You can't have it both ways: either it is wrong or it is o.k. to sexually assault passengers.

We don't know if the groping is done "lawfully" because the TSA won't allow any complaints about these procedures to get before a Court of law.

I contend that the private room gropes are not lawful because administrative searches are to be done in public and the TSA is not allowed to do any kind of a search other than an administrative search.

TSA needs to develop a new procedure for checking passengers for explosives, especially in light of the fact NEVER have they found a passenger carrying explosives who has alarmed the ETD. They need to develop a test that does not alarm on glycerins from hand soap, nor on nitrates from fertilizers.

Actually, if the nude-o-scopes worked, the solution would be to send passengers through the WBS after an alarm. By not doing so, the TSA is admitting that the WBS do not do the job that we were told they would do which is find hidden WEI.

The "procedures and protocols" are often unpublished/secret, and any searches done should not be secret or in private. The machine has been wrong several orders of magnitude than it has been right. The assumption should be false alarm and re-check rather than an assumption of guilt on the passenger's part.

No, that's a world you choose to live in: terrorized and afraid.


Then you should be given the option to get off the plane and stay home.

Rubbish. Passengers' genitals are touched without their consent. That's sexual assault.

That's exactly what it is.

It's offensive to pretend it is something that it is not and to force victims of sexual assault, both at the airport and elsewhere, to relive these assaults every time they fly. All sexual assaults should be treated as a criminal matter.

What's even more offensive is to assume that the victim is somehow responsible for the crime. "He/she was 'asking for it' based on how he/she dressed or what mode of transportation he/she chose." Disgusting.

Maybe something like an Explosive Trace Portal?

Sadly, that is indeed the case. Due Process is a concept that is completely lost on the fascists at TSA.

^^

Nobody said any of the things you imply, OP only claimed that a female TSA agent wanted to pat her down and since she was a women that was the same as a cavity search, which was never suggested or requested.

That's your opinion. I don't know enough about the validity of ETD to discuss it.

She left so I she wasn't coerced to do anything. It was always her choice.

But please tell me what you expect to happen if the ETD alarm goes off and you refuse any further screening and leaves. Would you think losing a trusted traveler program is fair? I do.

It's a fact. Number of all people ever arrested for explosives @ airport vs. ETD alarms? Practically zero vs. daily occurrence.

Submit to sexual assault or not fly: that's coercion. She was not even free to leave without further administrative harassment.

When the alternative is sexual assault, the victim should not only be free to leave, no questions asked, the perps should be arrested on the spot.

Actually, the OP first said:

And no, she never said it was the same as a cavity search. Her exact words:


If one has to have one's sexual organs touched in order to board a plane, that is coercion. End of story.

You mean like the ones the TSA did use but found didn't work because they got clogged with dust and dirt?

Any unwanted and coerced touching of sexual organs is a sexual assault.

If a screener does not follow the SOP for a resolution grope (or any other grope for that matter), it is sexual assault. However, as passengers we are not allowed to know what the exact resolution pat down SOP is, so we cannot know if what happens is out of bounds or not. Therefore, it is right and appropriate that we consider any touching of the external sex organs to be assault.

ETP 's are used in other industrial settings successfully. Surely the maintenance needs can be managed by TSA employees and if used as a secondary test the maintenance needed should be minimal.

I have to question if it was the ETP machines or the operators that malfunctioned?

The costs for regular maintenanace and upkeep on the ETPs during their short run in checkpoint areas was so far outside the estimated/projected costs it was ridiculous. The program ran roughly $29.6 million total, and $6.2 million of that was spent on maintenance and repair for 94 deployed machines (for you number nerds, that boils down to approximately $65,957.45 on average). This was also a fairly long "testing" run (from 2004 to 2009) or Beta phase, with many attempts at fixing the recurring maintenance issues. Sadly, none of the fixes worked on a large scale and this tech fell out of favor due to the exorbitant costs of keeping them running. I would love to see this tech revamped and brought back in some form, as it was pretty good tech, but it is fairly evident that the ability to operate these at a speed that is comparable to other screening while correcting the existing maintenanace challenges is not an easy path. Otherwise, we would have seen some company reintroduce this in another format and get the approvals needed to integrate into the system. Interestingly enough, the TSIF was introduced for TSA as this program was coming to the end, and TSIF allows TSA to conduct controlled research for new tech as it emerges. I am quite certain that the 2 situations are completely unrelated, but it is a funny coincidence. See the write up at the TSA Blog here http://blog.tsa.gov/2009/05/explosiv...detection.html.

FWIW, I loved this tech, it was pretty much non-invasive, and fairly quick for what it was. I also do not ever see it coming back in the format it was in previously. With the new spectrum analysis equipment, density testing equipment and some of the other tech coming down the pipe right now, ETP is probably a thing of the past - even though I loved these machines!

Why should a Trusted Traveler be treated in a manner from a first-time flyer when the ETD alarms? Both alarms should be resolved in the same manner but that manner is not a private room humiliating and degrading grope.

Man with a gun: "Your money or your life. Your choice."

I don't. Why do you think that's fair? Are you saying that her choice comes with consequences? Then what kind of choice was that?

TSA agent: "Submit to a private search or pay $11,000. Your choice."

Do you think that's a fair choice and doesn't amount to coercion?

The passenger should have the option to have this search done in public at the checkpoint. The private room should be an option but not mandatory. Unless there is a strip search, then there is no reason to force this into a private room.

There have been plenty of reports of what the private room search involves and none of it is secret or is SSI. The fact that the TSA seems to be embarrassed to perform this pat down in public says a lot about how inappropriate it is. I don't care if I'm getting my genitals touched with the back of the hand or the front of the hand. Either way, my genitals are being touched.

As you very well know the TSA doesn't operate on a "almost no bombs is good enough" management model.

You think it is sexual assault, I think her initial report was full of hyperboles and she was free to leave - but do you really think the TSA would say "well, your ETD went off and you left the screening area so we're letting it go"? Probably not.

No. It can be, under certain circumstances.

Don't want to follow screening procedures set forth by the TSA? Maybe you shouldn't be a TSA trusted traveler.

Again with the hyperbole. OP isn't Rosa Parks, the metal detector went off and the ETD was positive and she left the screening area because she didn't want to be patted down - which she wasn't and she was let go. Wherein lies the coercion?

If she felt coerced why did she feel perfectly safe in refusing and leaving? Maybe because she knew it was a choice?

Also she wasn't fined $11,000. As per the rules I'm sure she signed that is the maximum administrative penalty the TSA can give someone in a TT program.