Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.2.1; en-us; SCH-I500 Build/FROYO) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

Drop the rhetoric and you do make some valid points. My own personal, unofficial, in-no-way-representative-of-official-TSA-policy, opinion is that ATR was always part of the plan; it just wasn't ready when the AITs were deployed.

My observations yesterday at DFW and later at FLL help understand why TSA employees are feeling backlash from the public. In recent discussion here a TSA poster mentioned that checked baggage screeners wear a polo shirt without metal badge. I found that educational. I was taking the bus to the rental care center at FLL yesterday afternoon and a TSA emplyee was on the same bus. Polo shirt and embroidery TSA Badge. So I would think this person screened baggage and not people. I take from that TSA's intent is to have the police style uniform at the passenger screening checkpoints to subjugate citizens and for no other reason.

At DFW yesterday morning, 6:20 am, the C27 TSA checkpoint, was so backed up that the mass of people ran well back into the ticketing area. One 3 striper on the radio calling for I assume to be backup and a 2 striper trying to get people to go to the C21 checkpoint to lower the load. I take from this that TSA cannot effectively operate a checkpoint even on a day when passenger loads are light. Also the 3 and 2 striper could have been helping screen but they were not. Incompetence or what?

Oh, OK. You are taking money to supervise people who themselves are paid to rub other people's genitals. Isn't there a name for that. And I don't think it's short for Person In Management Position

I've long suspected the federal courts were dragging their heels on this issue until an alternative to AIT became available, then conveniently pronounce the strip search aspect of AIT illegal, or simply ignore the issue altogether since it becomes moot.

It is clear that the visceral and strong rejection of AIT and the gropings were not entirely in the plan. Napolitano clearly thought people had accepted them back in December. If no one objected, I believe we'd have these forever. I agree with your opinion that ATR was in the works, although probably as a fall back.

A little late to the thread here, but I wanted to go back and address this further. It appears that in your rush to type this one out, you forgot about not using absolutes when making general statements.

Based on what you have written, if the TSA person were to start punching me, I should be placed on the permanent retalitory SSSS list for defending myself? What about the TSA agent that is involved in a fight outside and away from the airport? Should the other participant be on the permanent retalitory SSSS list? What if the assault is from another TSA agent?

I do agree with the general principle though, violence should not be used against anyone, unless it can not be avoided. If someone assaults me, and I see no way to escape the situation without sustaining further assault, I will be forced to defend myself.

At a minimum, if they "karate chop" my groin, they would have gone past my "resistance" - although, it would probably also mean me falling to the floor, rolling around with both hands on my crotch, moaning in pain. Whether I fell on the agent providing the assault would be a different story. But, I suppose, falling on them would put me on the permanent "karate chop" list, right?

-- Mientree

p.s. If the screener refuses to define "resistance", when they start up the inside of my thigh and I tell them to stop or just knock their hand away - isn't that "resistance" and they should start on the other side? (Where the same resistance would be met.)

Take it easy on poor Bart. You can catch more flies with honey or something like that. Just don't take the honey home on an airline. The idiot Terminal Screener Apes (Oh wait, that's apiarists) will scream "explosive" and shut the whole freaking airport down if they are exposed to honey. See, http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/...pe=marketsNews
The TSA, saving us from honeybee vomit, one monosaccharide at a time.

You'll never productively discuss this topic on Flyertalk because of the reigning wisdom that says safety and politics can be separated. The fact is that every bad thing happening to you is ultimately the result of a political environment in which people's fears are politically exploited. No change in that environment will lead to insured frustration in changing how people are treated in airports. Started with the Patriot Act. If that can't be repealed, then real change is impossible.

I agree that violence against TSO's is unacceptable. That said, you don't understand the basic point that the lack of respect TSA dishes out on a daily basis towards airline passengers has come home to roost.

I've flown eight times from major European airports over the last six months. No BDOs with the magic eyepiece, no shoe carnival, no barking rude clerks on a power trip, no secondary screening for US-bound flights, no random gate screenings, no NoS, and no hand swabs. Instead, at these airports, I experience polite security personnel who carry out their jobs efficiently, professionally, and respectfully.

I realize that you may be trying to change the culture through your own efforts, but so far, you have been as effective as the kids who build sand castles at the beach. Your agency has no credibility with the public at large, and your leadership is laughed at when they come crying to the NSC, whining about how the poor TSO's are treated.

You reap what you sow, Bart. It is as simple as that.

:cool: and Priceless!! :D

Which makes violence against TSA clerks inevitable.

I don't wish violence on anyone -- that is descending to the TSA's level. Nor do I wish for individual TSOs to get cancer. I do wish for more peaceful resistance and civil disobedience.

The most encouraging recent change is a seismic shift in the media's default attitude to TSA. Six months or a year ago the MSM's underlying assumption was that TSA is doing a difficult but necessary job to keep us safe. Today it is that TSA is corrupt, incompetent and possibly insane. So that's a big win.

Invasive / punitive / retaliatory patdowns are not forcing all passengers into the NoS as intended. Another win.

Loathed by the public, derided by real law enforcement, and a laughingstock among the global security community is a pretty hard position to come back from.

We are moving the ball downfield but it's a game of inches and will take more time.

vigorous discussion
 

is taking place everywhere. http://texags.com/main/forum.reply.a...57&forum_id=16. ^

Legitimate question here...

If these screenings are not sexual in nature, and do not touch genitals like so many TSOs seem to claim, then I'd assume that you would have no problem with a passenger yelling out the name of the body part being groped during the inspection.

Simple examples of what I mean:
Frisk our legs, we call out "Legs"
Frisk our arms, we call out "Arms"
Frisk out groin, we call out "Crotch"

Now, if that were to happen with every passenger, how many times do you think we would hear "Penis", "Ball sac", or "Labia" on a daily basis? 10? 100? 1,000? More?

It is hard to claim that a screening isn't sexual when it involves touching, manipulating, feeling, or otherwise running your own body parts over that area. (Or would you like to claim that SOP doesn't touch these areas? It doesn't matter if you call it "Penis" or "resistance", it's still the same thing.)

What's further... it's hard to claim that a screening can't be sexual in nature when so much of that determination rests upon the passengers' interpretation of what "sexual" is. Or does TSA no longer require its employees and contractors to sit through sexual harassment training?

Here's a thought... Perhaps the way to start fighting TSA isn't to fight it directly with claims of sexual assault. Perhaps instead we should start filing sexual harassment lawsuits against the organization and its screeners, along with hostile workplace environment complaints toward our own employers (if required to travel for business). If enough screeners are dragged into court with petty lawsuits against them personally, perhaps then they will get the message and quit of their own volition.

If it wasn't sexual in nature, then the TSA would never have come up with the words "resistance" and "sensitive parts."

They also wouldn't need to consult sexual abuse victims' advocacy groups as part of their response to complaints on the issue. :o