Wha? When did I get promoted? You must have me confused with TSM West on the TSA Blog. I am simply a BDO, and a blog team member - not a manager. As a BDO, I have minimal impact on things but still make commentary and recommend things to co-workers. (Does this mean I don't get the corresponding pay increase that goes with being a TSM?)

I didn't say that, I said that I understand how they reached the decision with the information I have been given. I am on the fence as to whether the inconsistencies are worth all the bad relations it can cause with passengers. I should also point out that I am not given all the informaiton they use to make these policy decisions, so I am merely stating opinions of my own.

Those folks will profit regardless, there will be softwaqre upgrades and such that will have to be approved and rights that have to be given to the code writers, and that all has to be paid for somehow.

There have been some releases on both sides, granted there have been more that indicate there are problems, but the governmental groups in charge of rating and testing have written off on them, so I take that at face value.

Ok.

I have been on unannounced inspections of trusted shippers with one of our Inspectors (as part of a familiarization program we have here), and the ones I have seen run a pretty tight ship. All of the protocols were covered and most of them exceed the protocols at their own dime.

I forward many thoughts to the senior blog team members and to my own management here all the time. I would like to think I have more impact than simply getting co-workers to be more polite and follow SOP, but I am not certain.

I see it differently, the main issue with Negrin was his inability to address a problem situation in the correct manner. We all have a pretty good idea of what the imagery from AIT looks like (based on the video footage and published imagery I have seen). The issue was (for me) a TSO failed to address co-workers being unprofessional in the first place, and then failed to follow up with management (and further up if it was not resolved) to end it properly. We agree that one of the issues was the unprofessional behavior of his co-workers.

Or a set of 13 inch steel knitting needles? I give you that there are things that could be considered more of a threat than others, but again, I do not make policy. We will never agree on all the things that should be or should not be on the list of prohibs (I am pretty certain that the folks in HQ argue over it everytime something new is added or something is removed).

I am actually good with disagreeing on some things, how fun would this planet be if we were all "Stepford wives"?

I will give you some of the items on the list are not a "really effective threat" based on the confines of most aircraft, but I don't make that list. I send recommendations up the chain when I see something that I consider ineffective or not in good sense, but I am still a frontender.

I do not see the patdown (as it is in the SOP) as sexual assault. It is simply a method used to clear the person - big difference in my mind. So to answer your question, I do not have a problem with my family members (male or female) undergoing screening because it is not sexual assault.

Anyone ever touching someone's genitals, breasts, or anuses without being explicitly informed is sexual assault. I can only consent to what I am properly informed of. I actually had a TSO state to me this morning during my Grape™ that he did not know where my testicles were so he could not definitively state whether he would touch them or not. :rolleyes:

TSA just needs to do the right thing, drop this phoney baloney SSI business and properly inform people so they can give proper consent.

You got that right! ^

And it would be worn down to a nub in the two hours of uninterrupted whacking it might require to make a dent in the reinforced cockpit door. As if the other pax were going to allow the bad guy an uninterrupted hour. Or the pilot was going to continue to fly straight and level and not knock the bad guy around with a few fun swoops. "OK, everybody. Buckle up, and get ready to scrape the bad guy off the ceiling in ten seconds when we go negative G!! Then I'll fly nice and level for ten minutes while you pulp him up a bit."

Thank you for clarifying.

According to a number of LEOs and military personnel, the pat-down procedure currently in use by the TSA is more intrusive than anything they're allowed to do in the normal course of their own operations.

Why are American travelers put under greater scrutiny than suspected enemy combatants in the field?

And why do you not consider cupping someone's testicles and "rolling them around" a sexual assault when it's plain that such a procedure goes well above and beyond a required search?

Any unwanted sexual conduct is sexual assault. When you do not know what will happen until it happens you can't give consent.

The fact that you are coerced into the sexual assault by not being able to leave the screening process without a 10k fine is what seals the deal.

Further, the fact that several organizations that deal with individuals, both male and female, who have been sexually assaulted/abused are in formal talks with the TSA about these kinds of pat downs says they are sexually assaultive.

I wonder what gsoltso's wife/child/grandchild has to say about being screened at the airport. It's arrogant/eogtistic/patronizing of him to say that he doesn't mind his "family" being screened - let's hear it from them directly.

I got a better one:

I had to check my pool cue. Not only would I be unable to assemble it in the confines of an aircraft -- it would break in half if you looked at it funny. Maybe the drawing of the "pool shark" at the base of the shaft was too menacing?

SR

In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable—what then?

SR

(Orwell. 1984)

West, I respect you, but you're dead wrong here.

Negrin's co-workers, who are supposed to be "open, respectful, and dedicated to making others better", are peppering this man with verbal sexual abuse, and the issue is that Negrin didn't respond appropriately? If his co-workers aren't teasing him about the size of his attributes, none of the rest of the incident ever happens. We shouldn't blame the victim.

(And, yes, Negrin's response was inappropriate. But he was provoked.)

Bottom Line: The purpose of TSA/DHS is not to protect us from another terrorist attack. The purpose of TSA/DHS is control over the entire (not just the flying) population. You only need to look at recent events for confirmation.

But that is the issue for Negrin and he will be judged and, if found guilty, penalized for his crime.

However, what people on this forum want to know is how Bob could state on the TSA blog the images from the scanners are ready for the cover of Reader's Digest and to be handed out at your local preschool.

You tried to deflect Bob's false claim by saying that Bob may have not had the correct info at the time (although why anyone would claim to know if an image is innocuous or not without seeing it first is beyond me). So, I asked you to provide a link to Bob's mea culpa saying that he was wrong in his characterization of the images and you either didn't see it or ignored it or can't find any such contrition from Bob and decided to remain silent.

I don't know of a single person that would ever be pleased with a government actor, stranger or teacher handing out WBI scans that show male genitalia.

Therefore, regarding Bob's statement that the WBI images are ready for the kindergarten set, he is either a liar or too blinded by his pride to admit that he was flat out wrong.

Neither of those is a plus for someone representing the TSA.

Far as I'm concerned, any smurf that puts an underaged passenger in a Nude-O-Scope should be arrested for manufacturing child pornography and prosecuted. Let Pissy and JJ2 argue in federal court that making child porn is within the scope of duties of a federal employee. That should upset a lot of apple carts.

Negrin's co-workers only gained the knowledge about the size of Negrin's genitalia because the Strip Search Machine displays detailed images of a persons naked body.

How else could they have known these things?

Negrin did act incorrectly but I hardly would hold him accountable since TSA placed him in a situation out of his control. TSA knew what the Strip Search Machines are capable of and did not provide the required management oversight to control any such situations.

No one should have stand by and let others assault them, physically or verbally, and in this case I would only hold the TSA employees who instigated this assault accountable.

deleted, someone trying to be funny using my account

SR

When I worked as an MP (in a previous lifetime) the pat down I did when arresting someone was MUCH more invasive. When you place someone in custody it is (or at least it was) considered a safety issue to put someone under your control into an LEO car without ascertaining whether they have anything on them that could harm you or themselves or anyone else - but that is another discussion.

I can not speak for what types of searches our military currently uses in a field enviornment, I haven't had that training class in a lo-o-ong time.

I can't tell you the specific steps of the patdown, but what you state here is not the current procedure.


How is answering a direct question to me egotistical/arrogant/patronizing when I simply gave my opinion?

Ummm..... yeah.

I agree with you that the coworkeres were the initial wrong in this situation - there is no way this should have occurred at a professional workplace. However, if speaking to them did not alleviate the problem, then he should have gone to the next step to stop it. If I have a problem at work, the first thing I do is tell the person that I have a problem with (and 95% of the time that solves the problem). If that does not resolve it, I go to the next step in the chain until I resolve the situation. This is not a case of putting the responsibility for the initial situation on Negrin, that lies with the coworkers and it should be addressed properly. However, just because you are offended by what someone is saying to you, does not give you the right to take a bat to them regardless of what they are saying. I don't want you to think I am blaming Negrin for the ribbing and abuse he took, only for his actions at the end of the situation.

See my quote from Orwell's 1984 above. All you have to do to make something legal is for someone with enough power to say that it is so.

All you have to do to prove the enhanced patdown is not sexual molestation is to say that it is not.

All you have to do to prove that a backscatter image of a child is not child porn is to say that it is not.

If you have enough power whether you are able to force it upon the people or they allow their minds to be controlled anything that you say can be true; anything that you do can be legal.

SR