TSA to ramp up its harassment of Americans
Sep 16, 2004, 10:07 pm
#1
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
TSA to ramp up its harassment of Americans
Looks like TakeScissorsAway was right: The Terrorism Success Agency has announced new procedures calling for everyone to remove their jackets, blazers, etc. and subject them to the xray machine, as well as "discretionary" patdowns.
http://www.tsa.gov/public/display?th...000519800cdb11
Is there any other US government agency so hellbent on acting as un-American as this one?
What a disgrace.
One thing surprises me about the announcement, however. Prior to last week's loss in the Gilmore case, wouldn't the TSA brand this press release as SSI and refuse to admit that the procedures had changed?
TSA Increases Level Of Electronic And Manual Explosives Searches At U.S. Airports
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Transportation Security Administration
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - September 16, 2004
TSA Press Office: (571) 227-2829
New policy adds trace detectors to passenger search routine and expands use of physical pat-downs
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) today announced new passenger screening procedures that will increase the use of explosives trace detectors, expand the use of manual pat-down searches, and give screeners more latitude to refer individuals to secondary screening. This move is in line with our commitment to constantly review screening procedures to ensure our measures are targeted to counter potential threats.
The enhancements are designed to strengthen checkpoint screening of passengers and carry-on baggage and are in line with a recent recommendation of the 9/11 Commission Report that all passengers selected for secondary screening be checked for explosives. Passengers must continue to go through metal detectors and put their carry-on items through the X-ray; the extra measures will be applied to those persons referred to secondary screening.
Beginning next week, the new protocol will also require all passengers to remove outer coats and jackets for X-ray before proceeding through the metal detectors. Included are suit and sport coats, athletic warm-up jackets and blazers.
The new measures authorize pat-down searches of passengers if warranted, based on visual observations. These limited searches will be conducted as part of the secondary screening process.
“These procedures are consistent with TSA efforts to improve and expand the use of technology to screen passengers for explosives at airport checkpoints across the country,” said Rear Adm. David M. Stone, USN (Ret.), the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for TSA.
Since December 31, 2002, 100 percent of baggage checked at the nation’s 450 commercial airports has been screened for explosives and other harmful materials before being loaded onto a plane.
Working with airlines and aviation authorities, TSA is testing and evaluating new technologies including portals and document scanners that will detect traces of explosive particles on passengers.
Currently, five airports are testing the portals at passenger security checkpoints. This technology subjects passengers to puffs of air, which are collected and analyzed to determine if explosives residues are present. The pilot programs will help determine whether the trace detection technology is appropriate for use within an airport environment.
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Transportation Security Administration
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - September 16, 2004
TSA Press Office: (571) 227-2829
New policy adds trace detectors to passenger search routine and expands use of physical pat-downs
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) today announced new passenger screening procedures that will increase the use of explosives trace detectors, expand the use of manual pat-down searches, and give screeners more latitude to refer individuals to secondary screening. This move is in line with our commitment to constantly review screening procedures to ensure our measures are targeted to counter potential threats.
The enhancements are designed to strengthen checkpoint screening of passengers and carry-on baggage and are in line with a recent recommendation of the 9/11 Commission Report that all passengers selected for secondary screening be checked for explosives. Passengers must continue to go through metal detectors and put their carry-on items through the X-ray; the extra measures will be applied to those persons referred to secondary screening.
Beginning next week, the new protocol will also require all passengers to remove outer coats and jackets for X-ray before proceeding through the metal detectors. Included are suit and sport coats, athletic warm-up jackets and blazers.
The new measures authorize pat-down searches of passengers if warranted, based on visual observations. These limited searches will be conducted as part of the secondary screening process.
“These procedures are consistent with TSA efforts to improve and expand the use of technology to screen passengers for explosives at airport checkpoints across the country,” said Rear Adm. David M. Stone, USN (Ret.), the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for TSA.
Since December 31, 2002, 100 percent of baggage checked at the nation’s 450 commercial airports has been screened for explosives and other harmful materials before being loaded onto a plane.
Working with airlines and aviation authorities, TSA is testing and evaluating new technologies including portals and document scanners that will detect traces of explosive particles on passengers.
Currently, five airports are testing the portals at passenger security checkpoints. This technology subjects passengers to puffs of air, which are collected and analyzed to determine if explosives residues are present. The pilot programs will help determine whether the trace detection technology is appropriate for use within an airport environment.
Is there any other US government agency so hellbent on acting as un-American as this one?
What a disgrace.
One thing surprises me about the announcement, however. Prior to last week's loss in the Gilmore case, wouldn't the TSA brand this press release as SSI and refuse to admit that the procedures had changed?
Sep 16, 2004, 11:41 pm
#2
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: IAD
Programs: *wood Gold
Posts: 1,781
OK,
So what happens if I have the gull to refuse to remove my jacket and place it through the XRay? Are there other alternatives if I opt for this? Can I request a secondary screening instead?
It's not necessarily that I would refuse to remove my jacket when flying-- it's just that I'm curious to find out what would happen. Would the TSA refuse to let me through the CP at all, or would there be other procedures in place (like secondary screening) that would then "kick in" for that passenger?
There are also other concerns that I have. I don't like the thought of a TSA agent just reaching out and touching me without warning-- even if it is on the wrist or on some other "non sensitive" area. Will they still have to ask my permission (or at least inform me of what they are about to do) prior to touching me? If not, then I hope that policy changes.
And what about these environmental scanners that are being tested at 5 airports? Do we know if there are any possible harmful side effects of going through this? I understand that it just "blows puffs of air" on people (as described), but I honestly think that the scanners need to do more than this. If it's not known for certain that there are no harmful side effects, are people being informed of this prior to being subjected to this?
As some may recall, I'm one who is generally not in favor of the TSA. While some of my experiences with agents have been good (most of my flights out of IAD have been great), others have been unprofessional and horrid. Even though I've probably had more good experiences than bad (as of late), the bad ones still tend to stand out the most and still leave me unimpressed with some of the folks that work for the TSA.
So what happens if I have the gull to refuse to remove my jacket and place it through the XRay? Are there other alternatives if I opt for this? Can I request a secondary screening instead?
It's not necessarily that I would refuse to remove my jacket when flying-- it's just that I'm curious to find out what would happen. Would the TSA refuse to let me through the CP at all, or would there be other procedures in place (like secondary screening) that would then "kick in" for that passenger?
There are also other concerns that I have. I don't like the thought of a TSA agent just reaching out and touching me without warning-- even if it is on the wrist or on some other "non sensitive" area. Will they still have to ask my permission (or at least inform me of what they are about to do) prior to touching me? If not, then I hope that policy changes.
And what about these environmental scanners that are being tested at 5 airports? Do we know if there are any possible harmful side effects of going through this? I understand that it just "blows puffs of air" on people (as described), but I honestly think that the scanners need to do more than this. If it's not known for certain that there are no harmful side effects, are people being informed of this prior to being subjected to this?
As some may recall, I'm one who is generally not in favor of the TSA. While some of my experiences with agents have been good (most of my flights out of IAD have been great), others have been unprofessional and horrid. Even though I've probably had more good experiences than bad (as of late), the bad ones still tend to stand out the most and still leave me unimpressed with some of the folks that work for the TSA.
Sep 17, 2004, 1:04 am
#3
Join Date: May 2002
Location: In the home of the "brave"?
Programs: Whatever will get me out of Y and into C or F!
Posts: 3,748
“These procedures are consistent with TSA efforts to improve and expand the use of technology to screen passengers for explosives at airport checkpoints across the country,” said Rear Adm. David M. Stone, USN (Ret.), the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for TSA.
Why does he insist on listing his title at a previous job in this Press Release? Why should I give a rat's ... what he was in some previous career? I'm not trying to disrespect someone's military service/career, but you don't see me going around calling myself "Independent Snow-Remover HeHateY (Ret.), a poster on FT"
Unless he's trying to intimidate someone...?
Sep 17, 2004, 8:39 am
#4
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Colorado
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,745
Harassment?
Originally Posted by FWAAA
Looks like TakeScissorsAway was right: The Terrorism Success Agency has announced new procedures calling for everyone to remove their jackets, blazers, etc. and subject them to the xray machine, as well as "discretionary" patdowns.
http://www.tsa.gov/public/display?th...000519800cdb11
Is there any other US government agency so hellbent on acting as un-American as this one?
What a disgrace.
One thing surprises me about the announcement, however. Prior to last week's loss in the Gilmore case, wouldn't the TSA brand this press release as SSI and refuse to admit that the procedures had changed?
http://www.tsa.gov/public/display?th...000519800cdb11
Is there any other US government agency so hellbent on acting as un-American as this one?
What a disgrace.
One thing surprises me about the announcement, however. Prior to last week's loss in the Gilmore case, wouldn't the TSA brand this press release as SSI and refuse to admit that the procedures had changed?
Sep 17, 2004, 8:45 am
#5
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Colorado
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,745
You are going to secondary screening
Originally Posted by clrankin
OK,
So what happens if I have the gull to refuse to remove my jacket and place it through the XRay? Are there other alternatives if I opt for this? Can I request a secondary screening instead?
It's not necessarily that I would refuse to remove my jacket when flying-- it's just that I'm curious to find out what would happen. Would the TSA refuse to let me through the CP at all, or would there be other procedures in place (like secondary screening) that would then "kick in" for that passenger?
There are also other concerns that I have. I don't like the thought of a TSA agent just reaching out and touching me without warning-- even if it is on the wrist or on some other "non sensitive" area. Will they still have to ask my permission (or at least inform me of what they are about to do) prior to touching me? If not, then I hope that policy changes.
And what about these environmental scanners that are being tested at 5 airports? Do we know if there are any possible harmful side effects of going through this? I understand that it just "blows puffs of air" on people (as described), but I honestly think that the scanners need to do more than this. If it's not known for certain that there are no harmful side effects, are people being informed of this prior to being subjected to this?
As some may recall, I'm one who is generally not in favor of the TSA. While some of my experiences with agents have been good (most of my flights out of IAD have been great), others have been unprofessional and horrid. Even though I've probably had more good experiences than bad (as of late), the bad ones still tend to stand out the most and still leave me unimpressed with some of the folks that work for the TSA.
So what happens if I have the gull to refuse to remove my jacket and place it through the XRay? Are there other alternatives if I opt for this? Can I request a secondary screening instead?
It's not necessarily that I would refuse to remove my jacket when flying-- it's just that I'm curious to find out what would happen. Would the TSA refuse to let me through the CP at all, or would there be other procedures in place (like secondary screening) that would then "kick in" for that passenger?
There are also other concerns that I have. I don't like the thought of a TSA agent just reaching out and touching me without warning-- even if it is on the wrist or on some other "non sensitive" area. Will they still have to ask my permission (or at least inform me of what they are about to do) prior to touching me? If not, then I hope that policy changes.
And what about these environmental scanners that are being tested at 5 airports? Do we know if there are any possible harmful side effects of going through this? I understand that it just "blows puffs of air" on people (as described), but I honestly think that the scanners need to do more than this. If it's not known for certain that there are no harmful side effects, are people being informed of this prior to being subjected to this?
As some may recall, I'm one who is generally not in favor of the TSA. While some of my experiences with agents have been good (most of my flights out of IAD have been great), others have been unprofessional and horrid. Even though I've probably had more good experiences than bad (as of late), the bad ones still tend to stand out the most and still leave me unimpressed with some of the folks that work for the TSA.
As far as the scanners go, I would be curious to know what the cost is. I believe they are cost prohibitive at this point. The airport that I work at has 26 lanes and those machines would be very expensive to put in all at once. The GE Entry scan is the one that I think you are talking about and no there is no side effects. However there is a machine out there that is equal to a walkthrough X-Ray and that one may have effects other than the fact that the ACLU has a big problem with it.
As far as touching you goes, We dont have to ask permission. You gave up that right when you went into the CP. There is a sign there that says "All persons and their luggage are subject to search." So the permission is implied. We will however tell you that we are going to be touching you. Pay attention though. The sentence is very short and it is added on to the initial advisal for handwanding.
Last edited by eyecue; Sep 17, 2004 at 8:52 am Reason: add something
Sep 17, 2004, 8:48 am
#6
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Colorado
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,745
TSA lost? re: Gilmore v Ashcroft?
Originally Posted by FWAAA
Looks like TakeScissorsAway was right: The Terrorism Success Agency has announced new procedures calling for everyone to remove their jackets, blazers, etc. and subject them to the xray machine, as well as "discretionary" patdowns.
http://www.tsa.gov/public/display?th...000519800cdb11
Is there any other US government agency so hellbent on acting as un-American as this one?
What a disgrace.
One thing surprises me about the announcement, however. Prior to last week's loss in the Gilmore case, wouldn't the TSA brand this press release as SSI and refuse to admit that the procedures had changed?
http://www.tsa.gov/public/display?th...000519800cdb11
Is there any other US government agency so hellbent on acting as un-American as this one?
What a disgrace.
One thing surprises me about the announcement, however. Prior to last week's loss in the Gilmore case, wouldn't the TSA brand this press release as SSI and refuse to admit that the procedures had changed?
Sep 17, 2004, 8:48 am
#7
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: GVA (Greater Vancouver Area)
Programs: DREAD Gold; UA 1.035MM; Bonvoy Au-197; PCC Elite+; CCC Elite+; MSC C-12; CWC Au-197; WoH Dis
Posts: 52,140
Originally Posted by FWAAA
Is there any other US government agency so hellbent on acting as un-American as this one?
Sep 17, 2004, 8:55 am
#8
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Colorado
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,745
I can tell
Originally Posted by HeHateY
Why does he insist on listing his title at a previous job in this Press Release? Why should I give a rat's ... what he was in some previous career? I'm not trying to disrespect someone's military service/career, but you don't see me going around calling myself "Independent Snow-Remover HeHateY (Ret.), a poster on FT"
Unless he's trying to intimidate someone...?
Unless he's trying to intimidate someone...?
Sep 17, 2004, 9:11 am
#9
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,165
Originally Posted by HeHateY
Why does he insist on listing his title at a previous job in this Press Release? Why should I give a rat's ... what he was in some previous career? I'm not trying to disrespect someone's military service/career, but you don't see me going around calling myself "Independent Snow-Remover HeHateY (Ret.), a poster on FT"
Unless he's trying to intimidate someone...?
Unless he's trying to intimidate someone...?
and you comply with grooming standards) at official military functions and officiate at promotions, retirements, medal presentations, and commissioning ceremonies. If you get out without retiring (as both Kerry and Bush did, by the way) you resign your commission and you don't retain the rank. That's the legal basis for Stone using his retired rank.The other side of the coin is ego. The vast majority of retired officers of all ranks and services choose not to use their rank publically. I know plenty of retired generals who don't. You hardly ever hear Colin Powell addressed as "General" -- he's probably the most prominent retired officer in government these days. If Stone REALLY wanted to low-key his retired status, he could very easily do it.
Sep 17, 2004, 9:21 am
#11
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by FWAAA
Looks like TakeScissorsAway was right: The Terrorism Success Agency has announced new procedures calling for everyone to remove their jackets, blazers, etc. and subject them to the xray machine, as well as "discretionary" patdowns.
Is there any other US government agency so hellbent on acting as un-American as this one?
What a disgrace.
Is there any other US government agency so hellbent on acting as un-American as this one?
What a disgrace.
I hate that as much as I hate it when the other side uses "traitor" in debate. Neither is true and neither helps, it only incites.
Sep 17, 2004, 9:24 am
#12
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,165
Originally Posted by Bart
Not to get off on a tangent (my, my! does that happen in here?) but when all this talk of recalling retired officers back to active duty was going around, I thought I'd pull the old duffelbag out of the attic to see if the old uniform still fit.
I have great news!
The socks fit perfectly!
I have great news!
The socks fit perfectly!
I actually wore my dress uniform about a year ago (retired in Oct 98) to pin on an active duty guy I worked with. I fit into it pretty well, although I was glad to take it off an hour or two later! I got lots of odd looks because I was wearing the old USAF dress uniform. One aspect I didn't mention above is that you can either wear the current uniform or the one that was current when you retired.
Now that I think about it, probably the largest group who wears their uniforms in a retired status are JROTC instructors.
Sep 17, 2004, 9:59 am
#14
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
Originally Posted by eyecue
I didnt interpret that as a loss. Change of venue yes. Loss no.
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...ia/9655267.htm
Granted, Gilmore will have no more victories in this case, but this one was sweet
Refusing to confirm the existence of the security directive that requires ID because its release would harm national security? People who believe that should be flogged. This is the United States of America.
Sep 17, 2004, 10:01 am
#15
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
Originally Posted by law dawg
Man, gotta love this level of substantive debate. If all else fails call them un-American.
I hate that as much as I hate it when the other side uses "traitor" in debate. Neither is true and neither helps, it only incites.
I hate that as much as I hate it when the other side uses "traitor" in debate. Neither is true and neither helps, it only incites.
I call 'em as I see 'em, and this agency is un-American. You're free to disagree. Like I said, I couldn't care less what you think. I'm sure the feeling is mutual. Have a nice day.