![]() |
Has the screening pilot program expanded beyond BOS?
I was on a MHT-ORD-SFO flight the other day, and I handed the ID checker my MHT-ORD boarding pass. The guy then asked me if ORD was my final destination. When I said no, he began to ask me questions about where I was going. At this point I became beligerant and said I don't know, and I won't know until I get to ORD. That was the end of it until I was "randomly" selected for additional screening by the WTMD... I've never been asked questions like that anywhere else. Is the TSA starting to expand the behavior detection program that was previously limited to BOS?
|
It almost happened to be at BDL. I think the guy said "I need to ask you some questions" but being hearing impaired I was not sure. So, I replied, "I am hearing impaired, so if you are going to ask questions I may not understand your questions." He seemed unaware of how to proceed, and just started marking off the BP while not looking at me. There is more to the story, but that was the end of the official questioning.
|
Originally Posted by tacostuff
(Post 17110908)
I was on a MHT-ORD-SFO flight the other day, and I handed the ID checker my MHT-ORD boarding pass. The guy then asked me if ORD was my final destination. When I said no, he began to ask me questions about where I was going. At this point I became beligerant and said I don't know, and I won't know until I get to ORD. That was the end of it until I was "randomly" selected for additional screening by the WTMD... I've never been asked questions like that anywhere else. Is the TSA starting to expand the behavior detection program that was previously limited to BOS?
|
Originally Posted by tacostuff
(Post 17110908)
I was on a MHT-ORD-SFO flight the other day, and I handed the ID checker my MHT-ORD boarding pass. The guy then asked me if ORD was my final destination. When I said no, he began to ask me questions about where I was going.
Could be an expansion of the pilot, but just as likely to be a regular old-fashioned BDO/SPOT or some random policy a local supervisor made up. |
TSA has been using behavioral detection in the Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques program for years, with something like 3,000 officers now at 161 airports. The BOS pilot program is apparently a reaction to criticism from several sources, notably Rep. John Mica, that TSA rolled out the program without adequately validating it.
Some of the descriptions of the SPOT program in the media, and even from Rep. Mica himself (emphasis added below), appear to have been somewhat inaccurate, suggesting that behavior detection under SPOT is limited to observation from a distance rather than engaging the passenger with questions: Mica had urged the development of a behavior detection program, based on the highly successful Israeli model utilized by EL Al Airlines. "Unfortunately, the TSA’s SPOT Program is not like the Israeli behavior detection model. Unlike the Israeli program, SPOT is conducted from a distance, with no personal interaction between the passenger and the TSA employee performing the SPOT screening unless the passenger is identified for secondary screening," Mica said. "El Al also trains all their staff in behavior detection techniques, not just the screening staff working the passenger checkpoints." BDOs are expected to "walk the line"—that is, to initiate casual conversations with passengers waiting in line, particularly if their observations led them to question someone exhibiting behaviors or appearances on the SPOT checklist. As the BDOs walk the line, and the passenger with SPOT indicators is reached, a casual conversation is used to determine if there is a basis for observed behaviors or appearances on the checklist. "It is a derivative of a program by the Israelis," Davis said. In the TSA version, she said, uniformed officers in and around security checkpoints scan passengers for "involuntary physical and psychological reactions" that behavioral scientists say may signal stress, fear or deception. (The TSA declined to be more specific about reactions it monitors.) Officers also "may engage the passenger in casual conversation to observe the response," she added. If a passenger shows enough suspicious behaviors, Davis said, that person may be sent to secondary screening or questioned by police. I myself was taken aback last year when a uniformed agent who I presumed was a TSA agent approached me while I was in a checkpoint queue, I think at LAX, and started playing 20 questions with me. Since I travel a lot and had never experienced this before, and since it was clear to me that not all of the travelers were being asked these questions, I started to get very annoyed. He let it rest, and off I went. |
Originally Posted by InkUnderNails
(Post 17110959)
There is more to the story . . .
|
Originally Posted by battensea
(Post 17112293)
I myself was taken aback last year when a uniformed agent whom I presumed was a TSA agent approached me while I was in a checkpoint queue, I think at LAX, and started playing 20 questions with me. Since I travel a lot and had never experienced this before, and since it was clear to me that not all of the travelers were being asked these questions, I started to get very annoyed. He let it rest, and off I went.
I'm actually fine with common-sensical stuff like that as long as it is extremely brief and non-invasive. I doubt the utility though, if I'd said, "I'm just carrying it for a friend" or just made up some stuff quickly I bet they really would not logically behave differently. Also, if I shied away from them touching it, it may have just been a really, really expensive or rare instrument, which might give a similar reaction. But to look closely at really weird stuff going through the security queue, or followup on strange observed things is fine. What I DON'T approve of is harassing every single person with a canned interview, or assuming obvious non-terrorists are terrorists, effectively strip-searching and groping people, or just being a total jacka$$ to the average traveler, which is what the TSA currently does. |
Originally Posted by battensea
(Post 17112293)
So it seems that a main difference between the current BOS pilot program and the pre-existing program is that now all passengers will be engaged in conversation (presumably drawing from a predetermined set of questions) rather than just some passengers selected by BDOs.
|
Originally Posted by RichardKenner
(Post 17113555)
To me, the term "casual conversation" refers to things like "how are you doing?", discussing the weather, sports, current events, etc. It does not include questions about travel plans. I have no problem whatsoever about the former, but serious problems with the latter.
|
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
(Post 17113698)
...except that the motivation in both cases is based on you (and the rest of us) assumed to be a threat to national security because we showed up at the airport to catch our flight.
|
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
(Post 17113698)
...except that the motivation in both cases is based on you (and the rest of us) assumed to be a threat to national security because we showed up at the airport to catch our flight.
Questions about an item I'm carrying, fine. Questions as to purpose, destination, the name of my cat, go to h*ll. |
Originally Posted by Upgraded!
(Post 17114244)
Yes, but the former could just as easily be a TSO exercising his/her First Amendment rights as anything else and prohibiting them from engaging in casual conversation (from which you have the right to abstain) could be construed as a violation of their right to free speech.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/First_amendment The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from government interference. See U.S. Const. amend. I. Freedom of expression consists of the rights to freedom of speech, press, assembly and to petition the government for a redress of grievances, and the implied rights of association and belief. The Supreme Court interprets the extent of the protection afforded to these rights. The First Amendment has been interpreted by the Court as applying to the entire federal government even though it is only expressly applicable to Congress. Furthermore, the Court has interpreted, the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as protecting the rights in the First Amendment from interference by state governments. See U.S. Const. amend. XIV. |
Originally Posted by RichardKenner
(Post 17113555)
To me, the term "casual conversation" refers to things like "how are you doing?", discussing the weather, sports, current events, etc. It does not include questions about travel plans. I have no problem whatsoever about the former, but serious problems with the latter.
To me, the term 'casual conversation' means I have the option to decline to answer a particular question without consequences. It's 'casual' partly because there's nothing at stake. |
This is how they think:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ZL53r100oS...%2Breading.png |
Originally Posted by chollie
(Post 17115656)
+1
To me, the term 'casual conversation' means I have the option to decline to answer a particular question without consequences. It's 'casual' partly because there's nothing at stake. |
The sign at terminal A in Boston reads:
"People who refuse to cooperate will be subject to additional screening" :td: |
Originally Posted by Ari
(Post 17112882)
Like what?
|
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
(Post 17113698)
...except that the motivation in both cases is based on you (and the rest of us) assumed to be a threat to national security because we showed up at the airport to catch our flight.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 4:04 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.