chollie

TSA will either have to have dedicated cavity specialists or everyone will have to go back to the 'academy' for further training.

Years ago, as the frisks got more and more intimate, and fingers started dipping inside underwear and butt cracks, I asked about two things: hearing aids (real or not) and inside someone's mouth. I was responding to someone who was claiming that if I knew all the scary things TSOs are taught in training, well. I wouldn't be able to sleep at night. This individual pointed out that I had no idea how small a detonator could be - small enough to be concealed in someone's butt crack, apparently, or attached to their nipple.

I pointed out that if some detonators were this small, nothing stopped someone from holding it in their mouth - or shoving in their ear, pretending it was a hearing aid.

I would not be surprised at some point if TSA starts randomly making people talk to prove that they don't have something artfully concealed in their mouths. And all hearing aids should be removed for xray.

Personally, I have no idea what a detonator that tiny would look like, but apparently it is part of TSA 'academy' training. I recall many years ago when an activist went to a rather conservative social bash. She took compliments on her unusual dangling earrings all evening. As it turned out, they were IUDs and she was making a political point.

If someone had funky earrings or a hair ornament or a key fob made out of a tiny detonator (small enough to be disguised in someone's collar), I wouldn't recognize it as such.

gsoltso

Just to give you an idea on some commercial ones, you can peruse these images just to get a feel.

Boggie Dog

Will ETD detect the chemical used in detonators? Regardless, detonators are pretty much useless without the payload. Can't you TSA types interdict bulk explosives?

petaluma1

Where did this "stroking or caressing lovingly or erotically" come from? No one else has used those adjectives in describing the "pat down" process.

FliesWay2Much

Yes -- back in Nov 2010, right after National Opt-Out Day. He gave as evasive a non-answer that we have gotten very used to getting from the TSA:

So, does Pissy's answer mean:

1. Yes, we will do them eventually but not now;
2. No, we won't do them unless the threat changes;
3. We are training our clerks as we speak.

He never said whether or not he believes the TSA has the legal authority to initiate body cavity searches.

Just think... he's now a university president.

WillCAD

Since that video is published, can you confirm or deny that the pat-down procedure shown in it IS or IS NOT the currently mandated technique?

If it IS, then any pat-down which deviates from it is a violation of policy and the screener should be disciplpined.

If it is NOT, then it's pretty disingenuous of you to keep posting it.

If you cannot confirm or deny that it is or is not the technique currently mandated by TSA policy, then why refer us to it in the first place? Why does it even exist if the procedure it describes is actually SSI? How can you even perform a procedure on a non-covered person if that procedure is SSI? By definition, SSI must be protected from dissemination to non-covered persons, so every time a screener performs an SSI procedure in view of non-covered persons - or ON non-covered persons - they are violating the SSI rules.

The logical hoops you need to jump through to justify any of this would seem to me, on the surface, to be the product of seriously deranged minds.

petaluma1

In that same month, November, in 2010, a DHS attorney told the court, in response I believe to EPIC's lawsuit re: strip search machines:

https://tinyurl.com/y9azte6l

petaluma1

Speaking of retaliation:

gsoltso

Actually, it is a direct definition from your (and others here) comments. I merely elaborated on what you and others here were saying, so that everyone understands just how wrong the terminology they are using is. Words are powerful, and when the wrong ones are used, then it can completely destroy any point you are trying to make.

Boggie Dog

Perhaps that is exactly what TSA should do. I think doing so might be the straw that breaks the camels back.

So you intentionally destroyed your own argument?

Evidence reported by travelers tells us that groping by TSA screeners is going on. We know that in Denver that groping was sexual in nature. What we don't know is why this groping is being done at other airports or even if such procedure is correct policy. Is TSA employing a bunch of perverts or is groping proper procedure?
And I will define what groping is to me; if a TSA screener takes an open hand and feels my genitals then that is a grope.

I'll ask again, if the public isn't properly informed about the TSA Pat Down procedure how can informed consent be given? You have posted the link to the TSA video but as noted it completely avoids screening the crotch.

gsoltso

I can confirm that HQ states in the video that this is what to expect, and that this is what will happen.

I find it difficult to argue that a TSO that does not follow the SOP should not be disciplined.

Not disingenuous at all, simply a reflection of not being able to discuss any process or procedure that is not published.

That is not necessarily correct - there is a difference between describing the basics of the process or performing those basic procedures, and publishing SOP/SSI in a public permanent forum.

*One disclaimer - there are certain situations involving alarms and resolutions that are not the norm, and as such, have some differences to the screening process. The video depicts the norms you can expect without alarms. TSA has not published the responses to these situations, and I do not expect them to do so.

petaluma1

Here are the search results for "caressing lovingly" - you were the first one to use those words: https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/search.php?searchid=45259192&query=caressing-lovingly

and for the word "erotically" https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/search.php?searchid=45259210&query=erotically

Actually, a search of the entire forum shows that you are the only one to use the term "caressing lovingly": https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/sear...ssing-lovingly

Prior to your use of the term "erotically" yesterday, it had not been used since 2013: https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/sear...ery=erotically

gsoltso

I actually supported my position, and you are helping. You have a case that has been adjudicated (Denver), and I am already on record as saying it was wrong, and the individuals involved should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. In any case where you have an adjudicated situation, and the TSO is found to have gone outside the SOP, then I am openly for that individual being prosecuted. The rest of what you have are a bunch of unsubstantiated claims. Contrary to popular belief, or what the press and politicians would have you believe, you are innocent until proven guilty in this country. Going on social media and posting something may get you a viral trip, but it means absolutely nothing until things are adjudicated. Do you really want to live in a world where we simply take punitive action on someone based solely on a claim at a website - with no proof? No evidence or investigation? There is a different word for that, it is anarchy, and all policy arguments between us aside, I think that we both agree that this country has been a country that operates under the rule of law (at least for the most part).

Then we have a communication error, or a misuse of the word fondle. The word fondle is as described above, there is a specific element of caring or ardor or amorous intent added to that word for a reason. When someone uses an open hand and "feels" your genitals, that is actually a fairly nebulous explanation. Did the individual make inadvertent contact with them while patting you down trying to make sure that the area does not have a weapon of some sort, did they grab and squeeze to try and injure, did they gaze into your eyes and try to use it as part of making a pass at you? In all of those descriptions, only the last one technically is groping - the others are a pat-down, and battery.

If you watch the video a bit more carefully, you will see screening in the groin area, the buttocks, the upper inner thigh and the female breasts.

You keep using the term "fondle", the definition of fondle is "to stroke lovingly or erotically". So, actually, you were using those terms, just not in those specific words.

petaluma1

I never have used the word "fondle" when speaking of a TSA pat down. https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/sear...6&query=fondle

I expect an apology from you.

petaluma1

The case was not adjudicated as it should have been by finding the victims and giving them the opportunity to file charges against the screeners involved. TSA could have found at least a couple of those men had it wanted to do so.

How many more screeners are employed by TSA who take pleasure in groping, yes groping, passengers? I would imagine there are more than a few.