged before to do this, as was Kip Hawley, and neither responded;
3. A comment that he, as a TSA public affairs officer, should set the example for public acceptance of the strip search machine, if the TSA even cares about this in the first place, by posting these pictures as they are viewed by the operator.
Now, there is one other curious thing going on. You removed my original post that you edited. The only post I have listed is the one from May 19 at 7:17 PM. Not only did you edit my original post that I called you out on, you now have destroyed the evidence by removing my original post.
OK -- come clean with the truth.
FYI, I've sent a copy of this post in its entirety to a couple of friends who post on Flyertalk.com, so, I suggest it's in your best interests, and in the best interests of your agency, to respond here.
Update to the edited post issue: Bob posted the the reply I sent to Nico on the nail clipper thread in another thread. It was posted -- and edited -- on the mail strip search thread in which you wee spinning the CNN story. Here is my edited post (bolded) that I described in my other post on this thread:
Dave Nelson said...
Anonymous on May 18, 2009, at 3:14 pm said:
TSA isn't "strip searching" anyone. Look at the images on cnn.com...do you seriously think they are revealing? If you get your jollies from those images, you've got bigger problems than TSA!
As I said to Nico, if you have nothing to hide, and, if you believe the images are not "revealing", please post your image as the operator sees it. What are you afraid of?
May 18, 2009 3:38 PMPS: As the author of both of these posts, I give you permission to combine them in a single post, provided you do not edit the text in either of them.
Bob wrote:
"Jim, WBI will not be deployed at all checkpoints. "
However, on April 19th, just a bit more than one month ago, this was in Joe Sharkey's column in the NY Times:
"Initially, the machines were supposed to be used only on passengers who set off the metal detectors, to provide them with an alternative to the customary secondary physical pat-downs and inspections by electronic wand.
But Robin Kane, the agency's acting chief technology officer, said the initial results from tests at some checkpoints at 19 airports in the United States had been so good that the idea of using the machines as the standard checkpoint detectors made sense. Those results included, he said, positive feedback from passengers.
The plan now is that all passengers will "go through the whole-body imager instead of the walk-through metal detector," he said."So which is it, Bob?
One thing it is is more evidence of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing at the TSA as well as more evidence that the public absolutely cannot trust anything that the TSA says.
Blogger Bob blogged:
"- Did I mention you can opt out?"
Unfortunately, Bob, the same courtesy is not extended by your luggage/people screeners. Have you any concept of the magnitude of the disconnect between the front office and the front line?
But here's the key question: do you honestly believe it's appropriate for children to even be offered this option?
Irish
Remember folks, that when you are in the airport line waiting to have TSA violate your rights that you have the power of speech.
Since the TSA is going to lie to you about what the machine is, does, and can do (if you really think that TSA is going to provide full disclosure of what it can and does see and that you can opt out in the airports you are truly naive), when you see one of those machines, you can talk to the people around you and tell them what it is and what it does and that they have the option to say no. Or you can talk to the person you're with in a voice that can be heard by others. They'll listen. They may not say anything, but they'll hear. They may still go through with it, but you'll have planted a seed and perhaps they'll either think twice about flying the next time or be prepared to say no the next time.
I'm not suggesting you try to start a riot or anything, and if confronted by one of the super efficient TSA minions/dullards who does not like what you have to say you can simply get that person's name and badge number along with the date, time, airport, and checkpoint where the incident occurred.
If we can get enough people to do this and document it we can build a genuine case that TSA is engaging in wholesale suppression of first amendment rights, trampling on 4th amendment rights, and taking a giant stink-filled dump on the 6th and 14th amendments.
TSA for some reason holds itself above the law. It's time for the people to hold TSA accountable to the law.
I'm a little confused.
You say that the MMW WBI is in a test phase yet it seems to be deployed as a primary means of screening at the locations it is being tested.
So if this Strip Search machine is only being tested why I am required to be Groped if I prefer not to be Strip Search?
This must mean that the WTMD is no longer the primary means of screening and saying that the Strip Search Machine is only being tested is less than honest.
Why is it that TSA cannot be up front and honest about what it is doing?
How can TSA justify Strip Searching children?
Yes, really Bob. No smiley faces or sarcastic tags. Just relying on the fine print on your signs in the airport that say in very fine print that I can opt my kid out, and relying on not seeing the fine print.
Or relying on telling someone they should accuse the TSOs of child pornography but not telling them that they can opt out because non-readers of this blog don't often see the very fine print on your under-sized signs.
Tell your people to get ready to possibly face criminal charges.
Bob said...
Ayn,
Really? No smiley faces or sarc tags??? It would be kind of hard to report somebody for something you allowed, don't you think? You are the child's legal guardian. You can opt your child out of WBI screening.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
May 19, 2009 11:32 PM
........................
If the public was fully aware on exactly what these machines did, saw accurate images of what the TSA is seeing then acceptance would go down dramatically for adults and I doubt few parents would allow their children to be
Strip Search by TSA.
The Groping is even more disgusting!
Why is TSA afraid of providing truthful information about this new invasive Strip Search Machine?
if gential areas are "blurred" how are screeners able to discern if a weapon is placed in that area?
Bob said...
Ayn,
Really? No smiley faces or sarc tags??? It would be kind of hard to report somebody for something you allowed, don't you think? You are the child's legal guardian. You can opt your child out of WBI screening.
#####
It would be easy if some fellow trsveller on the other side of the checkpoint showed Ayn slide two images from the CNN article and pointed out that TSA's tiny eunuch signs are misleading.
Remember: Your option is "You have a choice to receive a pat down as an alternative"
That way, as soon as screening is finished I can call 911 and report a producer of child pornography and have the entire TSA branch at the nearest airport arrested at once.
*********************************
Yeah, good luck with that! How do you expect to be taken seriously by TSA or anyone else when you all sound like complete melodramatic nuts?
Bob@ "Anybody can opt out of WBI screening. Adults, children, Klingons, etc… If you opt out of WBI screening, you will receive a patdown search in lieu of the WBI screening."
Hey Bob, in the diabetes 101 thread, you said "No. You can opt out for WTMD screening and when necessary you may get a pat-down." and later, you and H2H both implied the pat-down wasn't mandatory.
Is our only "option" for our children to get whole-body-imaged or whole-body-patted-down?
@Bob: "The pilot is helping us determine things such as public acceptance, throughput, etc."
How will you assess public acceptance? You have already apparently concluded that "99%" of us accept it. Is that based on the number of people who have specifically requested complaint forms or sent a "got feedback"? Are the people you claim to have expressed approval fully informed about what the scanners actually do? And does public acceptance really matter to an agency whose officers are so eager to wield the "Do you want to fly today?" bludgeon?
That's the real problem with the way you're spinning the scanners as "friendly" and promising to (somehow) respect and protect our privacy, while carefully preventing the public from seeing the fully-detailed images the screeners use. Based on the evasion and incomplete disclosure, I can only conclude that the TSA's management are fully aware that scanners are far more intrusive than they're willing to admit, to the point where few people would accept it if they knew the full story. So they assume that their usual practice of secrecy combined with evasive, deceptive spin will keep the ignorant public from getting justifiably outraged at the new level of intrusiveness.
That statement reflects cynicism and distrust, but is there any reason to not be cynical and distrustful given the TSA's track record? I can only hope that enough people recognize that the TSA now seeks to strip search all passengers (with the alternative "option" of being groped by a TSO), and let their elected officials know they refuse to accept it.
That said, perhaps we might be willing to accept it in the future, if and when the TSA is reformed into an agency that the public can trust to respect our rights and our privacy. As I've said before, I don't have a problem with MMW scanning itself. I actually believe that when used properly it offers a genuinely useful improvement to security screening, far more than any measure the TSA has deployed since it replaced the private minimum-wage screeners. But I greatly object to putting such an intrusive form of screening in the hands of an inept and arrogant agency that consistently demonstrates only contempt for the rights and privacy of the public.
OK, Dave…here goes…
False accusations are a pretty low blow, but I’m going to post your comment so I can explain a few things.
I don’t edit any comments from readers. I don’t even have the capability to do that with Blogger. I can reject, or publish. I can delete a comment after it has been published, but I have not done so. So I’m not sure where you’re coming from with the editing accusations.
I reject any request that asks for us to post WBI images of us or our family. Yes, I have posted them in the past, but they have become so repetitive it’s ridiculous. It’s also disrespectful to bring our families into these conversations.
TSA has gone to great lengths to respect the privacy that the flying public deserves. We have made sure that WBI images aren’t able to be saved. We have made sure the faces are blurred. We strictly forbid any cell phones or cameras in the room where the officer monitors the images. There is no chance of anybody matching you to an image from the WBI. The image is automatically deleted.
After all of the precautions to protect privacy, many are still vehemently opposed to this type of screening. I can understand and respect that.
What I can’t respect and won’t tolerate are the repeated requests to post WBI images of our children.
Why do I have a problem with sharing images of my family and no problem with passengers going through the WBI?
Unlike unidentifiable images of passengers which are deleted automatically and sent to digital heaven, you are asking us to post a permanent identifiable image on the internet of our children. If you don’t see the difference, then we’re going to have to agree to disagree and leave it at that.
As far as sending your post to FlyerTalk, I’m not sure if that is supposed to have concerned me or make you look silly. I’ll stick with the latter.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
Just reviewed the TSA information "Traveleing with Children" and Traveling with Children with Disabilities.
No where in that compilation of information does it state that TSA will use a MMW WBI to Strip Search our children. Nor does it state that if we elect to not have our children Strip Searched by this machine that they will be "FELT UP" by a TSA screener.
TSA, a disgusting agency pushing the envelope.
Unlike unidentifiable images of passengers which are deleted automatically and sent to digital heaven, you are asking us to post a permanent identifiable image on the internet of our children. If you don’t see the difference, then we’re going to have to agree to disagree and leave it at that.
As far as sending your post to FlyerTalk, I’m not sure if that is supposed to have concerned me or make you look silly. I’ll stick with the latter.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
May 20, 2009 1:06 PM
.................
If these images are filtered for privacy then I see no reason to not post Nico's (I'll leave his kids out of it)image.
He is the one said they are ok for school children to view. Either the images are viewable by young children without concern or they are not.
TSA refuses to come clean on this matter.
If the images are as detailed as the frontal images on the CNN article and TSA images children then I hope you are all charged with a crime.
Bob said...
OK, Dave…here goes…
I reject any request that asks for us to post WBI images of us or our family. Yes, I have posted them in the past, but they have become so repetitive it’s ridiculous. It’s also disrespectful to bring our families into these conversations.
...........................
Bob, just what part of the posting guidelines are you using to not accept these post?
Who put you in charge of violating the Constitutional protections?
Bob, what steps does TSA take to ensure that every passenger knows that he or she can opt out of being virtually strip-searched?As few steps as possible. The TSA is under pressure to make airport screening as efficient and easy as possible (for themselves, not for passengers). Patting down passengers takes a lot more time and effort than scanning them, so it's in the TSA's interest to encourage passengers to "choose" what's fastest and easiest for the TSOs.
So it probably is official policy that passengers have the right to opt out of the strip search and request a groping, just as Bob said. But for reasons of operational efficiency, nobody at the checkpoints is likely to make any effort to publicize this option. What does seem likely is that TSOs will be barking orders at the crowd: "EMPTY EVERYTHING FROM YOUR POCKETS! STAND PRECISELY ON THE MARKS IN THE SCANNER! RAISE YOUR ARMS, SPREAD YOUR LEGS, AND KEEP THEM SPREAD UNTIL WE TELL YOU!"
Just as with changing gloves for bag checks, passengers who know the secret and specifically ask to be groped rather than strip searched will be accommodated per the SOP. Those who don't know the secret will simply obey the bellowed orders and spread-eagle in the scanner for the strip search.
But realistically, how many people will actually ask for the groping? And will the TSOs who are inconvenienced with having to spend the extra time and effort intentionally make the groping extra unpleasant, just to encourage passengers to make the "right choice" the next time? Would that sort of retaliation violate TSA rules? And if it does, would the TSO get into any trouble for the violation?
Whatever the official rules say, like many other so-called options the TSA claims to offer us the "right to opt out" is really illusory in practice. It's a choice between having our naked body viewed by out-of-sight TSOs, or being groped by a TSO (who has every reason to make the experience as unpleasant as possible). It's not much of a choice.
"What I can’t respect and won’t tolerate are the repeated requests to post WBI images of our children."
In other words, you're afraid to let us see the images these strip-search chambers produce.
"It’s also disrespectful to bring our families into these conversations."
Why, Bob?
"TSA has gone to great lengths to respect the privacy that the flying public deserves. We have made sure that WBI images aren’t able to be saved. We have made sure the faces are blurred. We strictly forbid any cell phones or cameras in the room where the officer monitors the images. There is no chance of anybody matching you to an image from the WBI. The image is automatically deleted."
Bob, all of these precautions you claim TSA is taking -- and given your agency's pathetic record of lies and abuse and incompetence and stupidity, they are claims that can not be given any weight whatsoever -- only serve to demonstrate that these strip searches are a grotesque violation of citizens' privacy, security, and dignity, a complete waste of resources, and do nothing to protect anyone from anything worse than 0.6 ounces of harmless lotion.
So when you cry the poor, poor pitiful TSA card? No, Bob, we're not buying it.
When do you plan to address any of the questions posed about TSA's steps to ensure people know that they can decline to be strip-searched by these machines?
Anonymous said...
TSA needs to ensure professionalism with the use of WBI's. Personally, if it makes getting through the security checkpoints quicker and I don't have to remove my shoes and jacket, I'm all for it!
TSA - why don't you standardize a family line? The likelihood of someone being a terrorist is minimized if you do selective screening. I know the ACLU types will object (that's their job) but 'comon...an 80yr old grandma traveling with her grand kids and family members are not a threat. Why not just have them walk through one level of security check (metal detector) while keeping their shoes and jackets on. This will really speed things up.
Why don't the TSA offer a frequent flier / pre-screen option to whisk through security checkpoints? I don't mind giving you my name, SSN, address, phone number, blood type, etc BEFORE my trip so that you can pre-screen me. When I show up to travel, just have a line for those who have already been pre-screened and subject me to a level one security check.
May 19, 2009 6:08 PM
___________________________________
This entire post is rediculous! Define grandma. So lets just say for fun, TSA starts to not screen grandma's. I think that some grandma's are in their 40's. Or if we started not screening at the age of 80, how would the people in their 70's feel? And what about grandpas?
What makes you think that once a person involved with an extremist group hits a certain age that they are no longer an extremist.
What if someone approaches this sweet looking old couple outside of the airport and says, I am going to kill you if you do not carry this through.
What if some nice man helps this elderly couple with their bags to the checkpoint and slides an IED or a gun into it when they are not looking.
So if TSA stops screening old people and children correctly then the terrorists are really going to know how to get things through.
And a pre-screen process, yeah right. Is it really that hard to stand in a line for 10 to 15 minutes? To put your things through the xray machine? To walk through and gather your things up? Really not that big of a deal! None of it.
Since I have a pace maker and have to be patted down every time I fly I love this new technology. When I flew awhile back I was screened by one of these types of machines. It was far faster then the other form of screening and easier.
On another note, I have no problem with my grandchildren being “exposed” to this type of screening. I would rather them be safe on the plane then panic about the highly unlikely chance that someone might drool over some picture of the outline of their body.
Please keep up the good work advancing security technology into the 21st century!
Isn't it time to eliminate the silly "no liquids" ban?! Come one. Let's get real!
Sandra said...
+1 to all those who asked why the TSA is not fully disclosing to passengers what this machine does and that its use is optional. Could it possibly be because you don't want them to know so that you can report that 99% of travelers will "choose" the virtual strip search over a pat down?
___________________________________
The public has been told what this machine does and there have been pictures for people to look at.
As you know from F/T, the travelers who have approached others who have gone through the MMW (or WBI as it has apparently been renamed) and explained to them what just happened, have found that those travelers were very upset at what was done without their knowledge.Your "signage" does not count as full disclosure.
___________________________________
I don't believe this! Unless I was there and heard all of these testimonials, that would be another story. But people saying that travelers are very upset, don't buy it. They know what the machine is. And if they don't then shame on them for not finding out before they agreed to go through.
To me, four-year olds are not the issue here, but pubescent girls are. So is anyone who is wearing an ostomy bag, a sanitary napkin or an adult diaper. Are you going to make everyone wearing one of those item remove them for inspection? A heck of a lot can be packed away in the crotch of an adult diaper.
___________________________________
This machine can see through clothing. I am guessing that since sanitary napkins and adult diaper are made out of an organic material just as clothes are, the machine will probably go through those objects as well.
As well, grossly obese people with rolls of fat can easily hide something that can't be seen by this machine. Are you going to make them pick up their fat rolls so you can take a look around?
___________________________________
This one I do not have an answer to.
Further as a poster in the "bare it all" thread wrote:
"what's to stop any terrorist from just choosing another checkpoint at the airport he/she might be transiting through, a checkpoint that does not demand either a strip search or a pat down?"
___________________________________
There is nothing stopping a terrorist from chosing another checkpoint. It does not mean that they will recieve any less screening. It would just mean that they would be avoiding the MMW. If a pat down is required at one checkpoint for whatever reason, it will be required at the next.
May 19, 2009 6:45 PM
@Bob: "TSA has gone to great lengths to respect the privacy that the flying public deserves. We have made sure that WBI images aren't able to be saved. We have made sure the faces are blurred. We strictly forbid any cell phones or cameras in the room where the officer monitors the images. There is no chance of anybody matching you to an image from the WBI. The image is automatically deleted."
I will accept this statement as an implicit admission that the scans are more detailed and intrusive than the TSA is willing to explicitly admit to the public. In that case, it would indeed be absolutely unacceptable and improper to ask you (or any other TSA employee) to post scans of yourself and members of your family.
The only reason that people make such requests is to point out the obvious Bandini, and to get the TSA to admit the truth. I honestly believe the TSA would have a much easier time gaining public acceptance of a genuinely valuable security tool if they simply told us the truth: The MMW scanner is a strip search. And then explain why the significant security improvement it provides truly justifies the new level of intrusiveness. Some people would still have qualms about it, but showing us respect by telling us the truth would surely convince many of us not only that the real enhanced security is worth the sacrifice of privacy and modesty, but that we can trust the TSA to protect our privacy.
Unfortunately, the TSA leadership seems utterly incapable of taking that approach, even though it would solve many of their intractable problems and increase their agency's effectiveness and cost them nothing. That's presumably because they see the public as an enemy that threatens their agency's expansion of power and authority as much as they threaten avaiation. That's what we too frequently see reflected at checkpoints, despite all the sweet talk about "quality" and "customers."
So you continue to insist on condescending spin and distortion. Nico patronizingly posts about the scanner being "family friendly" and how he has no trouble putting his children through it. Bob posts reduced pictures that don't show the full detail the scanner reveals, claiming they are what TSOs actually see. Bob also crows about the scanner's "success" at finding an oversized bottle of lotion, which only raises doubts about whether improved enforcement of the stupid liquid restrictions justifies the intrusiveness of a strip search. And Tim continues to insist that the MMW scanner is not a strip search (just as being asked to "voluntarily abandon" our property is not confiscation). This all only exacerbates the disdain we have for the TSA, which presumably is what this blog is meant to improve. But the TSA leadership doesn't seem to understand that.
@Bob: "After all of the precautions to protect privacy, many are still vehemently opposed to this type of screening. I can understand and respect that."
It's good that you can understand and respect that. No offense, but you're a low-level TSA employee whose job is to follow orders. Do your bosses-- the ones who issue the orders and make the rules-- understand and respect it? Unfortunately, I don't see any evidence that they do. Nor do I have any reason to be confident that "all the precautions" will either be followed or effective in protecting privacy.
Are the people about to be virtually stripped-searched aware that their genitals will be available for viewing by a person hidden in a darkened room?
Why is the other option one that involves the violation of my dignity and personal space?
I had to submit myself to a pat down after I forgot my keys in my pocket, which set off the metal detector. I was not given the opportunity to put the keys through the X-Ray machine and walk back through the metal detector, I was automatically sent for a pat down.
I felt so violated being touched by a strange man that I reported him to TSA authorities the moment I arrived to my destination. According to the TSA supervisor for that airport, the entire team working that day was identified and asked to undergo training once again.
I will do this every time I am touched by TSA and I will not let my genitals be photographed by your machines.
This agency is a disgrace and you should be ashamed of what you are doing to your fellow human beings.
Something else to consider...
When (not if) TSOs are arrested for child pornography, that means the rest of the TSA is guilty of conspiracy to commit child pornography or aiding and abetting child pornography. That leads to the question of how far up the chain of command the arrests will eventually go before the TSA realizes that this is a really stupid idea.
In the interest of security, which is why this technology was created, it is very important and detection of harmful items is necessary. This is a means to secure and I'm for it. If you're not, opt out. It all seems very simple to me.
For those of you who are concerned about images of your children being used as pornography, be sure to monitor all their cell phone photos, Facebook pages My space pages, internet cameras and any other technology they might be able to get a hold of because those images may be in real time live and in color.
Just a thought!
reject any request that asks for us to post WBI images of us or our family. Yes, I have posted them in the past, but they have become so repetitive it’s ridiculous. It’s also disrespectful to bring our families into these conversations.
Nice, Bob. So the families of the DHS/TSA bureaucrats are sacred and untouchable, but the families of "ordinary" taxpaying citizens are subject to your virtual strip searches and other humiliations?
Ahh the privileges of being DHS/TSA or related to someone who is, while the rest of us are treated like convicted felons just because we want to exercise our fundamental rights to free movement and free association.
Your stance reminds me of the bloggers' decision to not allow any reflection on the 9/11 thread as to if the TSA monster we have allowed the government to create in response to 9/11 is respectful of the memories of those who died on 9/11, or the memories of those who have fought for our freedom before or since.
I'll leave your family out of it when you leave out mine.
(Not expecting you to post this, but at least you'll have to read it.)
Bob, you have said that the screeners viewing the MMW - when did it become WBI? - cannot bring cellphones or cameras into the room where the images are viewed.
Are those screeners patted down or go through the MMW/WBI before and after their shift in the viewing room?
If your answer is no, how then can we trust that it doesn't or won't happen? If your answer is "it's SSI", then we will know that the screeners are not checked out before entering the room.
Bob wrote in response to Dave Nelson:
"As far as sending your post to FlyerTalk, I’m not sure if that is supposed to have concerned me...."
You'd be quite surprised at who does read F/T, Bob, and you're doing yourself no favors by posting your snide comments.
I am going to print 8.5" x 11" copies of the released WBI images and carry a large folder in my laptop case. Any time I see someone permitting themselves to be scanned by this unreasonable strip search device, I will use the image pages as an educational workshop.
Strip Searches? Groping? Pornography? Child Molestation? Lying?
These are some pretty extreme words you're using. I can understand that you don’t agree with the technology, but at least be reasonable about it and not exaggerate what it really is.
We have shown the signage on our blog. The signage is up at our airports. Numerous television programs have reported on WBI including 60 minutes. So to say that we’re trying to hide this is inaccurate.
If you travel though a checkpoint with WBI and don’t see any signage, let me know either here on the blog or at tsablog@dhs.gov and I’ll look into it as I’ve looked into other claims (which have been unfounded).
Bob
EoS Blog Team
Bob wrote:
Strip Searches? Groping? Pornography? Child Molestation? Lying?
These are some pretty extreme words you're using. I can understand that you don’t agree with the technology, but at least be reasonable about it and not exaggerate what it really is.
It is strip searching though, Bob. And it is child pornography when you are strip searching a child. And it is lying when you say that the other two statements are false. I'm not exaggerating, Bob.
You're the one who gives us thumbnail size images with the resolution turned down. It took CNN to give us an image of the same size and same resolution to show that it is not an appropriate image for children to view.
You tell us that there's no storage of images, when anyone with a computer background knows that means that the storage capability is disengaged and can be reengaged at any time.
You're the one telling us that there will be no cameras in the image viewing room, we're the ones who know how well the TSOs obey your rules about how they cannot abuse passengers.
Bob, you're losing this one. Let it go before your agency has a worse reputation than it already does. You're already seen as criminals. Don't be seen as sex offenders as well.
"They know what the machine is. And if they don't then shame on them for not finding out before they agreed to go through."
Many reports from travelers demonstrate that TSOs are not informing people of what the scanners do, and the fact that they are optional. Note that Bob is ignoring any and all questions about how TSA is making sure passengers know what these machines do, and that they can opt out.
"We have shown the signage on our blog."
Then why do you refuse to share scans of TSA employees in these machines at the same size and resolution the machines' operators see?
Why do you refuse to address multiple reports of TSOs failing to inform people that they can opt out of being strip searched?
Why do you refuse to tell us the steps you are taking to make sure citizens know they can opt out of being strip searched?
"The signage is up at our airports."
Where are the signs located? Are these signs given the same prominence as your deliberately inaccurate signs about the 3.4-1-1 policy?
"Numerous television programs have reported on WBI including 60 minutes. So to say that we’re trying to hide this is inaccurate."
You're trying to hide the extent of detail these machines can produce. You're pretty clearly trying to hide the fact that being strip-searched by one of your machines is optional. You're trying to hide quite a lot, and we are on to you.
Holy cow you people sure know how to twist Blogger Bob's words.
And George, for your information - bob is far from a low level employee. I work for TSA and can tell you he works at HQ and has the ear and support of more people than you are aware of.
My daughter and grandchildren have been through the MMW. These are certified federal government employees looking at a quick glance of an image for security purposes. Not a pervert in a peep booth.
JTA
Folks if you are for or against the TSA MMW WBI Strip Search machine then let TSA's boss know at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/
Click on the contact us tab and send a message.
I sent a question asking why the President is allowing TSA to Strip Search children.
I know it won't be read by the President but some staffer will and if enough noise about this outrage is raised perhaps the attention of the President will be alerted to this issue.
Please send the President a note.
Anonymous said:
"I had to submit myself to a pat down after I forgot my keys in my pocket, which set off the metal detector. I was not given the opportunity to put the keys through the X-Ray machine and walk back through the metal detector, I was automatically sent for a pat down."
The last time I walked through the metal detector (it was about 5:30 AM and I was barely awake) I discovered that both my keys and some coins had been in my pocket. I was also wearing a sterling belt buckle and a stainless steel watch.
The TSO was interested in seeing the 3 small bottles in my bag, local ground chili powder...
Ha. The FT folks think I'm having a breakdown. Actually, I'm sitting here with a nice cup of coffee and I've got my i-Pod set to play all Antonio Carlos Jobim songs. Life is grand. I just need a beach and some palm trees.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
You're the one who gives us thumbnail size images with the resolution turned down. It took CNN to give us an image of the same size and same resolution to show that it is not an appropriate image for children to view.
___________________________________
Welp good thing that there are no children viewing them.
"Ha. The FT folks think I'm having a breakdown. Actually, I'm sitting here with a nice cup of coffee and I've got my i-Pod set to play all Antonio Carlos Jobim songs. Life is grand. I just need a beach and some palm trees."
Or maybe you could put away the snark and try answering some of the questions that have you squirming, Bob.
Bob,
I'm really flattered that you took time away from your busy day and lowered yourself to respond to me in such a professional manner.
If you claim that you can only post or not post submittals, explain to me how my original post concerning Nico's willingness to post unaltered images could have been "altered?"
There is an account on Slashdot of a citizen being strip-searched at SFO. He likened it, especially the hands spread against the wall, to a police frisking. Tht's dignity & respect if I ever heard it. And, a screener searched his wallet.
I suggest you find a pre-TSA FAA document, a link to which has been posted on Flyertalk.com, in which the writer was very concerned that massive negative reaction by the flying public would ultimately get the strip search machine program canceled.
By the way, your former Administrator publically disclosed he read Flyertalk every evening.
Anonymous said... ... My daughter and grandchildren have been through the MMW. These are certified federal government employees looking at a quick glance of an image for security purposes. Not a pervert in a peep booth.
JTA... and how gullible are you? How many certified, federal goverment TSA employees have been fired, reprimanded, and/or charged with crimes since the inception of this organization???
Get real. There will be plenty of "Whoo-hoo! Did you see that one come through!" conversations over the TSA watercoolers.
Bob said...
Ha. The FT folks think I'm having a breakdown. Actually, I'm sitting here with a nice cup of coffee and I've got my i-Pod set to play all Antonio Carlos Jobim songs. Life is grand. I just need a beach and some palm trees.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
May 20, 2009 4:16 PM
...................
A bit arrogant are we?
Are childrens nannies sex offenders because they change the children, who are not theirs, diapers?
Are nannies sex offenders because they are bathing children that are not theirs?
Are nurses sex offenders because they are in the room when a child is born?
Are childrens doctors sex offenders because sometimes they ask them to get undressed?
Rediculous, rediculous, rediculous!!!!!!!!!!!!
Just like everything that you people are saying. This is a job, and being done in a professional manner. So give up the rediculous accusations!!!!
RB said...
Folks if you are for or against the TSA MMW WBI Strip Search machine then let TSA's boss know at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/
Click on the contact us tab and send a message.
I sent a question asking why the President is allowing TSA to Strip Search children.
I know it won't be read by the President but some staffer will and if enough noise about this outrage is raised perhaps the attention of the President will be alerted to this issue.
Please send the President a note.
___________________________________
Well atleast with email options, the president can spam all of your emails. He (or whom ever will be reading these emails) can somewhat ignore the rediculous accusations and annoying repetative garble by sending them to spam.
@JTA (Anonymous, May 20, 2009 3:59 PM): "And George, for your information - bob is far from a low level employee. I work for TSA and can tell you he works at HQ and has the ear and support of more people than you are aware of."
Ahhh... another secret revealed! But I wonder what he tells the folks at HQ.... perhaps something like "Four or five people have issues with authority and keep asking inappropriate questions and spouting irrelevant and disrespectful nonsense in blog comments. The rest of the team are having a great time tweaking them. Tim gets a lot of chuckles at the thought of their blood pressure going through the roof when he informs them how wrong and ignorant they are. I'm just ignoring all of them, so maybe they'll figure out that they're wasting their time and just go away. Other than that, the blog is very successful at getting our message out. We're getting a lot of comments expressing gratitude for keeping aviation safe. That's what we all like to hear!"
That said, I think the "child pornography" arguments are ridiculous. They're merely helping the TSA obscure the real problems with MMW, WBI, or whatever it's now officially called. I'd be more concerned about the lack of any way to be sure that the TSA actually enforces all the measures they claim to take to protect our privacy. TSOs don't consistently follow the rules at the checkpoints where we can see them; so why should we have any confidence that they'll follow the rules where we can't see them? That and the need to be separated from our wallets during the strip search, a concern that continues to be ignored.
"I will accept this statement as an implicit admission that the scans are more detailed and intrusive than the TSA is willing to explicitly admit to the public."
"So you continue to insist on condescending spin and distortion."
No more than you're spinning TSA to make them look like the worst group on the planet. Funny, they didn't fly 4 planes into various objects killing over 3000 people. They're just trying to stop it from happening again...
Following up on RB's comment about contacting the White House, please consider signing the Privacy Coalition's petition at:
http://privacycoalition.org/stopwholebodyimaging/
Sign the petition as an "Organization" because the Air Traveler link does not work. All you need give is a name, you can use "Anonymous" and a valid e-mail.
"I will do this every time I am touched by TSA and I will not let my genitals be photographed by your machines."
Please take the bus. I don't want youy in front of me when I'm trying to catch a plane.
Ayn R. Key said...
I'm tempted.
I'm tempted to buy the cheapest ticket on Expedia that I can find simply to go through screening with my kid.
That way, as soon as screening is finished I can call 911 and report a producer of child pornography and have the entire TSA branch at the nearest airport arrested at once.
I wonder if I should...
___________________________________
Ha! Loves it!
You people crack me up.
"Something else to consider...
When (not if) TSOs are arrested for child pornography, that means the rest of the TSA is guilty of conspiracy to commit child pornography or aiding and abetting child pornography. That leads to the question of how far up the chain of command the arrests will eventually go before the TSA realizes that this is a really stupid idea."
Not very far. Consider that the top of our government allowed illegal torture on our enemies and has yet to be held accountable for it. I doubt your child porno fantasy will come true...
"Nice, Bob. So the families of the DHS/TSA bureaucrats are sacred and untouchable, but the families of "ordinary" taxpaying citizens are subject to your virtual strip searches and other humiliations?"
GOOD GRIEF!! Bob did not say that his family or other DHS/TSA get to skip on being screened when they fly. PEOPLE: stop spinning stuff! You are getting to be worse than TSA!
"I am going to print 8.5" x 11" copies of the released WBI images and carry a large folder in my laptop case. Any time I see someone permitting themselves to be scanned by this unreasonable strip search device, I will use the image pages as an educational workshop."
AGAIN, please do not do this when you are in front of me. I have a plane to catch and no time for your so called "education workshop"
"Many reports from travelers demonstrate that TSOs are not informing people of what the scanners do, and the fact that they are optional. Note that Bob is ignoring any and all questions about how TSA is making sure passengers know what these machines do, and that they can opt out."
If you hit an airport that is doing this, post it here. Otherwise your post won't help much.
Bob:
What screening do the MMW operators undergo before starting their shifts to ensure that they do not have any cell phones/cameras/other imaging equipment with them before entering the screening room?
Since you say that images are deleted immediately after their use, how are they deleted? Is it a secure deletion in which the image is overwritten with junk data, or is it simply "deleted", leaving it vulnerable to being undeleted to anyone with the proper software?
What steps are taken to secure property while a traveller is in the MMR scanner?
An anonymous poster, responding to me, wrote:
"I am guessing that since sanitary napkins and adult diaper are made out of an organic material just as clothes are, the machine will probably go through those objects as well."
Sir (I presume you are male), no the MMW/WBI cannot see the what's in one's crotch unless there is a imager in the floor looking up one's crotch. Take a look at the images as posted and you will see for yourself that it can't see there. Unless, of course, we are not being told the whole truth about what these machines can and cannot see.
Folks ... I realize that defending Bob isn't terribly popular here, but he does have a point. :)
There is a difference between publicly posting a WBI image of an unnamed person, and publicly posting a WBI image of a named person. The type of violation of privacy is much more severe in the second case than in the first.
TSA has stated that such images are not stored, and are only viewed remotely by an individual who has no contact with the passenger; consequently, the viewer cannot equate those images with a particular person. Asking for a WBI image of a particular named person isn't fair; it's using the technology in a way outside of its intentions.
(Insert the usual "but can we trust what the TSA says" debate here. Nobody's mind will be changed by repeating those debates here.)
There's also the side issue of how TSA produces an image from a system which is supposed to be incapable of saving images. Producing such an image would be taken as evidence that the machine could actually save images. Failure to produce the image would be seen as stonewalling. Either way, TSA can't win.
For the record, I'm undecided as to whether or not WBI, as described, constitutes an invasion of privacy. If someone I'll never meet, and who will never meet me, views these scans, have I lost anything? I can see the argument from both sides.
But let's be fair. Bob actually has a reasonable point on this.
Geez, let's have a day without TSA, and see how many of you will fly. For all of you who hate TSA and all it stands for, let TSA know your itinerary and maybe they will not screen anyone including you for that flight. Let's have selective screening! However, I doubt that the airline crew will want to be on the same flight as you.
Anonymous wrote:
"Many reports from travelers demonstrate that TSOs are not informing people of what the scanners do, and the fact that they are optional. Note that Bob is ignoring any and all questions about how TSA is making sure passengers know what these machines do, and that they can opt out."
If you hit an airport that is doing this, post it here. Otherwise your post won't help much."
--
In the CNN thread, Adrian wrote:
"In Las Vegas, the whole body imager is used as a primary screening device instead of the metal detector arch, not just as a tool for secondary screenings. Passengers are not notified of what it does or that they have another option. I bet if you polled them, at least 90 percent would not even realize that it's an imaging device. Therefore, most people are not giving informed consent."
"Geez, let's have a day without TSA, and see how many of you will fly."
I would pay extra to fly without TSA.
Bob, please detail TSA's actions regarding the situation described in Sandra's 5:48 pm post, including specific disciplinary actions taken against TSA employees violating your stated policies regarding these strip-search machines.
I hope somebody puts Blogger Bob in for an incentive award. He deserves it for all the abuse he takes on this blog. Hang in their buddy!
Jim Huggins wrote:
"There's also the side issue of how TSA produces an image from a system which is supposed to be incapable of saving images."
Jim, Kip Hawley said in an interview with Bruce Schneier in July 2007:
"We do not now store images for the test phase (function disabled), and although we haven't officially resolved the issue, I fully understand the privacy argument and don't assume that we will store them if and when they're widely deployed."The machine does have the capacity to store images and Kip's statement leaves us wondering - do they or don't they?
"Yeah, we do." An honest answer. Thank you.
What the citizen should realize is that TSA and DHS as a whole is in an adversarial relationship with the citizens. It is part of their corporate culture to demean, distrust and instill fear in the public. It isn't a question of getting the employees to follow rule of regulation and law or be civil. It is a question of making life difficult for their adversary.
@Jim Huggins: "For the record, I'm undecided as to whether or not WBI, as described, constitutes an invasion of privacy. If someone I'll never meet, and who will never meet me, views these scans, have I lost anything?"
The TSA is asking us to stand spread-eagled in a scanner so that someone can view an image of our naked bodies. I don't know how that could not be an invasion of privacy, even though the viewer is out of sight, our identity is (supposedly) masked, and they (supposedly) have no way of storing the image. I don't know how anyone brought up in a puritanical culture that is squeamish about nudity could be comfortable with it. But that's really not the question.
The question is whether this invasion of privacy is justified and effective, and whether the TSA are implementing it in a way that keep the invasion to the minimum level necessary to accomplish the mission. In other words, they're asking us to pay a price for this new technology, both in dollars and in an increased level of intrusiveness and loss of privacy and dignity. Is that price worth what we're getting?
We're not going to get answers to those questions because the TSA consider themselves exempt from any cost-benefit analysis. They make decisions in secret about how they're going to fight the War On Terror, and we're supposed to accept that those are the right decisions because they say so. We're supposed to accept that what they do is necessary and effective because they say so. We're supposed to accept that WBI respects our privacy and is not a strip search because they say so. We're also supposed to accept that the TSA respects our rights and our privacy, and treats travelers as "customers," because they say so.
The way the TSA has chosen to promote WBI is enough to give any thinking person good reason to question it. The TSA seems to have a pathological inability to gain the public trust, even as they're asking the public to trust them with an unprecedented level of intrusiveness. Is there any reason we should accept it just because they say it's not a strip search and that they claim to have procedures in place to protect our privacy?
Bob said...
Ha. The FT folks think I'm having a breakdown. Actually, I'm sitting here with a nice cup of coffee and I've got my i-Pod set to play all Antonio Carlos Jobim songs. Life is grand. I just need a beach and some palm trees.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
May 20, 2009 4:16 PM
.......................
So you do read Flyer Talk.
@Bob: "I can understand that you don't agree with the technology, but at least be reasonable about it and not exaggerate what it really is."
Let's be clear about something. We don't disagree with the technology (or at least I don't). Rather, we don't trust the TSA, and thus we object to the TSA inflicting it on us. That's a very significant difference.
As I've said many times, I actually believe that the technology is a significant security enhancement that can actually protect aviation. But on the subject of not exaggerating what it really is, it really is a strip search. The TSA does an abominable job of respecting the rights and privacy of passengers as is. That's what makes the additional intrusion of a strip search unacceptable, despite the clear security benefit. It's entirely the TSA's fault that we're balking.
Yes, you carefully detail all the procedures the TSA is putting in place to protect our privacy. But we can experience for ourselves the fact that "things that aren't supposed to happen" do happen all too often at checkpoints. TSOs prohibit things that are permitted, show contempt and disrespect for passengers, and otherwise violate rules they're supposed to follow. If the rules aren't followed where we can see them, how can we have any confidence that the rules to protect our privacy will be followed when we can't see them? It's the TSA's own reputation for arrogance, condescension, incompetence, and untrustworthiness that creates the disagreement, not the technology! So you should understand why we object to WBI scanners. It's not the scanners themselves, but the completely untrustworthy people who seek to inflict them on us.
Earn our trust and we'll be more than willing to bare it all for enhanced security. Many of us have told you exactly what you need to do to earn our trust, but it seems you prefer to ignore it. As the TSA currently stands, we just can't trust you with such intrusive technology.
Here's one description of one pax's trip through the Virtual Strip Search Machine. I can't be sure, but it does not sound like he saw or heard that this was optional--he was just directed to get in line and get his virtual strip search. Was this SOP? I also don't like to hear that some TSO is going to be pawing through my wallet. Is that SOP?
-----------------------------
From slashdot:
Here's how it worked: As usual, I put all my metal items into the front pocket of my carry-on, took off my shoes, passed urine and blood samples to the TSA officer (just kidding -- or am I?), and put my bag onto the conveyor belt. Then I waited.
Station One was a line of three people (at the time). The front person in line was instructed to keep his or her feet behind a yellow line. Directly ahead was a big booth of clear plastic. We each waited our turn to get to the front of the line and wait for a TSA officer to instruct us to proceed to Station Two.
Station Two, you step up and into the booth itself. There are little feet marks on the floor of the booth that instruct you where to put your feet. You stand there, and you wait.
Station Three, after a minute or two, a TSA person comes along and instructs you that you may now put your hands on two hand-marks on the wall. Basically, you're now in a position not unlike how you stand when you're being frisked by a cop. Once the TSA officer is satisfied that you're doing it right (it isn't hard), the officer walks away, and you wait.
After another minute or two and a couple of thumping sounds, the officer comes back and tells you that you can now step down out of the booth ... and over to Station Four. I now notice that I am AGAIN standing in line behind the three people who were in line ahead of me. AGAIN we have to stand behind a yellow line, and all of the officers are acting like that yellow line is a Really Big Deal. Each person waits a minute or two until the TSA officer reappears and instructs them, individually, that they have passed the test and may collect their belongings.
Except I didn't pass.
In my case, the TSA officer approached me and informed me that they would need to see what was in my left front pocket. What was in my left front pocket was, not totally without precedent, my wallet. As it turns out, while the old scanners required you to remove all metal objects from your person, the new scanners now require you to remove EVERY object from your person, no matter what it is. They can tell if you're circumcised or not, but apparently they cannot tell that an oblong, slightly curved object of porous, nonmetallic material carried in the pocket of a man's trousers might possibly be his wallet.
I was escorted to Station Five -- yes, that's right, YET ANOTHER high-security yellow line where I needed to position my feet -- where I was told to wait for a different TSA officer. No doubt this one had a higher security clearance of the type that would allow her to examine the mysterious object. I was instructed to remove the object from my pocket. I did so using my left hand, then rotated my hand slowly so that the object was visible in my palm, revealing that the object was some kind of flat, oblong device made out of black leather. Visibly alarmed, the TSA officer informed me that she would need to open the object for inspection. Disassembly of the device revealed a number of very thin, flat, rectangular plastic objects. Some of them were printed with the logos of major financial institutions. At least one of the rectangular pieces of plastic had my photograph printed on it. In fact, this was the same flat, rectangular piece of plastic that I had showed to a TSA officer about fifteen minutes ago, at Station One. Satisfied, the officer told me I could collect my things.
Ok, you people really need to get over yourselves. There are signs posted well ahead of the WBI, complete w/ pics, but that would require you to look at them and read them. Open your eyes next time you are standing in those lines. They actually tell you it is optional.
I would agree w/ the poster who notices that a 'mad bomber' would only have to look for the lane that does not have a WBI. That's why I am in favor of getting these machines at ALL checkpoints and lanes. After all, several of you here have been crying you want consistancy...
Ayn is apparently worried that TSA is full of pedophiles and afraid of having her kids scanned. Lets just think about that...Ok, so pedophiles make up X% of the general population, lets say for simple math that # is 1 in 5000. There are approx 40K TSA employees so there would be 8 TSA employees with a nasty little proclivity. Now lets figure the same ratio works for the number of people who transit airports nationwide. Lets call that # about 20 million.(A conservative est.) That would mean there are some 4000 pedophiles roaming our airports on any given day. And you're worried about some TSO off in a locked room? I think I'd be more worried about little Johnnie or Jane getting snatched up...Or am I just crazy?
And (as I recall) if they get snatched up and hauled thru the checkpoint, many of you don't want us talking to them to see if they are comfortable w/ the adult they are with.
I work at a checkpoint w/ a WBI and have heard only positive things from the PAX who use them. They are delighted with the speed that they get thru, overjoyed at not having to go thru the wanding/pat-down, and promise to tell all their friends of the great experience they had. Shame those people don't all find their way here. All we have to go on is the 5-6 of you by name who want to gripe, and the handfull of Annons.
Rest assured the WBI is being as well recieved as you are being told by Bob and others.
Ronnie TSO DEN
"He deserves it for all the abuse he takes on this blog."
Poor Bob! Being asked questions by the very people TSA terrorizes every day!
Bob said a bunch of things on May 20, 2009 1:06 PM including:
I reject any request that asks for us to post WBI images of us or our family. Yes, I have posted them in the past, but they have become so repetitive it’s ridiculous. It’s also disrespectful to bring our families into these conversations.
After all of the precautions to protect privacy, many are still vehemently opposed to this type of screening. I can understand and respect that.
What I can’t respect and won’t tolerate are the repeated requests to post WBI images of our children.
Why do I have a problem with sharing images of my family and no problem with passengers going through the WBI?
Unlike unidentifiable images of passengers which are deleted automatically and sent to digital heaven, you are asking us to post a permanent identifiable image on the internet of our children. If you don’t see the difference, then we’re going to have to agree to disagree and leave it at that.
*******************************
Here's the problem w/those sentiments, Bob-your pal Nico is the one who, from the very start of this whole virtual strip searching conversation way back when, claimed the images were 'family friendly'; so much so, that said he'd have no concerns about his own family going thru it.
Nico, & now by default the rest of the TSA, are simply being asked to prove what he said was the case w/these machines.
OK, here is my question:
What size is the display monitor that the image screener is using, what is the display resolution, and are the images full screen, half screen or something else.
I remain concerned that passengers are not being fully informed about what information about them (a view underneath their clothes, to be specific) is being collected at the Virtual Strip Search Machine.
Here's what one passenger going through LAX on May 7 reported seeing:
At LAX:
Specifically, T4 just past the WTMD's upstairs?
I reported seeing this thing, whatever it is, in action on 5/7 when I was flying out [snip], but to summarize...
Yes, there were signs posted right before & right after it, but the images on the signs were more of the Casper the Friendly Ghost variety, nothing like what is being discussed on CNN & [EOS] currently.
I stopped to watch & after it was done the woman being strip-searched asked the smurf wearing the fancy headset if that was the 'new faster machine' she'd heard about; he responded that it was the 'new no-touch machine', but that was the extent of his explanation to her. Clearly she didn't get one before being strip-searched (no surprise there).
So, that's what I can tell you about T4 @ LAX, at least as of 5/7."
Blogger Bob, the image CNN obtained looks NOTHING like the Ken doll image released by the TSA on this Blog. Here is a comparison of the TSA image and the CNN image. I have not altered either except to enlarge the CNN image to the same size as the TSA image.
When the TSA announced the MMW WBI, we were assured the images were kid safe and would be approved on the cover of Reader's Digest, what CNN showed is NOT kid safe.
We were also assured that signage would be placed in a conspicuous location to belay any modesty concerns. If someone felt the images would be to graphic, they could opt out.
Numerous stories from frequent flyers are proving the signage is NOT being placed as promised.
The PR speak of "99% of the people are choosing the MMW WBI" is a lie cut from whole cloth. Most of those that have "chosen" are unaware that the MMW WBI allows the TSA to see beneath their clothing. The victim assumes the MMW WBI is simply a sophisticated metal detector.
Don't believe me, head down to the airport and take a survey. I will bet a new tie for Blogger Bob that at least 80% have no clue to the graphic nature of this device. Show them the CNN image, the reactions will be better than anything Candid Camera ever got.
Bob wrote: "Strip Searches? Groping? Pornography? Child Molestation? Lying?
These are some pretty extreme words you're using."
-----------------------------
In what sense? Let's examine them alphabetically: A. Groping: "–verb (used without object)
1. to feel about with the hands; feel one's way: I had to grope around in the darkness before I found the light switch.
This seems like a pretty accurate characterization of what a screener does when you opt out of the MMW.
B. Lie
1.a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.
2. something intended or serving to convey a false impression; imposture: His flashy car was a lie that deceived no one.
3. an inaccurate or false statement.
Again, this is a debatable characterization of TSA's past and present approach, but hardly an "extreme" one.
C. Molest
1.to bother, interfere with, or annoy.
2. to make indecent sexual advances to.
3. to assault sexually.
Granted, the second and third entries are "extreme," though probably at least sometimes accurate (unless you suppose that TSOs are less likely to be pedophiles than the general population). The first entry, however, is undoubtedly true. Every day your screeners "bother, interfere with, or annoy" countless children.
D. Pornography –noun
obscene writings, drawings, photographs, or the like, esp. those having little or no artistic merit.
Again, debatable. To suggest that the screeners are by definition pornographers is extreme, but to suggest that nude images are pornographic is not at all extreme.
Then again, I'm trying to discuss these matters with people who believe that human lie detectors can be trained in four days (and don't care about the statistical evidence that shows they can't), insist that shoes are a real threat to aviation, and obsess over small amounts of liquids.
This is the reality...
P: "Is WBS optional?"
TSA: "You do not have to fly today sir"
P: "So I have to go though the WBS?"
TSA: "If you wish to fly today we have to check you for items that might impact aircraft safety."
I'm paraphrasing a little (bad memory etc) but that is what happens at real airports.
PS - Are TSA subject to Child Porn laws?
"..The images are extremely detailed, clearly showing a person’s gender. You can actually see the sweat on someone’s back,” said James Schear, the TSA security director at Baltimore/Washington International Airport."
I think approval would change if the people being scanned could watch a monitor showing the process being done on themselves.
The claims about destroying the pictures, we can't be sure, other than just taking your word for it. That's not very much assurance.
I keep hearing this thing about "TSA for school bus". Any info on that rumor?
George said...
Earn our trust and we'll be more than willing to bare it all for enhanced security. Many of us have told you exactly what you need to do to earn our trust, but it seems you prefer to ignore it. As the TSA currently stands, we just can't trust you with such intrusive technology.
May 20, 2009 7:44 PM
........................
I have to disagree George.
First, TSA has never been up front and honest with the public. They can never gain my trust without a sea change in the way TSA conducts business.
There is no reason that anyone should be "Strip Search" in order to fly on a commercial aircraft.
Other means can be deployed to ensure dangerous items are kept off the aircraft.
The Explosive Trace Portals should have been perfected instead of being abandoned by TSA.
Weapons such as knives and such present little threat since cockpit doors are a suitable barrier to those types of threats.
TSA has deployed the most invasive technology available without consulting the people who are to be protected, those who fly.
Any TSA employee who participates in this Strip Search and scans children should be charged with child abuse and let the courts decide their fates.
And lets not forget about the unlawful surveillance of people outside of the secure areas with their new SPO-7. TSA has the audacity to thumb its collective nose at the citizens of this country and completely disregard the Constitution of the United States of America.
I'm not sure whose side the TSA is on but I know it's not on the side of freedom!
My personal take on the issue of "voluntary" is that it only is for now....once this goes live...it will be "go through or go home"! Probably more like "go through or get arrested"!
Even if it is voluntary, opting NOT to be scanned will be seen as a form of "guilt" (aka "what are you trying to hide"). Either way, the TSA will prevail because their policies function above the law. For example:
Freedom of Speech (Amendment I) - Say what is on your mind, except at the airport.
Bear arms (Amendment II)- gets you arrested at the airport.
Search & Seizure (Amendment IV) - you waived these rights when you stepped in the Security Line.
Deprived of life, liberty or PROPERTY (Amendment V and XIV, Section I) - Bring a bottle of water....see what happens, but please keep your 7" screwdriver!
The TSA is nothing short of a militia "civilians trained as soldiers but not part of the regular army". They overstep their authority in every way, and it is time that "We the People" remind them of our power to remove government... "We the People" are not the enemy!
RB wrote:So you do read Flyer Talk.He's posted a few comments there too. :P
Anyone who says that this technology does not illustrate a person's complete body is full of crap. I was subjected to this technology in another country and let's just say that when my colleague came through after me I became more aware of his anatomy than I cared to ever know.
When will be take control of how our government (of, for and by the people!!!) treats us.
Of course, remember - you can opt out of this so you can get felt up by some rude, power-hungry screener who thinks he's a sworn law enforcement officer.
TSA = "Thousands Standing Around"
Sigh. Yet more useless security theater.
Does anyone over there at the TSA have any real clue about what "security" actually is? Because it certainly doesn't seem like it.
Every new post on this blog just makes me weep for the idiocy of humanity.
No more than you're spinning TSA to make them look like the worst group on the planet. Funny, they didn't fly 4 planes into various objects killing over 3000 people. They're just trying to stop it from happening again...The TSA didn't fly the planes on 9/11. But they're (probably unintentionally) helping to further at least some of the goals of the people who did fly the planes. They are helping to destroy aviation by bogging it down in so much security theater hassle that increasing numbers of people choose to avoid it. And they're also at the forefront of transforming a uniquely free society that cherishes the rule of law into an authoritarian "papers-please" state that acts arbitrarily and regularly punishes citizens for violating secret rules. They seem to believe that the way to protect us from an enemy that wants to destroy us is to act like that enemy.
The TSA may be trying to stop 9/11 from happening again, but by all available independent reviews show they're doing a rather poor job. And that's the worst part of the entire charade.
Anonymous said... Yes, there were signs posted right before & right after it, but the images on the signs were more of the Casper the Friendly Ghost variety, nothing like what is being discussed on CNN & [EOS] currently. May 20, 2009 11:45 PM
----------------------------
Up until last week, LAX T-4 was piloting a backscatter machine. It is no longer there, but it would have been there as you stated on 5/7. Backscatter images and MMW images are different. You saw the sign for the backscatter which is why it didn't look like anything you've seen on CNN or EoS.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
These machines are sick and disgusting. But what else would one expect from the TSA?
@Ronnie TSO DEN: "I work at a checkpoint w/ a WBI and have heard only positive things from the PAX who use them. They are delighted with the speed that they get thru, overjoyed at not having to go thru the wanding/pat-down, and promise to tell all their friends of the great experience they had. Shame those people don't all find their way here."
Do you know whether any of those "positive PAX" are fully aware of what the WBI does? I'm sure they know it's faster than the wanding/pat-down, but do they know it's a machine that can produce an image of their naked bodies for viewing by unknown hidden TSOs?
I suspect they would be something other than "overjoyed" if they knew the full truth about the machines. Which is exactly why the TSA is going to such great lengths to obfuscate and conceal the truth. Gush endlessly about the throughput and speed, and why it's better than being groped by a TSO. Just ignore the intrusive privacy invasion, and you've spun yourselves some happy passengers. Ignorance is bliss, but what you don't know can hurt you!
"All we have to go on is the 5-6 of you by name who want to gripe, and the handfull of Annons. Rest assured the WBI is being as well recieved as you are being told by Bob and others."
Bravo!! Repeat the Official Spin, then denigrate and dismiss anyone who disagrees. That's exactly how the TSA has been so successful at winning the animosity and distrust of the public. If condescension doesn't solve the problem, "Do you want to fly today?" works every time. Yes, I'll be sure to tell all my friends of the great experience I had.
What concerns me most is how cowardly the American people are. And to further this cowardice, the government repeatedly reminds us of 9/11. Yes, it was a tragic day. However, bullying the American people because of it is no justification.
Yes, we need airport security. Read the ASRS on the FAA website about unruly, aggressive, and deranged passengers and one can see the need to keep weapons off aircraft. But refusing to permit liquids because of some failed "plot" three years ago and ONE incident in Philippines that had so much more going on than someone getting an explosive liquid onboard an aircraft is faulty rationale.
We all have to accept risk in our lives. Otherwise we would all be living in padded cells in underground bunkers with thick leaded walls to keep out the boogeymen.
If you want to continuously bring up acts of terrorism to justify your actions, why not bring up Timmy McVeigh? I've moved quite a bit in the past several years and I was not virtually strip searched and refused carriage of any items in my Uhaul and Budgets trucks. Oh, right - it was Ryder. I do seem to recall a lot of lives being lost in OKC, many children (oh, God, what about the CHILDREN!!!). What about the USS Cole? The Somali pirates? The embassy bombings worldwide, the London train bombings, the outbreaks of violence recently in Mumbai? Are other countries harassing their citizens and others that want to travel or engage in commerce like the TSA is doing to the flying public? No. They suffered the tragedy, picked up the pieces, and moved on. Why can't we?
I'm tired of hearing, when someone has a decent idea, "You obviously forget 9/11," "What about all those innocent people on 9/11," "You are unAmerican to forget 9/11." WE do not forget. We just want to move on.
Again, I am not saying dissolve TSA. I'm saying we need to quit the harassment, the dredging up of past events and tragedies, and hiding behind "SSI." It is time to move on. Look for the weapons, bombs, incendiaries. But realize you can't stop terrorism. And, if someone truly wants to bring down another aircraft, it is going to happen. Keeping stuff secret only stops your bored, teenage, basement dwellers. True extremists are 5 steps ahead of the government and intelligence.
@RB: "First, TSA has never been up front and honest with the public. They can never gain my trust without a sea change in the way TSA conducts business."
That's exactly what I meant about earning our trust. The TSA can never earn our trust under its current operating philosophy and management. They've had seven years, during which they've established an abominable reputation that is now beyond repair. And they seem intent on damaging it further. It's very clear they have only contempt for the public, which they regard as enemies. Maybe they believe they don't need our trust, and would prefer the sort of "trust" more easily instilled through fear and "Do you want to fly today?" That's an even more horrifying thought.
The entire flawed system needs to be independently reviewed and rebuilt from the ground up. Then they can start earning our trust.
"There is no reason that anyone should be "Strip Search" in order to fly on a commercial aircraft."
I'm not convinced of this. Believe it or not, I agree with the TSA when they continually tell us that the terrorist threat to aviation is real and frightening. A strip search machine, when properly deployed, would seem to provide more effective protection against that threat than anything the TSA currently uses (which doesn't seem very effective at all).
But I do not believe that the TSA would deploy it properly, particularly regarding the inherent privacy implications of such an intrusive form of screening. The fact that they insist on minimizing or denying the true intrusive nature of the scanner can only suggest that we can't rely on any of their sweet promises about protecting our privacy.
The strip search machine could be a welcome improvement over the TSA's reactive-accretion paradigm, which continually adds dubious hassles in reaction to past failures. It could provide an actual measure of security, which the stupid hassles of the liquids, shoes, and "Do you want to fly today?" do not. The trouble is that the machines are a strip search. That's a fact; that's the truth, no matter how many TSA employees deny it. They represent a new and unprecedented level of intrusiveness and invasion of privacy. And given the TSA's track record, we just cannot trust them with it. That's really a shame.
"TSA has deployed the most invasive technology available without consulting the people who are to be protected, those who fly."
They're pretending to consult those who fly. That's what the "pilot" is for. You give them misleading information, telling them it's faster and better than the alternative of being groped but conveniently avoiding the fact that it's a strip search. They react positively, and the TSA can crow about how enthusiastic passengers are about being strip searched. Except, of course, for the fact that the TSA went to great lengths to ensure that those "enthusiastic" passengers were unaware that they were being strip searched. Another "success" for TSA spin and lies!
@RB: "Any TSA employee who participates in this Strip Search and scans children should be charged with child abuse and let the courts decide their fates."
I think this "child abuse" or "child pornography" argument is almost as absurd as the TSA's continued claims that WBI is not a strip search, and that it's innocuous and friendly. But it does bring up a real point: Should the TSA be strip searching children? For that matter, should the TSA be strip searching every passenger?
I think they'd do better a lot better, legally and morally as well as from a passenger privacy perspective, by reserving the strip search for secondary screening. At least then there would be something resembling "probable cause" (i.e., the passenger set off an alarm) to justify the severe intrusion, as opposed to subjecting everyone to a strip search. But I don't think that would satisfy the TSA.
"I'm not sure whose side the TSA is on but I know it's not on the side of freedom!"
That one's easy: The TSA is on its own side! Bureaucracies inherently seek to expand their power and authority. That's why we have the GAO, the Inspector General, and various laws about oversight. The TSA has found a way to exploit 9/11 and the "Global War On Terror" to justify exemption from the oversight that would normally constrain a government agency. That exemption allows them to expand their power and authority. And their fetish for secrecy creates an environment where ineptitude and bullying flourish. That's why we absolutely must not allow them to strip search us.
Wait, what's this I'm hearing about having to remove wallets and such from your person before this scan?
I'm all for this technology if it can speed lines up and cause less hassle, but it sounds like it's not going to do that.
Where I'm from, when I'm carrying a wallet and/or passport, that is my identity, and I am NOT going to leave it anywhere that I do not have control of it.
The day I show up and the option is either give up control of my identity or get a pat-down, I'm turning around and never boarding a plane again until that option changes.
Please, can't we just go back to the basic rules from 9/10/01? Just lock the cockpit doors. As always, "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both"
"Why does TSA refuse to share images of TSA employees being virtually strip searched at the same size and resolution the machine's operator sees?"
Because the TSA employees would sue the hell out of the government.
"TSA - why don't you standardize a family line? The likelihood of someone being a terrorist is minimized if you do selective screening. I know the ACLU types will object (that's their job) but 'comon...an 80yr old grandma traveling with her grand kids and family members are not a threat. Why not just have them walk through one level of security check (metal detector) while keeping their shoes and jackets on. This will really speed things up."
Who would choose to stand in the "terrorist stamped on forehead" lane?
"Why don't the TSA offer a frequent flier / pre-screen option to whisk through security checkpoints? I don't mind giving you my name, SSN, address, phone number, blood type, etc BEFORE my trip so that you can pre-screen me. When I show up to travel, just have a line for those who have already been pre-screened and subject me to a level one security check."
Already exists. Trusted Traveller Program. Clear.
I was wondering if I could set up an appointment at my nearest TSA checkpoint so that I can go through the Virtual Strip Search machine? I would like to save the resulting image to my thumb drive. All I'm asking for is a picture of MYSELF using this technology; surely I must have the right to see myself on the machine if I so choose. Then I will take the image and post it online so that everyone else can see exactly what the screener sees. No privacy issues here, I'm giving permission for my body to be scanned in this manner and I give permission for the picture to be posted online. Can that be arranged?
John Q Traveller said...
Of course, remember - you can opt out of this so you can get felt up by some rude, power-hungry screener who thinks he's a sworn law enforcement officer.I don't consider myself rude, power-hungry or law enforcement.
But it's that what you believe, by all means, go ahead and believe it.
Hooray stereotypes.
Since I have a pace maker and have to be patted down every time I fly I love this new technology. When I flew awhile back I was screened by one of these types of machines. It was far faster then the other form of screening and easier.
@Anonymous, May 21, 2009 8:21 PM: "Wait, what's this I'm hearing about having to remove wallets and such from your person before this scan? ....
Where I'm from, when I'm carrying a wallet and/or passport, that is my identity, and I am NOT going to leave it anywhere that I do not have control of it."
This is my most serious concern about the strip search. The risk of lost identity documents is far more significant than the "voluntary abandonment" of privacy and human dignity. I've mentioned this several times here, but the only response was a blog team member who condescendingly dismissed my concern. I have written to the TSA contact center, but that has gone unacknowledged.
I don't know what to make of the apparent lack of interest in this concern on the TSA's part. My guess is that the Experts at Headquarters who set up the procedures for the strip searches didn't think of it, so therefore it must not matter.
I suspect that if I ever do run into checkpoint that's using a strip search, I will exercise my "secret" option to let Buster the TSO give me a very friendly feeling rather than be separated from my wallet. But I think you have an even better idea in choosing to avoid flying entirely. The TSA isn't the only reason why that's a very good idea.
George said...
@RB: "Any TSA employee who participates in this Strip Search and scans children should be charged with child abuse and let the courts decide their fates."
I think this "child abuse" or "child pornography" argument is almost as absurd as the TSA's continued claims that WBI is not a strip search, and that it's innocuous and friendly. But it does bring up a real point: Should the TSA be strip searching children? For that matter, should the TSA be strip searching every passenger?
..........................
George, I think you and I are in agreement on most points but on this one I have to disagree with you.
The Strip Search Machine clearly images a persons genitals. We both agree that it is a Strip Search. To do that to a child is in my opinion child abuse and charges should be filed against those individuals who participate in this. It will only take one court to rule that this is abusive and to stop this insanity. Sadly some low level TSA employees will pay a lifelong price.
Perhaps I need to contact some large Christian groups to draw more attention to this practice. I doubt they know that their government has started Strip Searching its citizens and in particular children.
Again in my opinion people who are against this invasive Strip Search must use all legal means to push back on this point. The Office of the President, Congress, State Representatives, Airline Executives, the news media and any other outlet to get the word out.
If we remain silent TSA will roll us over without a care to the privacy concerns of the citizens of this country.
WE have to know which issues are worth fighting over.
This issue deserves an all out effort.
@RB: "The Strip Search Machine clearly images a persons genitals. We both agree that it is a Strip Search. To do that to a child is in my opinion child abuse and charges should be filed against those individuals who participate in this."
I actually agree with you. But why is that really any more offensive than imaging the genitals of an adult, an adolescent, a senior citizen, or anyone else? It's not child abuse, but abuse pure and simple.
My problem with your argument is that "children" are used far too often as a hot-button political pawns to inflame emotions, or as justification for infringement of civil liberties. So I think it's counterproductive to claim that the TSOs in their remote hidey-holes viewing images of children are guilty of "child abuse" or "child pornography." If they're guilty at all-- and I think the notion of criminal liability here is utterly absurd-- they're guilty of imaging the genitals of people, with no probable cause to justify that serious invasion of privacy.
If there is an issue before a court (or preferably before Congress), it's whether the TSA has the authority to subject everyone who wants to fly to the sort of intrusive search that otherwise would only be administered to criminal suspects or prisoners. Regardless of the possible security benefits, and no matter how much the TSA tries to spin and conceal it, subjecting airline passengers of any age to a strip search (or alternatively a pat-down of their bodies) is not something the TSA should just be able to decide in secret and implement on their own authority. If they are going to institute that intrusive screening, it needs to be at the explicit direction of Congress after proper debate that lays bare (as it were) the full implications of the proposal for public scrutiny.
Now if they sought to use the strip search for secondary screening, where something like probable cause exists, it would be another matter entirely. That would seem the best use of this intrusive technology that balances privacy rights with the need for additional security. But apparently that's not good enough for the TSA. They'll settle for nothing less than the full monty.
"Again in my opinion people who are against this invasive Strip Search must use all legal means to push back on this point. The Office of the President, Congress, State Representatives, Airline Executives, the news media and any other outlet to get the word out."
I'll certainly agree and support this. We have put up with enough intrusive security theater from the TSA. This goes too far. And the fact that the TSA's spin machine is revving up in high gear to spread confusion and lies suggests they're fully aware of the implications. It's time to act like the proud informed Americans we are, instead of the cowering bamboozled sheep the TSA want us to become.
RB said...
"WE have to know which issues are worth fighting over.
This issue deserves an all out effort."
Give us a break RB. You fight against EVERY issue regarding TSA. If I am not mistaken your on just about every blog here!
Stick to your words! You bash TSA for not doing what it claims. Pick a few issues and stick to just that. Or are we going to have to keep seeing you on topic after topic after topice after topic...
"They are helping to destroy aviation by bogging it down in so much security theater hassle that increasing numbers of people choose to avoid it."
As opposed to the airlines, cutting service, raising prices, charging all sorts of fees.
But I forgot, it's all TSA's fault.
I don't buy the "we're not saving images" argument.
Tell me ... if one of these strip searchers finds something nefarious (gun or bomb, for example) on someone, I'd put money on the fact that such an image would be entered into evidence at that person's trial.
Whether or not it is in use currently is an arguable, and we know the system has the capability. But let's not be naive to think that TSA's automatically deleting all of these images. I have no doubt they can be saved if needs be for evidence or propaganda purposes.
And Bob, there's a principle of leadership that one does not ask his followers to do something he himself would not do. You find it awful that people are asking for the pics to be posted of TSA and DHS people and their families. Fair enough. I find it just as awful that you're asking me, my family, and everyone else in America to do the same thing without concrete proof that things are as they say you are.
If the pictures are as innocuous as you and Nico claim them to be, then posting such pics shouldn't be an issue. Using the classic TSA argument, what do you have to hide? Take a nice sampling of DHS people and their families and post them. You don't have to say who specifically each one is, but so-and-so and their family is among them. Privacy is protected as much as ours would be and it would be a step of good faith.
I think the fact that such pictures aren't posted is a testament to the fact that the pics aren't as innocuous as TSA claims them to be.
Lead by example. It's hypocritical to say "do as I say, not as I do."
Al
"Please take the bus. I don't want youy in front of me when I'm trying to catch a plane."
"AGAIN, please do not do this when you are in front of me. I have a plane to catch and no time for your so called "education workshop"Hey Anonymous - don't we all have planes to catch?! What makes you so special?
Get to the airport with plenty of time and anyone doing something like this won't be an issue. You know - just like the random stupidity that TSA subjects us to and tells us to get their earlier?
I've been behind a lot of stupid people in lines who have done all sorts of things. Suck it up and move on. I'm not telling them to take the bus as they have the same right as I do to be in such a place.
Look beyond yourself and what such a person is trying to accomplish. It's for the good of us all.
Earl
Anon said: TSA needs to ensure professionalism with the use of WBI's. Personally, if it makes getting through the security checkpoints quicker and I don't have to remove my shoes and jacket, I'm all for it!1st of all, I agree with you 100% that all screeners should be professional, in all areas.
2nd, the WBIs are in a pilot phase and are still being perfected; as are the procedures. With any new technology/procedures, there will be set backs, hold ups and a learning process for both screeners and passengers. There will be confusion at times and may be a little frustrating for both parties. In the end, I'm sure we can all agree that once mastered, anything that will speed up the screening process efficiently, is worth a little patience in its initial stages.
Also anon, with the WBIs, you still must remove shoes, jackets and anything in your pockets, just as the procedures state now.
Anon also commented: but 'comon...an 80yr old grandma traveling with her grand kids and family members are not a threat. Why not just have them walk through one level of security check (metal detector) while keeping their shoes and jackets on. This will really speed things up.This can only be described as "profiling" or "discriminating". This is something we are prohibited from doing. We cannot decifer who is or is not more of a threat than someone else. Everyone must undergo the same procedures as the next person, regardless of age, race or any other factor. Also, if we were to follow what you stated, that procedure would be known to all, including.....terrorists. This would be a weak spot that terrorists could use to their advantage. Terrorists are willing to do anything or use anybody to carry out their plan, even their own families. They don't care. So who's to say they won't use grandma or little John John? Well, we can't say, so it is in our best interest to screen all with the same standards to keep everyone as safe as possible. Safe Travels
Kelly
EoS Blog Team
Anon said: Ahh the privileges of being DHS/TSA or related to someone who is, while the rest of us are treated like convicted felons just because we want to exercise our fundamental rights to free movement and free association.What you need to understand is when someone employed by DHS/TSA flies, we go thru the same screening as anyone else. I have been with TSA for 2 1/2 years and nor myself or my co-workers treat people like convicted felons the minute they walk to the checkpoint. I'm not going to deny that certain situations can get out of hand by either a bad apple TSO or an unruly passenger, but we certainly don't treat people unfairly just for stepping through our checkpoints. We are here to ensure the safety of all passengers to the best of our ability, not to treat you poorly. (Again, I understand there are TSOs who overstep their authority) I treat passengers with respect, have light conversation if there is time, laugh with them, help them, answer questions and say "Have a Great Flight!!". I relate to passengers just as I would relate to any other stranger I met on the street. We are just trying to perform our job and keep you safe.
Kelly
EoS Blog Team
Kelly: "I relate to passengers just as I would relate to any other stranger I met on the street."
So you insist that strangers choose between subjecting themselves to a virtual strip search machine or an intense hand-groping? I doubt it.
Anonymous said...
"Kelly: "I relate to passengers just as I would relate to any other stranger I met on the street."
So you insist that strangers choose between subjecting themselves to a virtual strip search machine or an intense hand-groping? I doubt it."
Nice job taking what Kelly said out of context to spin your argument. You know exactly what she meant: she was talking about her attitude towards people.
Funny, but so many of you accuse TSA and its employees of being dishonest, yet here you are basicially lying - no, in fact you are lying - to make your argument. After doing that how can you claim you have any amount of credibility?
Earl Pitts wrote...
""Please take the bus. I don't want youy in front of me when I'm trying to catch a plane."
"AGAIN, please do not do this when you are in front of me. I have a plane to catch and no time for your so called "education workshop"Hey Anonymous - don't we all have planes to catch?! What makes you so special?
Get to the airport with plenty of time and anyone doing something like this won't be an issue. You know - just like the random stupidity that TSA subjects us to and tells us to get their earlier?
I've been behind a lot of stupid people in lines who have done all sorts of things. Suck it up and move on. I'm not telling them to take the bus as they have the same right as I do to be in such a place.
Look beyond yourself and what such a person is trying to accomplish. It's for the good of us all.
Earl
______________________________
Earl, glad you can tell us all whats best for us! I can't seem to figure that out for myself. And why, if someone wants to waste my time doing something stupid at an airport, its ok, cause I did as you suggested and got there early and had to wait behind them. But its ok - I only live once and those 10 minutes I'm sure I can get back somehow. Wait, I can't? What do you mean they are gone forever!? They were my 10 minutes, and someone else decided to waste them for me!
But I guess its ok, because as you said its for all of us, even if I didn't want to donate my time.
Glad there are people out there who accuse TSA of horrible things, but then turn around and do terrible and stupid things to others in the name of "its whats best for you, even if you don't know it, like it, or want it."
Thanks.
By the way, isn't that last thing you said, "look beyond yourself and what such a person is trying to accomplish. It's for the good of us all", what TSA basically says and many reject? Why does that not work for TSA but works for you?
Happy times, Earl.
Hi KellyMae --
RE your point about passengers being treating like "convicted felons" and situations getting out of hand because of "bad apple TSO's" --
I'm glad to hear your treat the passengers with courtesy. Unfortunately, my experience has been the opposite. That's part of the reason I avoid flying. (The other part is the way the airlines treat their customers.)
Here's a synopsis of the experiences that left me feeling this way:
Atlanta -- screeners can't open their mouths without yelling.
Flint MI -- screener can't open her mouth without yelling, and barks orders instead of giving instructions in a civil manner.
Flint MI -- screener is doing a bag check on my girlfriend's bag, and asks if there's anything she might poke herself on. Heather points to a rear pocket, and says there's a nail file in that pocket. Screener yells not to touch the bag. Heather points out that she didn't touch the bag -- she only pointed. Screener yells louder not to touch the bag. (As the old saying goes, whoever is yelling the most is probably in the wrong.)
Orlando FL -- screener is yelling something in such heavily accented English that we couldn't understand a word, and was visibly angry that people weren't doing whatever it was she wanted. This led to more incomprehensible yelling.
Pensacola FL -- screener #1 yells at my girlfriend over a tube of mascara so loudly I could hear it from the other side of the WTMD, then walks away. I join my girlfriend, and we can't figure out whether screener #1 is done with her or not. (She led Heather to think that she wanted to re-run the bag in question.) Screener #2 bellows in my ear to "expedite gathering your belongings because the line is backing up", then walks away. I look at screener #3 who is standing there in his blue gloves doing nothing, who makes eye contact for a moment, then looks away, staring into space.
I don't call any of these experiences a show of courtesy or professionalism. How would checkpoint personnel react if I walked up to one of them, yelled at them, then walked away? (I'd bet at least a thorough secondary, and potentially call an LEO and DYWTFT.) I do call them treating passengers like felons. (Having toured a military brig in my Navy days, I've seen it first hand.)
I've advocated proactive measures and accountability for how passengers get treated, and secret shoppers as a tool to this end -- a customer service analog to Red Team testing.
The best the TSA has done is the reactive tool "got feedback", which puts the onus on the passenger to QA the checkpoint experience. Also, we still don't have a definitive answer to the question "can I be required to show ID to receive a comment card?"
As I've said before, the TSA needs to take aggressive, proactive measures to rein in the "bad apple" screeners, and they need to be very transparent about it. Then, there wouldn't be nearly as many stories like ours in circulation.
If the TSA had meaningful accountability measures in place, I'd probably try flying again. Until then, I thank heaven that the price of gas has come down and that TSA doesn't have checkpoints at the entrances to the interstate system.
Mark
kellymae81 said...
What you need to understand is when someone employed by DHS/TSA flies, we go thru the same screening as anyone else.
Kelly
EoS Blog TeamKelly when was the last time you allowed a PAX to go through to the sterile area with nothing more than a Benny Hill salute?In the second photo I see 3 TSOs going into the sterile area carrying loaded backpacks without so much as a wanding let alone an x-ray of their backpacks.
@MarkVII: "As I've said before, the TSA needs to take aggressive, proactive measures to rein in the "bad apple" screeners, and they need to be very transparent about it. Then, there wouldn't be nearly as many stories like ours in circulation."
There must be a reason they don't take effective measures against the "bad apple screeners." For a while, my preferred explanation was that the TSA leadership didn't see that as a problem because they somehow believed that bullying was essential to effective security. So they encouraged TSOs to be "tough" in their dealings with passengers, who were assumed to be terrorists until proved otherwise. If passengers perceived "tough" TSOs with fear and loathing and circulated horror stores, presumably terrorists would read them as well and be appropriately deterred.
But recalling the axiom to "never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity or incompetence," I have now concluded that the bad experiences are simply the result of inadequate training of TSOs on intentionally vague "guidelines," combined with a lack of any accountability for following what rules there are. It's a failing, pure and simple. Along with the shroud of secrecy that the TSA has thrown over most of its operation, this failing encourages even good TSOs to make up and "interpret" their own rules out of necessity to fill gaps in the vague guidelines, while allowing the "bad apples" to bully and violate the rules with no adverse consequences to their careers.
No conspiracy theories are necessary to explain why "things that should not happen" do happen far too often. It's just old-fashioned bureaucratic ineptitude perpetuating a systemic failure, with a special "War On Terror" exemption from normal oversight meant to find and correct systemic failures. As long as the TSA retains its license to operate "open loop" without accountability or checks and balances, nothing will change (except they'll continue to expand the scope of their intrusions into our lives). And I'm sure the TSA leaders (and the "bad apples") are very happy with that.
"I thank heaven that the price of gas has come down and that TSA doesn't have checkpoints at the entrances to the interstate system."
Be very careful. The TSA usually ignores or dismisses what we have to say here. But sometimes they are interested in our ideas. I can just imagine someone at Headquarters salivating at the prospect of setting up TSA roadblocks on highways where they can strip search us, tear apart our cars looking for cash or oversize lotion bottles, and then ask "Do you want to drive today?"
Hello everyone I am back from a fun trip to juneau... Hello everyone I am back from a fun trip to juneau for an employee council meeting. So I have been looking at these machines for awhile now and honestly I can't understand the uproar about it from my personal point of view. Even if I didn't work at TSA I would still feel the same about this subject. The machine does awesome screening from a security stand point. The only false alarms your going to get on this machine is going to be if a TSO can't make out what an item in your jacket pocket is and I am sure at that point in this machines progress we would have protocols to only search that spot of the passenger not a whole pat down. I understand it is uncomfortable, I don't want anyone to see me naked and I am pretty sure no one else wants to see me naked either. However when you look at it with this point of view it really isn't that bad. When you go to the swimming pool you have to go through a locker room first right? A locker room filled with much more then one person, and you can even see them standing next to you. You have to go through this room before you can get into a swimming pool right? No one has a problem with that so why does everyone have a problem with this? I am guessing probably because its new strange and people really don't like huge dramatic changes like this. But like locker rooms in swimming pools or in gym class, people get used to it and it doesn't matter anymore.
With all that said I don't mind the machines at all but honestly I would prefer something else. I don't want to see these machines making it into the checkpoints and would rather, as a TSO, take all the stress and hard work of pat downs and hand wands over that machine. But I just wanted to put that point of view on the table because I really don't understand the big deal about it.
"So I have been looking at these machines for awhile now and honestly I can't understand the uproar about it from my personal point of view."
The uproar is because these machines take naked pictures of people, and TSA is misleading the public about that.
Thank you, though, for having the guts to post under your real name and the name of your airport, unlike some of your colleagues.
TSOWilliamReed said...
Hello everyone I am back from a fun trip to juneau... Hello everyone I am back from a fun trip to juneau for an employee council meeting. So I have been looking at these machines for awhile now and honestly I can't understand the uproar about it from my personal point of view. Even if I didn't work at TSA I would still feel the same about this subject. The machine does awesome screening from a security stand point. The only false alarms your going to get on this machine is going to be if a TSO can't make out what an item in your jacket pocket is and I am sure at that point in this machines progress we would have protocols to only search that spot of the passenger not a whole pat down. I understand it is uncomfortable, I don't want anyone to see me naked and I am pretty sure no one else wants to see me naked either. However when you look at it with this point of view it really isn't that bad. When you go to the swimming pool you have to go through a locker room first right? A locker room filled with much more then one person, and you can even see them standing next to you. You have to go through this room before you can get into a swimming pool right? No one has a problem with that so why does everyone have a problem with this? I am guessing probably because its new strange and people really don't like huge dramatic changes like this. But like locker rooms in swimming pools or in gym class, people get used to it and it doesn't matter anymore.
With all that said I don't mind the machines at all but honestly I would prefer something else. I don't want to see these machines making it into the checkpoints and would rather, as a TSO, take all the stress and hard work of pat downs and hand wands over that machine. But I just wanted to put that point of view on the table because I really don't understand the big deal about it.
May 29, 2009 5:11 PM
...................
Thanks for your post.
So you admit that the image is a "naked" image.
You ask about locker rooms.
I don't go to locker rooms but it would be a choice I could make or not make.
Such is not the case with TSA.
Either a full intrusive Pat Down or a Strip Search! My choice courtesy TSA.
I refuse to be treated like a common criminal just to fly on a commercial aircraft.
I wrote a letter to American Airlines today stating that I will no longer purchase their services.
As far as I care all commercial air can end tomorrow.
The sooner that happens the sooner TSA will be out of the business of abusing citizens of this country. Then you TSO's can get some honest work.
So... the options are:
1. Have your naked-to-the-backscatter kid be watched (and possibly photographed/videoed) by the "creepy TSA guy",
2. Have your clothed kid be fondled by the "creepy TSA guy," or:
3. ????
Lose/lose in my opinion from a PR standpoint. No matter how well they're screened, eventually someone will be caught either fondling a kid or distributing the pics on the internet, and people will go nuts.
The reason why it will happen if this technology is implemented is because apparently nobody at the TSA understands how the internet works: if there's the potential for a freakshow, it will get uploaded to the internet eventually-- no matter how many safeguards are put in place.
And by the way, if it can be seen on a monitor, it can be photographed. This nonsense about "can't be saved" is poorly conceived.
@Anonymous, June 1, 2009 8:07 PM The reason why it will happen if this technology is implemented is because apparently nobody at the TSA understands how the internet works: if there's the potential for a freakshow, it will get uploaded to the internet eventually-- no matter how many safeguards are put in place.I think this is a somewhat remote concern, but it's justified. If we had confidence that the TSA created and consistently enforced safeguards to prevent such things from happening, we wouldn't worry about it. Unfortunately, the TSA shows no signs of consistently enforcing anything. We all too frequently encounter "bad apples" and "things that should not happen" at checkpoints, with no sign that the TSA's leadership is holding anyone accountable for these very visible violations or discrepancies from published statements.
The TSA is now asking is to trust them to consistently implement and enforce safeguards for MMW scanning that work in hidden places where we can never see them. Is there any reason to have any confidence that the TSA will consistently implement and enforce invisible safeguards when we know they can't consistently enforce the rules and standards at checkpoints where we can see them?
Don't blame us for not trusting you to protect our privacy when you strip search us. It's your own fault that we can't rely on you to follow your own rules or to tell us the truth. I'm sorry, but the risk of abuse at the hands of the current unaccountable TSA outweighs whatever claimed security benefits these highly intrusive devices might provide.
Anonymous said...
"Thank you, though, for having the guts to post under your real name and the name of your airport, unlike some of your colleagues."
Hmmmmmm.... posted by someone named anonymous.
Can you explain why it is important anyone, including you, post under their real name?
Trollkiller said...
"kellymae81 said...
What you need to understand is when someone employed by DHS/TSA flies, we go thru the same screening as anyone else.
Kelly
EoS Blog TeamKelly when was the last time you allowed a PAX to go through to the sterile area with nothing more than a Benny Hill salute?In the second photo I see 3 TSOs going into the sterile area carrying loaded backpacks without so much as a wanding let alone an x-ray of their backpacks."
Trollkiller, why do you need to lie to make you point? The picture you post a link to is TSA employees at work, not TSA employees flying as kellymae81 was talking about.
I think there are many issues you can have a legitimate complaint about regarding TSA. No need for you to make things up, or stretch the facts.
kellymae81 is correct. When TSA employees fly, we go through all the same things any traveler does. Shoes off, computer out, jacket off, etc..
Now if you post a picture of TSA employess flying just breezing past security, then that would be a different point, and kellymae81 would be incorrect. Do you have any of those pictures?
Anonymous writes:
kellymae81 is correct. When TSA employees fly, we go through all the same things any traveler does. Shoes off, computer out, jacket off, etc..
See, this is what doesn't make sense to me. When a TSO is on-duty, they don't have to be screened when entering the sterile area. We're told that this isn't a security problem because TSOs have gone through background checks and are therefore "trusted". But when a TSO is off-duty and approaches the checkpoint as a passenger, they're no longer "trusted" and have to submit to screening like everyone else.
So ... why does TSA trust TSOs when they're on-duty, but not when they're off-duty?
Anonymous said...
Trollkiller said...
"kellymae81 said...
What you need to understand is when someone employed by DHS/TSA flies, we go thru the same screening as anyone else.
Kelly
EoS Blog TeamKelly when was the last time you allowed a PAX to go through to the sterile area with nothing more than a Benny Hill salute?In the second photo I see 3 TSOs going into the sterile area carrying loaded backpacks without so much as a wanding let alone an x-ray of their backpacks."
Trollkiller, why do you need to lie to make you point? The picture you post a link to is TSA employees at work, not TSA employees flying as kellymae81 was talking about.
I think there are many issues you can have a legitimate complaint about regarding TSA. No need for you to make things up, or stretch the facts.
kellymae81 is correct. When TSA employees fly, we go through all the same things any traveler does. Shoes off, computer out, jacket off, etc..
Now if you post a picture of TSA employess flying just breezing past security, then that would be a different point, and kellymae81 would be incorrect. Do you have any of those pictures?
June 3, 2009 4:15 PM
Using this logic people who are not flying should be allowed through the checkpoints at will and without screening since they are not flying!
RB said...
"Anonymous said...
Trollkiller said...
"kellymae81 said...
What you need to understand is when someone employed by DHS/TSA flies, we go thru the same screening as anyone else.
Kelly
EoS Blog TeamKelly when was the last time you allowed a PAX to go through to the sterile area with nothing more than a Benny Hill salute?In the second photo I see 3 TSOs going into the sterile area carrying loaded backpacks without so much as a wanding let alone an x-ray of their backpacks."
Trollkiller, why do you need to lie to make you point? The picture you post a link to is TSA employees at work, not TSA employees flying as kellymae81 was talking about.
I think there are many issues you can have a legitimate complaint about regarding TSA. No need for you to make things up, or stretch the facts.
kellymae81 is correct. When TSA employees fly, we go through all the same things any traveler does. Shoes off, computer out, jacket off, etc..
Now if you post a picture of TSA employess flying just breezing past security, then that would be a different point, and kellymae81 would be incorrect. Do you have any of those pictures?
June 3, 2009 4:15 PM
Using this logic people who are not flying should be allowed through the checkpoints at will and without screening since they are not flying!"
No RB, your incorrect. I simply stated a fact that Trollkiller was misleading people by posting a link to a picture of TSOs who were working, not flying.
Trollkiller implied this was proof kellymae81's comment was not telling the truth. She made a post regarding TSO's who fly. Why did Trollkiller feel he had to lie to disagree with her?
I made no judgement on when, where or how TSO's should or shouldn't be screen. Just pointed out that Trollkiller lied.
And shame on you for feeling the need to defend someone you know lied. You and others here bash TSA all the time for lying. You shouldn't do it yourself.
One last time. I was not applying "logic" on how TSOs or anyone should be screened. Just called "foul" on Trollkiller for not being honest.
Thanks, though.
Jim Huggins said...
"Anonymous writes:
kellymae81 is correct. When TSA employees fly, we go through all the same things any traveler does. Shoes off, computer out, jacket off, etc..
See, this is what doesn't make sense to me. When a TSO is on-duty, they don't have to be screened when entering the sterile area. We're told that this isn't a security problem because TSOs have gone through background checks and are therefore "trusted". But when a TSO is off-duty and approaches the checkpoint as a passenger, they're no longer "trusted" and have to submit to screening like everyone else.
So ... why does TSA trust TSOs when they're on-duty, but not when they're off-duty?"
I wasn't talking about why or if or maybe they should screen TSO's when working. Didn't mention whether that should happen at all.
I did mention facts. As it stands right now, TSOs are not screened while working. Didn't say I agree or disagree with it. Also, when flying, TSOs go through the same security everyone else said. This was what kellymae81 said.
What Trollkiller did was imply that kellymae81 was lying by posting a link to a picture of WORKING TSOs going through the checkpoint without being screened. Which, of course was not what kellymae81 was talking about. But Trollkiller knew what he was doing.
He lied.
"Can you explain why it is important anyone, including you, post under their real name?"
TSA employees, as public servants, should be able to be held acountable for the things they say in that capacity. I disagree with much that Mr. Reed has said, but I give him credit for putting his name and his credibility on the line. If he were to say something outrageous or insulting or offensive while posting in his capacity as a TSA employee, it would be possible to complain to his supervisor. If he were to say something helpful or useful or insightful, it would be possible to send a note of thanks or praise to him or his supervisor. As we have seen on this blog, however, many TSOs who post are not made of as stern stuff as Mr. Reed.
As for non-TSA employees, anonymous critique of the government is a hallowed tradition dating back to this nations earliest days, cf Publius & Brutus!
Using this logic people who are not flying should be allowed through the checkpoints at will and without screening since they are not flying!"
No RB, your incorrect. I simply stated a fact that Trollkiller was misleading people by posting a link to a picture of TSOs who were working, not flying.
..........................
Regardless of what I understood you to say it is a fact that TSA employees when on duty are not screened when they enter the secure area of an airport. Nor are any other of the thousands of people who work at this nations airports screened 100% of the time.
If you or anyone else wants to call this policy "effective security" then I call foul.
Lets just look at the last couple of days with both TSA and other airport employees violating that trust.
TSA is just a bunch of Smoke and Mirrors.
kellymae81 said...
Anon said: Ahh the privileges of being DHS/TSA or related to someone who is, while the rest of us are treated like convicted felons just because we want to exercise our fundamental rights to free movement and free association.What you need to understand is when someone employed by DHS/TSA flies, we go thru the same screening as anyone else. I have been with TSA for 2 1/2 years and nor myself or my co-workers treat people like convicted felons the minute they walk to the checkpoint. I'm not going to deny that certain situations can get out of hand by either a bad apple TSO or an unruly passenger, but we certainly don't treat people unfairly just for stepping through our checkpoints. We are here to ensure the safety of all passengers to the best of our ability, not to treat you poorly. (Again, I understand there are TSOs who overstep their authority) I treat passengers with respect, have light conversation if there is time, laugh with them, help them, answer questions and say "Have a Great Flight!!". I relate to passengers just as I would relate to any other stranger I met on the street. We are just trying to perform our job and keep you safe.
Kelly
EoS Blog Team
May 24, 2009 5:31 PM
......................
Requiring either a Strip Search or a Full Body Pat Down is treating people like felons.
Neither should be needed for a person to exercise their right to travel.
RB said...
"Using this logic people who are not flying should be allowed through the checkpoints at will and without screening since they are not flying!"
No RB, your incorrect. I simply stated a fact that Trollkiller was misleading people by posting a link to a picture of TSOs who were working, not flying.
..........................
Regardless of what I understood you to say it is a fact that TSA employees when on duty are not screened when they enter the secure area of an airport. Nor are any other of the thousands of people who work at this nations airports screened 100% of the time.
If you or anyone else wants to call this policy "effective security" then I call foul.
Lets just look at the last couple of days with both TSA and other airport employees violating that trust.
TSA is just a bunch of Smoke and Mirrors."
No RB you are wrong. It does matter alot regarding what I said about Trollkiller.
I have read many post by you, Trollkiller, and others where you state TSA lies, we hide the truth, etc.
And now Trollkiller does it. You should have called him out on it.
Instead, you go off on something I wasn't even talking about, most likely to divert attention that someone you relate to lies about things. You may or may not have a valid point. But I wasn't talking about that one bit.
Trollkiller should apologize to kellymae81. If he has an I missed the post, I'm sorry.
You should apologize to this blog in general.
How can both of you call TSA liers, basically a worthless organization, yet allow lies that don't seem to bother you go unchallenged? BIG double standard.
Or as I see it, hypocritical.
Foul on you; foul on Trollkiller, I say.
Anonymous said...
Trollkiller, why do you need to lie to make you point? The picture you post a link to is TSA employees at work, not TSA employees flying as kellymae81 was talking about.
I think there are many issues you can have a legitimate complaint about regarding TSA. No need for you to make things up, or stretch the facts.
kellymae81 is correct. When TSA employees fly, we go through all the same things any traveler does. Shoes off, computer out, jacket off, etc..
Now if you post a picture of TSA employees flying just breezing past security, then that would be a different point, and kellymae81 would be incorrect. Do you have any of those pictures?
June 3, 2009 4:15 PM
Sorry I did not see this until now.
Excuse you, I did NOT lie. I stated a fact, that fact is TSOs are entering the sterile area without screenings. I said NOTHING about TSOs flying.
Flying or not flying is not the issue, the law says "No individual may enter a sterile area or board an aircraft without submitting to the screening and inspection of his or her person and accessible property in accordance with the procedures being applied to control access to that area or aircraft under this subchapter."
The law makes no distinction between getting on a plane or entering the sterile area when it comes to screening an individual. To do either you MUST be screened by law.
I am sorry if you don't agree with my tie in but if it makes you feel better you can pretend I responded to this gem that kellymae81 said. (note: I was not being sarcastic by using the word "gem")
"Terrorists are willing to do anything or use anybody to carry out their plan, even their own families. They don't care. So who's to say they won't use grandma or little John John? Well, we can't say, so it is in our best interest to screen all with the same standards to keep everyone as safe as possible. Safe Travels"
kellymae81 gets the fact that letting anyone into the sterile area with out screening to the same standards as everyone else is detrimental to security.
In the future please be very careful calling someone a liar. You can disagree with me and we can still be buds, but I am very careful to try to only state fact. If you find a fault with a fact of mine, and you are correct I will acknowledge the mistake.
Be honest what set you off was the Benny Hill salute... right?
Anonymous said...
"Can you explain why it is important anyone, including you, post under their real name?"
TSA employees, as public servants, should be able to be held acountable for the things they say in that capacity. I disagree with much that Mr. Reed has said, but I give him credit for putting his name and his credibility on the line. If he were to say something outrageous or insulting or offensive while posting in his capacity as a TSA employee, it would be possible to complain to his supervisor. If he were to say something helpful or useful or insightful, it would be possible to send a note of thanks or praise to him or his supervisor. As we have seen on this blog, however, many TSOs who post are not made of as stern stuff as Mr. Reed.
As for non-TSA employees, anonymous critique of the government is a hallowed tradition dating back to this nations earliest days, cf Publius & Brutus!"
Sorry, you are wrong. I am both an employee of TSA, and I am a CITIZEN of this nation. I never post on this blog on my time at work. I do this as a CITIZEN, and I expect you to defend all my rights as a CITIZEN.
While I work, my badge, including full name and badge number, are always clearly displayed. I have never hesitated to hand it out, when asked. I have handed my entire badge over to passenger, when asked.
To suggest that as a public servant I somehow lose the privileges I have as a citizen while not at work is, well, ridiculous. It actually goes against everything this country stands for, in my opinion.
And I find it very odd that you chose to cite Publius and Brutus. TSA did not exsit back then. But the men who chose to write under these assumed names, well, were public servants. You didn't think they were private citizens, did you?
Anonymous said...
Sorry, you are wrong. I am both an employee of TSA, and I am a CITIZEN of this nation. I never post on this blog on my time at work. I do this as a CITIZEN, and I expect you to defend all my rights as a CITIZEN.
If I defend your rights when you are not at work, will you defend my rights while you are at work?
Ok now that I snarked you, I agree there is no reason that you should post using your real name except for the fact that by doing so you would gain credibility.
Of course the risk of doing so, is if you make a mistake you would have exposed yourself to disciplinary actions by your bosses.
All in all I would advise you not to post under your real name but I do ask that you pick a "handle" so we can distinguish you from the tons of Anonymous posters.
You should apologize to this blog in general.
June 5, 2009 8:49 PM
................
Anon, I have nothing to apologize for nor do I have any intention of doing so.
It matters little why a person is in the sterile area of the airport. If a person passes from the unsecured area to the secured area without undergoing screening then they are a security risk.
Current TSA regulations require all who enter the
secure area to submit to screening of themselves and their property.
TSA only conducts 100% screening of airline passengers.
TSA is violating their on directives and in doing so places the flying public at greater risk.
How does effective security allow for an airport worker to carry a weapon into the secure area?
How does effective security allow for the ongoing known problem of thieves targeting checked baggage?
How does effective security allow for an airport worker to have a weapon in their truck while that vehicle is inside of the secure area?
How does effective security allow for a TSA employee to run an Ebay store selling stolen property including a $60,000 commercial video camera?
If anyone needs to apologize it's the whole of TSA for not doing their job and placing the public in unneeded danger.
RB said...
"Anon, I have nothing to apologize for nor do I have any intention of doing so."
I didn't think you would. Your arrogant. You call others out for lying, but when you do it, well, its ok. You have one standard for others, but yours seems to be set lower.
All the more reason for TSA to ignore you and people like you.
Before you ask or demand that TSA should change, maybe you should look in a mirror?
Trollkiller said...
"Anonymous said...
Sorry, you are wrong. I am both an employee of TSA, and I am a CITIZEN of this nation. I never post on this blog on my time at work. I do this as a CITIZEN, and I expect you to defend all my rights as a CITIZEN.
If I defend your rights when you are not at work, will you defend my rights while you are at work?
Ok now that I snarked you, I agree there is no reason that you should post using your real name except for the fact that by doing so you would gain credibility.
Of course the risk of doing so, is if you make a mistake you would have exposed yourself to disciplinary actions by your bosses.
All in all I would advise you not to post under your real name but I do ask that you pick a "handle" so we can distinguish you from the tons of Anonymous posters."
Thanks for saying you will defend my rights! Yes, I will defend your rights. But can we agree what those "rights" are? Even with both of us being honest, what we each define as being our "rights" may differ. Or do you honestly think we might NOT differ on what rights we do and don't have? And once we define what each of us believe are our rights, which set of rights will I defend while at work?
However, I do find it funny you think I might get into trouble for what I might/could post here. I have my work hours, and my time off. Though this is a government site, I come to in on my own time. I am not controlled by TSA as to my opinions. SOP is controlled here (it can't be posted) but I feel no urge to attempt to slip it through somehow. In other words, I am allowed by opinions on this site without fear of any action taken against me at work.
In all honesty, I though what you said was funny, I actually laughed out loud when I read it. I sent a link to my bosses personal email.
However, thank you very much for your concern. Seriously.
Trollkiller said...
"Excuse you, I did NOT lie. I stated a fact, that fact is TSOs are entering the sterile area without screenings. I said NOTHING about TSOs flying."
You certainly did lie. You twisted the truth by posting a picture of working TSO's while kellymae81 was specifically talking about off-duty public TSO's. And you post that picture to try to disprove what kellymae81 said about TSO's travelling following the same rules as the public does. That, my friend, is lying.
As for Benny Hill, he was too funny to die. That shouldn't have happened. And I only wish more people were as funny as he; TSO's included.
To the moderators and TSA management in general:
Why is Trollkiller allowed to post pics of TSA personnel on his site? Was he given permission from TSA to do this? Did he get a release from each TSO in each picture?
If not, why is he not being given a "cease and desist" order?
TSOs - please look at the pics on his site. If you are in any of them, please consider legal action.
TSm, Been here... said...
To the moderators and TSA management in general:
Why is Trollkiller allowed to post pics of TSA personnel on his site? Was he given permission from TSA to do this? Did he get a release from each TSO in each picture?
If not, why is he not being given a "cease and desist" order?
TSOs - please look at the pics on his site. If you are in any of them, please consider legal action.
June 17, 2009 1:33 PM
..........................
Legal action for what reason?
These pictures are taken in a public place.
Pictures in public places are not protected, otherwise you could never take a picture during a parade, at a ball game or for any other reason.
TSm, Been here... said...
To the moderators and TSA management in general:
Why is Trollkiller allowed to post pics of TSA personnel on his site? Was he given permission from TSA to do this? Did he get a release from each TSO in each picture?
If not, why is he not being given a "cease and desist" order?
TSOs - please look at the pics on his site. If you are in any of them, please consider legal action.
To answer your question, no the TSA did not give me permission, no I did not get a release or any other type of permission from the TSOs nor did I get any releases or permission from any of the general public captured in that image.
I welcome any legal action the TSA feels they can toss my way and any legal action individual TSOs feel they can toss my way.
To any non-TSOs captured in the photo, just contact me on my blog and prove you are in fact pictured and I will be happy to blur your face. Click my name to see the photo.
Oh and to answer your question on why I am allowed to post pics of TSOs, it is called The First Amendment, you would do well to look it up.
Trollkiller said...
TSm, Been here... said...
To the moderators and TSA management in general:
Why is Trollkiller allowed to post pics of TSA personnel on his site? Was he given permission from TSA to do this? Did he get a release from each TSO in each picture?
If not, why is he not being given a "cease and desist" order?
TSOs - please look at the pics on his site. If you are in any of them, please consider legal action.
To answer your question, no the TSA did not give me permission, no I did not get a release or any other type of permission from the TSOs nor did I get any releases or permission from any of the general public captured in that image.
I welcome any legal action the TSA feels they can toss my way and any legal action individual TSOs feel they can toss my way.
To any non-TSOs captured in the photo, just contact me on my blog and prove you are in fact pictured and I will be happy to blur your face. Click my name to see the photo.
Oh and to answer your question on why I am allowed to post pics of TSOs, it is called The First Amendment, you would do well to look it up.
June 18, 2009 9:05 PM
...........................
TK, it seems to me that you may have just been handed the golden egg by Tsm, been here.
This person is conspiring and inciting other government employees to illegally harass your exercise of Constitutional rights.
I see his words as no less than a threat to cause you harm.
The blog team allowed these threatening remarks and bear equal responsibility.
I suggest a 30 minute conference with a lawyer.
"TSA has gone to great lengths to respect the privacy that the flying public deserves. We have made sure that WBI images aren’t able to be saved. We have made sure the faces are blurred. We strictly forbid any cell phones or cameras in the room where the officer monitors the images. There is no chance of anybody matching you to an image from the WBI. The image is automatically deleted."
Now that CAN change in a fragment of a second
I would like to say that TSA does NEGLECT to let passengers know that this as of now is OPTIONAL. They tried to force me to go through...but thank God I read the small sign. People need to know your rights or else you will have none! What about those people who are easily distinguishable? such as basket ball players over 6 feet 6?? This is a complete invasion of privacy, and not to mention a health hazard. You might argue that it is a small amount of radiation, even IF this is the case, why would TSA subject human beings to more radiation which is a FACT is harmful. This technology should not be in airports, but since it is in airports should be completely optional ALWAYS. I should also mention that this is a human rights violation.
You say "whole body imagers can have an opt out, in lieu we can simply have a full pat down search!" Does this make sense to anyone? I thought the whole point was to reveal hidden contraband in body cavities which obviously the pat down search would reveal nothing. Don't believe it and just ask any prisoner in a max security penitentiary how they would smuggle stuff -- all would probably reply "Keister it" meaning they would put it in their behind. Okay as unpleasant a subject we are dealing with National Security issues not romper room, which any terrorist would now just be able to keister their explosives even plastic-made weapons including guns of hard plastic.
Let's seriously re-think the doing away with mandatory WBI !!!
Can I tell you my favorite Matt Dillon story real briefly?
Mike Walker
This system directly violates our 4th Amendment rights "Unreasonable Search and Seizure". I'm guessing that a class action law suit is being developed somewhere on this one... Oh, by the way... What ever happened to our right to privacy?
I have a few questions. One is, it says on the TSA site that these images are not saved and cannot be viewed later, however, there are 'copies' of these images on the site so you can supposedly "see" what the inspectors see. How is that possible? Also, I read somewhere that the genetalia were blurred out. How does it know when to blur? And lastly, if we have the 'option' to 'opt out' and everyone opts out, then what good is it?
I want to mention that I found this site accidently, and when attempting to post an anonymous question, I noticed at the bottom (so I left it there) my NAME and EMAIL ADDY. This made me go "hmmmm", but since I have nothing to hide, I continued to post...
Jennie said... I have a few questions. One is, it says on the TSA site that these images are not saved and cannot be viewed later, however, there are 'copies' of these images on the site so you can supposedly "see" what the inspectors see. How is that possible? Also, I read somewhere that the genetalia were blurred out. How does it know when to blur? And lastly, if we have the 'option' to 'opt out' and everyone opts out, then what good is it? I want to mention that I found this site accidently, and when attempting to post an anonymous question, I noticed at the bottom (so I left it there) my NAME and EMAIL ADDY. This made me go "hmmmm", but since I have nothing to hide, I continued to post... March 9, 2010 5:57 PM
---------------------------
Hi Jennie. The images you are seeing are either samples from the vendor, or they are shots from press events with willing models.
Genitals are not blurred out. Faces are blurred for privacy. This is an algorithm that was designed by the manufacturers.
Even if you choose to opt out, you still receive a full body pat down. It's a sound security measure, but it takes much longer than the imaging technology.
I'm not sure what happened when you posted here, but we have always allowed anonymous comments. Look around our blog and you'll see plenty of them.
Thanks,
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
This is a total stinker that the UK Government is now trying to implement over here as it always follows American ideas like this. Even getting entry into the USA is tough because of the posturing of the idiots at TSA who really would be better employed flipping burgers at McDonalds. I think the real reason for it is that its yet more money for yet another corporation.
Bob,
You seem like a reasonable guy, so perhaps you can help me with this. My 17 year old daughter is going on an education trip to France in June. She’s very upset that at various airports in the US and possibly France, she will have a choice of either a nude image (face blur aside) or a pat down. Teenage girls are especially sensitive to this kind of thing. Neither option sounds very appealing. At this point, she thinks she’d prefer the pat down, but is concerned about stories of people being harassed by screeners or other passengers for not just going along.
I found your blog looking up the rules, assuming that there would be something exempting children. I understand that the images aren’t stored, and that the screener is not in the immediate area, but, you have to admit for a young woman, it’s just creepy. It will be very sad indeed if our young people just decide to stay home.
SB
No one is ever allowed to touch my child but myself and their doctor. Ever!
Trish Wimmer
Bob et. al.,
Seen many comments referring to what ACTUALLY happens at a screening point. Here's one I saw repeated several times. TSA employees (coming to work?), going past the screening by using the exit and being allowed by the TSA standing there to prevent a passenger from doing so. Their comment to this when I asked was that TSA agents have security classifications.
You know, when the U.S. Government was blacklisting "communists" or sending Japanese Americans to concentration camps, that was said to be in the name of national security too.
Bob,
I understand that there are a lot of people on this site using some pretty inflammatory language, but I find your response to it all shocking. We have not gotten a very clear answers about all this and your response suggests to me that the TSA does not care about people's concerns regarding some of our most basic and fundamental rights.
These are very serious and legitimate concerns that I have yet to see a clear answer about. My pregnant wife will be traveling tomorrow with my 4 year old daughter and we are trying to decide what to do. I know we can opt out of the screening machines, but instead have to be subjected to a just a humiliating and invasive pat down. Just because images are not saved and screens are in a separate room does not mean that some of our most prized rights and protections are being violated, or at least very closed to violated.
I do not understand the whole premise that because we can chose a machine or pat down, or chose to not fly, that somehow makes a violation of our rights acceptable.
Can you comment on the legal considerations that were made prior to implementing this technology?
Can we choose to strip down instead of being patted down? Seriously, I would rather show up naked in front of people than be touched by one.
Can't we be given more choices?
"Children are allowed to be screened by the WBI if they’re able to stand motionless with their arms outstretched and feet shoulder width apart for 5 seconds. (If your child is like my 4 year old, they can’t stand still for a single second unless they’re watching that yellow sponge guy who shares my name)"
So you're basically saying your policy is to pat down children under 4 since they can't be radiated?
We're driving next year. Forget this.
Isn't this actually a way for the TSA to hide its incompetence and ineffectiveness a little more? Its employees cannot stop a trained, determined person from getting explosives or weapons onto a plane, so it wants the public to think that it is actually being more thorough, when in fact, it is as inept as it ever was.
Unlike most of the others commenting here, I am very grateful for what TSA is doing. My families security is worth the inconvience 100 fold. It is quite obvious here that the negative comments are coming from spoiled Americans who have never experienced a terrorist act or a serious act of violence. How quickly we forget Pearl Harbor or 9-11?? Unfortunely, we as a nation will have to experience something of that magnatude again in order to get everyones attention. Keep up the good work TSA in keeping us safe. There are some of us who actually appreciate what you do.
Please have someone random(i.e. off the street) tell me what is right and what is not. I have no sympathy for strip searches.
Why don't the TSA offer a frequent flier / pre-screen option to whisk through security checkpoints? I don't mind giving you my name, SSN, address, phone number, blood type, etc BEFORE my trip so that you can pre-screen me. When I show up to travel, just have a line for those who have already been pre-screened and subject me to a level one security check.
Post a Comment