|
But DHS disagreed with the GAO’s recommendation that the TSA administrator “limit future funding support for the agency’s behavior detection activities until TSA can provide scientifically validated evidence.” In its response within the report, DHS faulted both the GAO’s findings related to the 2011 SPOT validation study, saying its use of different statistical techniques resulted in “misleading” conclusions, and that its review of the research literature omitted some studies that supported the use of behavior detection. And someone from Congress finally read the 2011 GAO report? Why do we even have a GAO if Congress more or less ignores it? I have to put the blame on Congress here for once again failing to make responsible use of taxpayer dollars. SPOT should have been validated before $1B was allocated to implementing it nationwide, and SPOT in its current form should certainly not have continued receiving funds after the 2011 GAO report was released. |
Originally Posted by halls120
(Post 21783395)
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?
|
Originally Posted by bdschobel
(Post 21783361)
Congress funds all kinds of agencies (the military, for instance), but they -- and their employees -- do illegal things from time to time.
|
Originally Posted by MikeMpls
(Post 21781971)
The idea that federal employees are going to be prosecuted for being hired and trained and then doing what they were trained to do -- junk science or not -- is ludicrous.
http://rt.com/usa/texas-tsa-bill-patdown-709/ Other states thought of it also. I get the fact some of it is a protest and whatnot but there are plenty of state cops and small town constables is this country willing to stare down the feds... |
Originally Posted by halls120
(Post 21783395)
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?
Heck, the TSA hires felons... |
Originally Posted by halls120
(Post 21783395)
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?
|
.....
|
OK, I agree with at least part of your point: Nobody is going to jail for merely asking questions, especially when the person being asked is under no legal obligation to answer. But somebody should pay a price for this huge waste of scarce government resources. You and I are paying the bill for this nonsense, so why aren't you as bothered as I am?
Bruce |
Originally Posted by MikeMpls
(Post 21784339)
What's silly (and ludicrous) is suggesting that people will be jailed for being hired/trained/employed in a program authorized & funded by Congress.
|
Originally Posted by MikeMpls
(Post 21784339)
In this case they specifically funded the program being discussed. What's silly (and ludicrous) is suggesting that people will be jailed for being hired/trained/employed in a program authorized & funded by Congress.
If I were to come across a job applicant who mentioned BDO/SPOT junk (or anything like it) in their resume or interview, I'd really like to get to know the mind of that con-artist before showing them the door. |
.....
|
Originally Posted by MikeMpls
(Post 21785187)
*ROTFL* again!
The abuse at Abu Ghraib was scarcely authorized by Congress, and it also has nothing to with GAO review of the BDO program. This forum is really going out to lunch. |
.....
|
Originally Posted by MikeMpls
(Post 21785316)
Try reading what I said: The abuse at Abu Ghraib wasn't authorized ...
Done with this thread & forum again, no point in spending time on these wacky tangents. Just like the average SPOTnik would be the most convenient scapegoat when the "Behavioral Detection" nonsense finally falls apart. "Teams" like the "Mexicutioners" don't exist in a vacuum. |
Originally Posted by Caradoc
(Post 21783942)
And why is "being an illegal alien" a problem for the SPOTniks but not for issuing SIDA IDs?
Heck, the TSA hires felons... |
The sooner the program ends, the better.
|
Originally Posted by GUWonder
(Post 21785436)
The sooner the program ends, the better.
|
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 21785692)
TSA won't give it up voluntarily.
This is why they want to be allowed to wave their magic paper over your drinks, chatting you down, and rummaging through your carry-on at the gate while denying any responsibility whatsoever for watching the exit lanes. |
Originally Posted by MikeMpls
(Post 21785316)
Try reading what I said: The abuse at Abu Ghraib wasn't authorized ...
Done with this thread & forum again, no point in spending time on these wacky tangents. |
.....
|
The TSA has wasted $7.91 billion in 2013.
|
Originally Posted by I_Can_Fly_US_Airways
(Post 21779646)
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!!! |
Originally Posted by MikeMpls
(Post 21785316)
Try reading what I said: The abuse at Abu Ghraib wasn't authorized ...
|
Originally Posted by Caradoc
(Post 21785728)
The only thing the TSA voluntarily gives up is responsibility. Not authority, whether real, usurped, or implied.
This is why they want to be allowed to wave their magic paper over your drinks, chatting you down, and rummaging through your carry-on at the gate while denying any responsibility whatsoever for watching the exit lanes. |
Originally Posted by Caradoc
(Post 21785361)
"Teams" like the "Mexicutioners" don't exist in a vacuum.
Originally Posted by GUWonder
(Post 21785436)
The sooner the program ends, the better.
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 21785692)
TSA won't give it up voluntarily.
Of course, this will never happen. We and our elected representatives have become afraid of our own shadows and consider young brown men (or anyone who even looks like one) at or near an airport to be a bigger threat to the nation's survival than 5000+ Russian nuclear missiles controlled by a Communist regime during the Cold War. Police agencies at all levels love the SPOTNik program because they can arrest and convict all sorts of people with evidence obtained from TSA interrogations and "administrative" searches that would be highly illegal for any real cop to perform without consent pretty much anywhere. Shame on us for allowing it to happen. |
Contempt
Originally Posted by Spiff
(Post 21780234)
If he doesn't show up, Pissant should be charged with Contempt of Congress.
|
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
(Post 21789048)
The fact is that the GAO works for Congress.
The question is, "Who does the TSA really work for?" since they do not take direction as an agency from Congress, the American people, or apparently even the Executive branch. It's possible (probable) that the Executive branch's "real" orders are at odd with their public statements about "reining in" the TSA's overreaches. |
TSA defends behavior detection program
CNN Article
Longer lines at airport checkpoints would result from eliminating a nearly $1 billion Behavior Detection Officers program, the head of the Transportation Security Administration told a congressional committee Thursday. The Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques, or SPOT, program trains officers to identify terrorists before they act by looking for passengers showing signs of stress, fear or deception. The Government Accountability Office investigated and said in a report this week there was no proof it works, and urged Congress to cut funding for it. Transportation Security Administration administrator John Pistole defended the program as an essential component of a web of protections. "If we remove one whole layer of security, that being BDOs, who again are the least invasive and are looking for intent rather than items then that gives us an exposure to potential terrorists that we don't currently have," he said. What a surprise; that scumbag wants to keep the money coming in for "security" voodoo. What's even more surprising is that Pissant actually showed up for the hearing. Maybe a Congresscritter or two suggested he'd get a subpoena attached to his butt with a staplegun if he skipped this one? Love the comments in this article too. |
I was also surprised that he showed up (for a change) but not at all by what he said. Next thing he'll do is order 60,000 magic rocks that keep terrorists away. Gotta love those layers, ya know? :mad:
Bruce |
Originally Posted by Spiff
(Post 21793946)
CNN Article
Longer lines at airport checkpoints would result from eliminating a nearly $1 billion Behavior Detection Officers program, the head of the Transportation Security Administration told a congressional committee Thursday. The Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques, or SPOT, program trains officers to identify terrorists before they act by looking for passengers showing signs of stress, fear or deception. The Government Accountability Office investigated and said in a report this week there was no proof it works, and urged Congress to cut funding for it. Transportation Security Administration administrator John Pistole defended the program as an essential component of a web of protections. "If we remove one whole layer of security, that being BDOs, who again are the least invasive and are looking for intent rather than items then that gives us an exposure to potential terrorists that we don't currently have," he said. What a surprise; that scumbag wants to keep the money coming in for "security" voodoo. What's even more surprising is that Pissant actually showed up for the hearing. Maybe a Congresscritter or two suggested he'd get a subpoena attached to his butt with a staplegun if he skipped this one? Love the comments in this article too. “Defunding the program is not the answer,” he said. “If we did that, if Congress did that, what I can envision is, there would be fewer passengers going through expedited screening, there would be increased pat-downs, there would be longer lines, and there would be more frustration by the traveling public.” |
How in the world is the BDO program linked to expedited screening??????
|
"An imperfect deterrent to terrorist attacks is better than no deterrent at all, " said American Federation of Government Employees National President David Cox, speaking in a conference call after the hearing. "Is it a perfect program? No, but until we have a better program, we shouldn't just trash and burn this program." |
Originally Posted by petaluma1
(Post 21794679)
Pistole's threat:
Kind if like what every gov't office did during the beginning of sequestration. |
Originally Posted by Schmurrr
(Post 21795900)
How in the world is the BDO program linked to expedited screening??????
The hearing transcript won't be out yet, nor will we see the questions for the record that will follow in 4-6 weeks. But, I have every confidence that nobody on the committee was smart enough to ask your question. |
Originally Posted by Spiff
(Post 21793946)
Longer lines at airport checkpoints would result from eliminating a nearly $1 billion Behavior Detection Officers program, the head of the Transportation Security Administration told a congressional committee Thursday.
|
Originally Posted by celsius1939
(Post 21789682)
This administration could care less about contempt of congress because they hold the congress in contempt. Good luck getting a better TSA.
Originally Posted by tkey75
(Post 21795981)
IOW, take away his $1B and he'll retaliate against the innocent traveling public.
Kind if like what every gov't office did during the beginning of sequestration. We're going to be stuck with this BDO nonsense for quite some time, as there is no critical mass in government to change that. |
NYCLU and ACLU Sue TSA for Records on Discredited ‘Behavior Detection’ Program
A March 19, 2015 press release from the American Civil Liberties Union:
NYCLU and ACLU Sue TSA for Records on Discredited ‘Behavior Detection’ Program An excerpt: The NYCLU and the American Civil Liberties Union took the Transportation Security Administration to court today in an effort to uncover documents about a controversial passenger screening program used at airports nationwide. The program is called Screening Passengers by Observation Techniques, or SPOT. TSA “behavior detection officers” watch passengers in airport screening areas for behaviors that the TSA associates with stress, fear or deception – sometimes also engaging travelers in casual conversation. The officers then flag certain people for additional inspection and questioning. Government investigators and outside experts have criticized SPOT as ineffective, unscientific and wasteful. The program has cost over $1 billion since 2007 and has been blamed by passengers and TSA officers themselves for numerous cases of racial profiling. Today’s Freedom of Information Act lawsuit is seeking records related to any scientific basis for the program, its effectiveness and how much minorities are disproportionately singled out. |
A behavior detection program was authorized last month by the French government for use at Paris CDG airport.
Which groups in France -- the land of "liberty, equality and fraternity" -- will sue the French government over this kind of discredited approach having been implemented? https://www.yahoo.com/news/passenger...180705789.html |
I have all I can manage trying to keep track of the things TSA is doing here in the U.S., the French will have to look after their own problems.
|
Yesterday at DTW, the TDC asked the person in front of me how old they were. She asked me which airline I was flying. If this is behavior detection, seems like a pretty crappy way to do it because I'm pretty sure a terrorist would know those details :rolleyes:
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 8:56 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.