Now that the SPOT program has been officially announced and in operation it will be interesting to see how it develops.
In this document
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/p...a_tsa_spot.pdf
"Privacy Impact Assessment for the
Screening of Passengers by
Observation Techniques (SPOT) Program "
it states
"Section 6.0 Notice
6.1 Was notice provided to the individual prior to collection of
information?
No. BDO observations of suspicious behaviors or activity are contemporaneously recorded so there is no
opportunity to give notice."
Yes I know that this is 2008 document but it appears to be the only publicly publish document on SPOT available...
BUT
In 2005 a GAO report was published on the Secure Flight program.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8672258/.../#.TknmSYJfgzc
"GAO: TSA data collection violated Privacy Act
Agency says test passenger screening program overstepped restrictions
The Transportation Security Administration violated privacy protections by secretly collecting personal information on at least 250,000 people, congressional investigators said Friday. ........
The 1974 Privacy Act requires the government to notify the public when it collects information about people. It must say who it’s gathering information about, what kinds of information, why it’s being collected and how the information is stored. (my boldings)

So how I wonder how long before the ACLU or like a organization takes TSA to task for violating the 1974 Privacy Act because it is not posting notifications in the areas that the SPOT BDO's are collecting information??????


..

Article on npr - doesn't note there is no supported science behind this program

http://www.npr.org/2011/08/16/139643...ough-chat-down

ACLU has been impotent when the subject of TSA comes to the table.

GAO: $1 billion TSA behavioral screening program 'slightly better than chance'
 

Submitted without comment.

http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_n...an-chance?lite

In other big news the sun will rise in the east, and a kardashian will be on TMZ.

So, the TSA has wasted $1 billion dollars. While this really doesn't qualify as news - since it was apparent to anyone who has been paying attention to this travesty - I wonder if this finding will prompt the usual cast of BDO defenders to rise to the occasion and defend the indefensible. ;)

So that is 3,000 BDO's that can be RIF along with all of the administrative and management support positions staffed for this wasteful program.

Wish TSA (Pistole) was a more careful with our tax dollars instead of whizzing them away like has happened at TSA so often.

Bolding mine: I'll comment....

Color me unsurprised and way to go TSA :rolleyes:

The saddest (& sickest) part is that NO no one on the Federal dole cares...it's not their $ so why should they want to do anything to fix the problem???

This country of ours is SERIOUSLY broken!!!

Criminal charges are in order for whoever the imbecile(s) was who introduced and for whoever kept touting this worthless excuse of a taxpayer loss. :mad:

Often the "bad guys" are people with the nerve to ask TSA goons
how many terrorists they've caught after annoying/molesting
some 400 million travelers. Check out the Hitler lookalike at the end
pretending to be a "good guy."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3ODNwr607E

Anyone want to bet on whether Pistole actually shows up??

We have the federal government which the citizens deserve, and it shows with the TSA policies and practices.

If he doesn't show up, Pissant should be charged with Contempt of Congress.

That's incorrect. ;)

The TSA has wasted far more than $1 billion. It just wasted $1 billion on SPOT.

Who would have thunk it, we're all qualified BDO's. No wonder my spidey sense starts going off when I see people wearing fake cop uniforms with fake cop badges. People up to no good.

There is no excuse for the TSA, and this proves it. They have done nothing private security couldn't have at a lesser cost. :mad:

Au contraire, they have done many things that no sane/legal security organization would ever do. The actors involved should face criminal charges.

Here is my shocked face...(cue the *E-trade baby with the shocked face).

So much for the "security" training of the TSA in this area -- not that the TSA could do anything with junk "security" training other than waste money on it too.

.....

Some violations of constitutional/civil rights done by federal government officials are a criminal violation even if the violations are funded by Congress.

Some may say that dragnets leading to arrests and/or detentions where probable cause is lacking for the search/detention/arrest are a violation of at least one constitutional right.

.....

Criminal fraud, for one. Anyone accepting a paycheck for "Behavioral Detection" knows full well that they're peddling voodoo horsepuckey.

.....

Here's The Report
 

...all 99 pages of it.

This will take a long time to review. When I skimmed it, the TSA basically disagreed with the GAO every step of the way -- not surprised. For some reason they vigorously defend this program.

Page 76 caught my eye -- the education level of SPOTNiks:

...and this tidbit from footnote #30:

From page 44:

FYI, the public -- i.e.: us -- have the ability to comment on these reports directly to the GAO.

TSA Should Limit Future Funding for Behavior Detection Activities
 

http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-14-159

Available evidence does not support whether behavioral indicators, which are used in the Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques (SPOT) program, can be used to identify persons who may pose a risk to aviation security. GAO reviewed four meta-analyses (reviews that analyze other studies and synthesize their findings) that included over 400 studies from the past 60 years and found that the human ability to accurately identify deceptive behavior based on behavioral indicators is the same as or slightly better than chance. Further, the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) April 2011 study conducted to validate SPOT's behavioral indicators did not demonstrate their effectiveness because of study limitations, including the use of unreliable data. Twenty-one of the 25 behavior detection officers (BDO) GAO interviewed at four airports said that some behavioral indicators are subjective. TSA officials agree, and said they are working to better define them. GAO analyzed data from fiscal years 2011 and 2012 on the rates at which BDOs referred passengers for additional screening based on behavioral indicators and found that BDOs' referral rates varied significantly across airports, raising questions about the use of behavioral indicators by BDOs. To help ensure consistency, TSA officials said they deployed teams nationally to verify compliance with SPOT procedures in August 2013. However, these teams are not designed to help ensure BDOs consistently interpret SPOT indicators.

I don't need to be taken seriously.

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/1005...l/465412a.html

There's not one scintilla of evidence supporting "behavioral detection" as a science. The TSA knows it. Anyone who's been through their "training" knows it.

The larger question is why anyone who espouses the "SPOTnik" nonsense is allowed into public without an escort and incontinence undergarments, as nobody that dumb should be trusted not to pee on the floor.

Looks to me like that oversteps the whole "WEI" argument that this is all just "administrative searching."

Scratch that - it clearly demonstrated that the TSA has not merely crossed that line, but pole-vaulted it.

(Hopefully, the mental image of Pistole or any of his minions engaging in the activity of pole vaulting will get someone to chuckle.)

Sexual assault, theft, elder abuse, child abuse...

These are serious crimes and TSA commits them daily. "I was only following orders." is no defense and consent under duress is not consent.

.....

Almost as ludicrous as their original hiring and "purpose" as presented.

Careful, there. Mike says it's ludicrous to expect them to be prosecuted for carrying out exactly what they were "trained" to do...

.....

.....

I´ve been pointing this out for years:

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/1005...l/465412a.html

In 2010, Nature, one of the World's leading scientific journals, tried to locate the scientific evidence behind the SPOT program and found none.

It's unfortunate that federal prosecutors don't often go after current or previous federal government employees who violated the laws of this country under the color of authority with the Executive, Legislative and/or Judicial branches want to provide cover for the violations of law and do just that.

Those who authorized the SPOT/BDO/profiling nonsense -- and those whom they hired for training people in this junk "security" -- are pick-pocketing shysters. Following orders to scam others isn't a very good excuse in my opinion. Not that my opinion will get US(A)As to run with a case against DHS/TSA for participating in this SPOT/BD/"profiling" scam.

Ac-cent--u-ate the positives...
 

You and I read this:
TSA management reads this:

This is a silly argument. The fact that Congress appropriates funds for an agency (or for an agency initiative) doesn't mean that everything that agency does is automatically legal. For one thing, the courts have never ruled on the legality of the SPOT program, to my knowledge. Until that happens, we just don't know if it's legal, funding or not.

Congress funds all kinds of agencies (the military, for instance), but they -- and their employees -- do illegal things from time to time.

Bruce

Could someone please explain to me how possession of illegal drugs, child pornography, fraudulent documents, being an illegal alien, subject of an outstanding warrant or possessing undeclared currency has anything to do with aviation safety?