From today's TSA blog- desire for "curb-to-gate secure environment"
Jun 25, 2017, 12:35 pm
#46
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,094
I think before we seriously consider curb-to-gate security, we should close the security loopholes that already exist.
I think the greatest danger, besides on an aircraft, is in bottle-necked congested areas, particularly because we have yet to see good leadership emerge in the crisis situations we have witnessed. TSOs are trained to protect only themselves, which is particularly problematic for pax, who in times of crisis will naturally gravitate towards the uniforms generally ordering them around. I'm thinking particularly of the awful LAX shooting and the EWR mess over alleged shots. The folks responsible for airport security need to come up with much better emergency plans.
I think the greatest danger, besides on an aircraft, is in bottle-necked congested areas, particularly because we have yet to see good leadership emerge in the crisis situations we have witnessed. TSOs are trained to protect only themselves, which is particularly problematic for pax, who in times of crisis will naturally gravitate towards the uniforms generally ordering them around. I'm thinking particularly of the awful LAX shooting and the EWR mess over alleged shots. The folks responsible for airport security need to come up with much better emergency plans.
Jun 26, 2017, 8:36 am
#47
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Greensboro
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,424
"The Transportation Security Administration is pushing back on reports it forced a wheelchair-bound member of the Marines to remove his prosthetic legs during an airport security screening.
The agency said it viewed the tape of the alleged incident, which drew the attention of lawmakers, and found the Marine's screening was "done by the book."
"After reviewing TSA video (CCTV), interviewing and receiving written statements from all officers involved, we found that the soldier was not asked and did not remove his prosthetic legs," TSA blogger Bob Burns wrote in a post on the agency's website.
"The screening was done by the book and lasted a total of 8 minutes from beginning to end," Burns continued. "By chance, the screening was conducted by two TSA Officers who were prior military. One was in the U.S. Air Force for 18 years, and the other was in the U.S. Marine Corps for 13 years." "
As someone else referenced, there were changes made at a later date - as part of a consistently proactive process of changing to meet the needs of those individuals. TSA does this consistently and regularly, with all screening processes. At the time, TSA had the Wounded Warrior program (which continues today), and later expanded certain parts of the program and training that goes with it. We also collaborate consistently with a variety of groups that represent specific types of persons with needs. This has been a consistent theme with TSA, we head shed with these groups to try and design the best screening process for everyone, while keeping security concerns and personal needs balanced. Working with these groups has given TSA the Wounded Warrior program, our TSA Cares program, and many of the specialized screening programs that work with a variety of passengers with medical challenges.
There was even a press release last year about new links, resources and programs offering services for the public with medical needs/challenges.
https://www.tsa.gov/news/releases/20...cal-conditions
Jun 26, 2017, 8:54 am
#48
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
No.
TSA released a video clip. It did not release all video for the time period. As we know from police forces across the country, video can be edited and cut to distort the true picture. The video proved nothing.
This was handled just like the Stacey Amato and Phil Mocek and Tom Sawyer checkpoint fiascos: dishonesty and cover-ups.
If you are interested, follow Kristin Beck, an transgender ex-Navy Seal. She has encountered repeated harassment at the checkpoints, even after the 'academy' retrained the work force. TSA asked her to work with them publicly. Sounds good, right? And TSA keeps telling us they 'work closely' with their partners.
They work so closely with the 'academy' trainers and the work force and Kristin Beck that transgender pax continue to get harassed and mocked at TSA checkpoints around the country. What TSA really did was reach out to Beck to shut her up.
With all due respect, I'm not a TSO so I can't challenge you when you claim TSA has all kinds of secrets that you can't share with us. We have to take you at your word, even when all the publicly available evidence contradicts you.
I don't pretend to be an expert at what happens at GSO. I've never flown through there and likely never will.
I know PHX and a lot of military, active and retired, from the area. You are wrong on this episode and there are plenty of military in PHX who will tell you so. The two ex-military TSOs who pulled this cr*p were 'ex' for very good reasons. You don't leave a stellar career in the US military, particularly when you are on the brink of retirement, to go work as a TSA groper. You get a job with TSA and continue the kind of cr*p that you pulled in the military, only with encouragement, not oversight.
TSA released a video clip. It did not release all video for the time period. As we know from police forces across the country, video can be edited and cut to distort the true picture. The video proved nothing.
This was handled just like the Stacey Amato and Phil Mocek and Tom Sawyer checkpoint fiascos: dishonesty and cover-ups.
If you are interested, follow Kristin Beck, an transgender ex-Navy Seal. She has encountered repeated harassment at the checkpoints, even after the 'academy' retrained the work force. TSA asked her to work with them publicly. Sounds good, right? And TSA keeps telling us they 'work closely' with their partners.
They work so closely with the 'academy' trainers and the work force and Kristin Beck that transgender pax continue to get harassed and mocked at TSA checkpoints around the country. What TSA really did was reach out to Beck to shut her up.
With all due respect, I'm not a TSO so I can't challenge you when you claim TSA has all kinds of secrets that you can't share with us. We have to take you at your word, even when all the publicly available evidence contradicts you.
I don't pretend to be an expert at what happens at GSO. I've never flown through there and likely never will.
I know PHX and a lot of military, active and retired, from the area. You are wrong on this episode and there are plenty of military in PHX who will tell you so. The two ex-military TSOs who pulled this cr*p were 'ex' for very good reasons. You don't leave a stellar career in the US military, particularly when you are on the brink of retirement, to go work as a TSA groper. You get a job with TSA and continue the kind of cr*p that you pulled in the military, only with encouragement, not oversight.
Last edited by chollie; Jun 26, 2017 at 9:01 am
Jun 26, 2017, 8:59 am
#49
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,094
Except the official release from TSA says it didn't happen the way that it was reported -
"The Transportation Security Administration is pushing back on reports it forced a wheelchair-bound member of the Marines to remove his prosthetic legs during an airport security screening.
The agency said it viewed the tape of the alleged incident, which drew the attention of lawmakers, and found the Marine's screening was "done by the book."
"After reviewing TSA video (CCTV), interviewing and receiving written statements from all officers involved, we found that the soldier was not asked and did not remove his prosthetic legs," TSA blogger Bob Burns wrote in a post on the agency's website.
"The screening was done by the book and lasted a total of 8 minutes from beginning to end," Burns continued. "By chance, the screening was conducted by two TSA Officers who were prior military. One was in the U.S. Air Force for 18 years, and the other was in the U.S. Marine Corps for 13 years." "
As someone else referenced, there were changes made at a later date - as part of a consistently proactive process of changing to meet the needs of those individuals. TSA does this consistently and regularly, with all screening processes. At the time, TSA had the Wounded Warrior program (which continues today), and later expanded certain parts of the program and training that goes with it. We also collaborate consistently with a variety of groups that represent specific types of persons with needs. This has been a consistent theme with TSA, we head shed with these groups to try and design the best screening process for everyone, while keeping security concerns and personal needs balanced. Working with these groups has given TSA the Wounded Warrior program, our TSA Cares program, and many of the specialized screening programs that work with a variety of passengers with medical challenges.
There was even a press release last year about new links, resources and programs offering services for the public with medical needs/challenges.
https://www.tsa.gov/news/releases/20...cal-conditions
"The Transportation Security Administration is pushing back on reports it forced a wheelchair-bound member of the Marines to remove his prosthetic legs during an airport security screening.
The agency said it viewed the tape of the alleged incident, which drew the attention of lawmakers, and found the Marine's screening was "done by the book."
"After reviewing TSA video (CCTV), interviewing and receiving written statements from all officers involved, we found that the soldier was not asked and did not remove his prosthetic legs," TSA blogger Bob Burns wrote in a post on the agency's website.
"The screening was done by the book and lasted a total of 8 minutes from beginning to end," Burns continued. "By chance, the screening was conducted by two TSA Officers who were prior military. One was in the U.S. Air Force for 18 years, and the other was in the U.S. Marine Corps for 13 years." "
As someone else referenced, there were changes made at a later date - as part of a consistently proactive process of changing to meet the needs of those individuals. TSA does this consistently and regularly, with all screening processes. At the time, TSA had the Wounded Warrior program (which continues today), and later expanded certain parts of the program and training that goes with it. We also collaborate consistently with a variety of groups that represent specific types of persons with needs. This has been a consistent theme with TSA, we head shed with these groups to try and design the best screening process for everyone, while keeping security concerns and personal needs balanced. Working with these groups has given TSA the Wounded Warrior program, our TSA Cares program, and many of the specialized screening programs that work with a variety of passengers with medical challenges.
There was even a press release last year about new links, resources and programs offering services for the public with medical needs/challenges.
https://www.tsa.gov/news/releases/20...cal-conditions
Of course TSA also claimed that the Backscatter Whole Body Imager images were suitable for viewing by young children. We now know that a high level TSA employee based out of Denver said the images were explicit, that Congress was so concerned about the images that they directed TSA to remove those devices unless privacy filters could be added. And if I recalled TSA claimed that strip searches didn't happen at New York as reported by three elderly ladies. This just scratches the surface of statement made by TSA that just didn't hold up to scrutiny.
I could go on but the point is clear, TSA doesn't have a sterling track record on honesty. So I'll apologize up front that I think any claims by TSA about how something happened can be taken with a grain of salt.
Jun 26, 2017, 9:06 am
#50
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
I certainly can't argue that TSA claims it didn't happen the way it was reported.
Of course TSA also claimed that the Backscatter Whole Body Imager images were suitable for viewing by young children. We now know that a high level TSA employee based out of Denver said the images were explicit, that Congress was so concerned about the images that they directed TSA to remove those devices unless privacy filters could be added. And if I recalled TSA claimed that strip searches didn't happen at New York as reported by three elderly ladies. This just scratches the surface of statement made by TSA that just didn't hold up to scrutiny.
I could go on but the point is clear, TSA doesn't have a sterling track record on honesty. So I'll apologize up front that I think any claims by TSA about how something happened can be taken with a grain of salt.
Of course TSA also claimed that the Backscatter Whole Body Imager images were suitable for viewing by young children. We now know that a high level TSA employee based out of Denver said the images were explicit, that Congress was so concerned about the images that they directed TSA to remove those devices unless privacy filters could be added. And if I recalled TSA claimed that strip searches didn't happen at New York as reported by three elderly ladies. This just scratches the surface of statement made by TSA that just didn't hold up to scrutiny.
I could go on but the point is clear, TSA doesn't have a sterling track record on honesty. So I'll apologize up front that I think any claims by TSA about how something happened can be taken with a grain of salt.
I don't know anyone in any branch of the military in the Phoenix area who believed the TSA's side of the story. One of the TSA 'vets' had a nasty local reputation off the job.
I, personally, can attest to TSA's dishonesty. TSA confiscated my nitro pills, made a report of it, and then lied and said it never happened. FWIW, there's at least one other person whose pills were confiscated, a guy about to leave on a cruise.
Here's what I found most offensive about that continued lie. TSA could have said 'yes, nitroglycerine pills are allowed, but only if our screener says so'.
That was and is the truth, yet neither you nor TSA seem to want to publicly state that this is what can happen and it is perfectly within the scope of TSA's rules.
Not to go OT, but other than the former TSO who started an occasional online blog, I have yet to meet (online, checkpoint, recently in person a few times) a TSO who doesn't automatically assume the pax is lying in any negative pax-TSO exchange.
If someone had posted on this forum that he's gay and he's getting a super frisk at DEN and he thinks he's being targeted by the TSOs, I suspect you would have politely called him a liar. You would have talked about 'academy' training, gropes being designed to be offensive and invasive, you've never seen it happen at GSO so it probably doesn't happen any where else, etc.
And TSA wonders why it has a credibility issue. When it comes to TSA, I trust only if I can verify - and I bend over backwards to give the pax the benefit of a doubt, because I know TSA's version of events will be wildly skewed in the other direction. It has proven so time and again when it called pax liars until pax video started emerging.
It's pretty sickening when it's 2017 and I still can't get a straight answer about what to expect at the checkpoint from the blog, twitter, or FB. I still can't show up and fly without hands between my legs, stroking my genitals, dipping in my butt crack.
And I still am forced to fly without my necessary medical nitro. If something ever does happen to me and I am hurt or die because I wasn't allowed to have my nitro pills with me, my family and friends will post it here. No point in trying to post it on the blog, because TSA knows this is a life-threatening practice and it still stands behind it.
Last edited by chollie; Jun 26, 2017 at 9:26 am
Jun 26, 2017, 10:30 am
#51
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Greensboro
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,424
No.
TSA released a video clip. It did not release all video for the time period. As we know from police forces across the country, video can be edited and cut to distort the true picture. The video proved nothing.
This was handled just like the Stacey Amato and Phil Mocek and Tom Sawyer checkpoint fiascos: dishonesty and cover-ups.
If you are interested, follow Kristin Beck, an transgender ex-Navy Seal. She has encountered repeated harassment at the checkpoints, even after the 'academy' retrained the work force. TSA asked her to work with them publicly. Sounds good, right? And TSA keeps telling us they 'work closely' with their partners.
They work so closely with the 'academy' trainers and the work force and Kristin Beck that transgender pax continue to get harassed and mocked at TSA checkpoints around the country. What TSA really did was reach out to Beck to shut her up.
With all due respect, I'm not a TSO so I can't challenge you when you claim TSA has all kinds of secrets that you can't share with us. We have to take you at your word, even when all the publicly available evidence contradicts you.
I don't pretend to be an expert at what happens at GSO. I've never flown through there and likely never will.
I know PHX and a lot of military, active and retired, from the area. You are wrong on this episode and there are plenty of military in PHX who will tell you so. The two ex-military TSOs who pulled this cr*p were 'ex' for very good reasons. You don't leave a stellar career in the US military, particularly when you are on the brink of retirement, to go work as a TSA groper. You get a job with TSA and continue the kind of cr*p that you pulled in the military, only with encouragement, not oversight.
TSA released a video clip. It did not release all video for the time period. As we know from police forces across the country, video can be edited and cut to distort the true picture. The video proved nothing.
This was handled just like the Stacey Amato and Phil Mocek and Tom Sawyer checkpoint fiascos: dishonesty and cover-ups.
If you are interested, follow Kristin Beck, an transgender ex-Navy Seal. She has encountered repeated harassment at the checkpoints, even after the 'academy' retrained the work force. TSA asked her to work with them publicly. Sounds good, right? And TSA keeps telling us they 'work closely' with their partners.
They work so closely with the 'academy' trainers and the work force and Kristin Beck that transgender pax continue to get harassed and mocked at TSA checkpoints around the country. What TSA really did was reach out to Beck to shut her up.
With all due respect, I'm not a TSO so I can't challenge you when you claim TSA has all kinds of secrets that you can't share with us. We have to take you at your word, even when all the publicly available evidence contradicts you.
I don't pretend to be an expert at what happens at GSO. I've never flown through there and likely never will.
I know PHX and a lot of military, active and retired, from the area. You are wrong on this episode and there are plenty of military in PHX who will tell you so. The two ex-military TSOs who pulled this cr*p were 'ex' for very good reasons. You don't leave a stellar career in the US military, particularly when you are on the brink of retirement, to go work as a TSA groper. You get a job with TSA and continue the kind of cr*p that you pulled in the military, only with encouragement, not oversight.
1. It is what they are supposed to do
2. There is always the threat of OIG/Professional Standards review of the case and all related materials
If these folks are found wanting or out of round on an investigation, it is really not good for them - in several ways.
I guess we will simply have to disagree on this one, it is not the first time we have disagreed, and I am pretty certain it will not be the last.
I certainly can't argue that TSA claims it didn't happen the way it was reported.
Of course TSA also claimed that the Backscatter Whole Body Imager images were suitable for viewing by young children. We now know that a high level TSA employee based out of Denver said the images were explicit, that Congress was so concerned about the images that they directed TSA to remove those devices unless privacy filters could be added. And if I recalled TSA claimed that strip searches didn't happen at New York as reported by three elderly ladies. This just scratches the surface of statement made by TSA that just didn't hold up to scrutiny.
I could go on but the point is clear, TSA doesn't have a sterling track record on honesty. So I'll apologize up front that I think any claims by TSA about how something happened can be taken with a grain of salt.
Of course TSA also claimed that the Backscatter Whole Body Imager images were suitable for viewing by young children. We now know that a high level TSA employee based out of Denver said the images were explicit, that Congress was so concerned about the images that they directed TSA to remove those devices unless privacy filters could be added. And if I recalled TSA claimed that strip searches didn't happen at New York as reported by three elderly ladies. This just scratches the surface of statement made by TSA that just didn't hold up to scrutiny.
I could go on but the point is clear, TSA doesn't have a sterling track record on honesty. So I'll apologize up front that I think any claims by TSA about how something happened can be taken with a grain of salt.
I might have given TSA the benefit of a doubt if they had released ALL of the video. The very fact that they limited the release made me suspicious.
I don't know anyone in any branch of the military in the Phoenix area who believed the TSA's side of the story. One of the TSA 'vets' had a nasty local reputation off the job.
I, personally, can attest to TSA's dishonesty. TSA confiscated my nitro pills, made a report of it, and then lied and said it never happened. FWIW, there's at least one other person whose pills were confiscated, a guy about to leave on a cruise.
Here's what I found most offensive about that continued lie. TSA could have said 'yes, nitroglycerine pills are allowed, but only if our screener says so'.
That was and is the truth, yet neither you nor TSA seem to want to publicly state that this is what can happen and it is perfectly within the scope of TSA's rules.
Not to go OT, but other than the former TSO who started an occasional online blog, I have yet to meet (online, checkpoint, recently in person a few times) a TSO who doesn't automatically assume the pax is lying in any negative pax-TSO exchange.
If someone had posted on this forum that he's gay and he's getting a super frisk at DEN and he thinks he's being targeted by the TSOs, I suspect you would have politely called him a liar. You would have talked about 'academy' training, gropes being designed to be offensive and invasive, you've never seen it happen at GSO so it probably doesn't happen any where else, etc.
And TSA wonders why it has a credibility issue. When it comes to TSA, I trust only if I can verify - and I bend over backwards to give the pax the benefit of a doubt, because I know TSA's version of events will be wildly skewed in the other direction. It has proven so time and again when it called pax liars until pax video started emerging.
It's pretty sickening when it's 2017 and I still can't get a straight answer about what to expect at the checkpoint from the blog, twitter, or FB. I still can't show up and fly without hands between my legs, stroking my genitals, dipping in my butt crack.
And I still am forced to fly without my necessary medical nitro. If something ever does happen to me and I am hurt or die because I wasn't allowed to have my nitro pills with me, my family and friends will post it here. No point in trying to post it on the blog, because TSA knows this is a life-threatening practice and it still stands behind it.
I don't know anyone in any branch of the military in the Phoenix area who believed the TSA's side of the story. One of the TSA 'vets' had a nasty local reputation off the job.
I, personally, can attest to TSA's dishonesty. TSA confiscated my nitro pills, made a report of it, and then lied and said it never happened. FWIW, there's at least one other person whose pills were confiscated, a guy about to leave on a cruise.
Here's what I found most offensive about that continued lie. TSA could have said 'yes, nitroglycerine pills are allowed, but only if our screener says so'.
That was and is the truth, yet neither you nor TSA seem to want to publicly state that this is what can happen and it is perfectly within the scope of TSA's rules.
Not to go OT, but other than the former TSO who started an occasional online blog, I have yet to meet (online, checkpoint, recently in person a few times) a TSO who doesn't automatically assume the pax is lying in any negative pax-TSO exchange.
If someone had posted on this forum that he's gay and he's getting a super frisk at DEN and he thinks he's being targeted by the TSOs, I suspect you would have politely called him a liar. You would have talked about 'academy' training, gropes being designed to be offensive and invasive, you've never seen it happen at GSO so it probably doesn't happen any where else, etc.
And TSA wonders why it has a credibility issue. When it comes to TSA, I trust only if I can verify - and I bend over backwards to give the pax the benefit of a doubt, because I know TSA's version of events will be wildly skewed in the other direction. It has proven so time and again when it called pax liars until pax video started emerging.
It's pretty sickening when it's 2017 and I still can't get a straight answer about what to expect at the checkpoint from the blog, twitter, or FB. I still can't show up and fly without hands between my legs, stroking my genitals, dipping in my butt crack.
And I still am forced to fly without my necessary medical nitro. If something ever does happen to me and I am hurt or die because I wasn't allowed to have my nitro pills with me, my family and friends will post it here. No point in trying to post it on the blog, because TSA knows this is a life-threatening practice and it still stands behind it.
Your suspicions are completely your own, I have simply asked for proof or substantiation on situations. The ability of some folks on this forum to take a comment here and there as fact without verification is simply amazing to me - the converse of that, is when someone asks for proof or substantiation, they are regarded as a pariah... unless they are supporting the same side as the person making the comment. I will continue to ask for proof in these mentions, I would hope that you would continue to do the same thing, so we don't wind up with situations where people make false claims, get tons of publicity, then we come to find out that the story was hokum.
Jun 26, 2017, 10:32 am
#52
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
I certainly can't argue that TSA claims it didn't happen the way it was reported.
Of course TSA also claimed that the Backscatter Whole Body Imager images were suitable for viewing by young children. We now know that a high level TSA employee based out of Denver said the images were explicit, that Congress was so concerned about the images that they directed TSA to remove those devices unless privacy filters could be added. And if I recalled TSA claimed that strip searches didn't happen at New York as reported by three elderly ladies. This just scratches the surface of statement made by TSA that just didn't hold up to scrutiny.
I could go on but the point is clear, TSA doesn't have a sterling track record on honesty. So I'll apologize up front that I think any claims by TSA about how something happened can be taken with a grain of salt.
Of course TSA also claimed that the Backscatter Whole Body Imager images were suitable for viewing by young children. We now know that a high level TSA employee based out of Denver said the images were explicit, that Congress was so concerned about the images that they directed TSA to remove those devices unless privacy filters could be added. And if I recalled TSA claimed that strip searches didn't happen at New York as reported by three elderly ladies. This just scratches the surface of statement made by TSA that just didn't hold up to scrutiny.
I could go on but the point is clear, TSA doesn't have a sterling track record on honesty. So I'll apologize up front that I think any claims by TSA about how something happened can be taken with a grain of salt.
Update: TSA took her to a private room and lifted up her shirt to see scar on her back. They wanted her to drop her jeans so they could see scars on her hip, but she refused to do so.
Last edited by petaluma1; Jun 26, 2017 at 11:30 am
Jun 26, 2017, 10:39 am
#53
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
<deleted>, I hope you remember these posts of yours if my family ever has to post here that I have died or been hospitalized because I was at the airport or on a plane without the necessary meds that TSA will not allow me to take on board unless the screener decides it's OK.
Of course, you wouldn't believe it if the head of TSA himself came out and acknowledged that my nitro was confiscated and it was according to the unavailable-to-the-public policy you continue to deny.
TSA will never improve as an organization as long as it continues to treat all pax like liars, at the checkpoint and on IBBs.
Of course, you wouldn't believe it if the head of TSA himself came out and acknowledged that my nitro was confiscated and it was according to the unavailable-to-the-public policy you continue to deny.
TSA will never improve as an organization as long as it continues to treat all pax like liars, at the checkpoint and on IBBs.
Last edited by TWA884; Jun 26, 2017 at 1:49 pm Reason: Privacy
Jun 26, 2017, 11:00 am
#54
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Greensboro
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,424
<deleted>, I hope you remember these posts of yours if my family ever has to post here that I have died or been hospitalized because I was at the airport or on a plane without the necessary meds that TSA will not allow me to take on board unless the screener decides it's OK.
Of course, you wouldn't believe it if the head of TSA himself came out and acknowledged that my nitro was confiscated and it was according to the unavailable-to-the-public policy you continue to deny.
TSA will never improve as an organization as long as it continues to treat all pax like liars, at the checkpoint and on IBBs.
Of course, you wouldn't believe it if the head of TSA himself came out and acknowledged that my nitro was confiscated and it was according to the unavailable-to-the-public policy you continue to deny.
TSA will never improve as an organization as long as it continues to treat all pax like liars, at the checkpoint and on IBBs.
I can speak for no one but myself, when I say I do not treat anyone like a liar unless they earn it, and even then I do so as professionally as possible.
Last edited by TWA884; Jun 26, 2017 at 1:49 pm Reason: Conform to moderator's edit of quoted post
Jun 26, 2017, 11:20 am
#55
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
I don't know what the 'company line' is, because it's SSI/SOP and you certainly are not at liberty to discuss what the 'company line' is, unless you mean the inconsistent nonsense communicated to the public in various ways.
There is an old dishonest blog post that says nitro pills are always allowed. It did not acknowledge a problem. Blog posts are not binding at the checkpoint, as I'm sure you know.
The current rules published on the website do not guarantee that medical nitro pills will be allowed. They are only permitted at screener discretion and the website is not binding at the checkpoint.
I called TSA Cares once about this matter. It took a couple weeks to get through.I wasn't optimistic - a friend in a wheelchair who had gotten hassled tried to arrange an escort through the checkpoint. TSA Cares stood him up. I made it clear I wanted an escort at the checkpoint, not advice. When I got to the reason - hoping to be allowed to take my medical nitro pills with me, because my heart had really been acting up, she declined because it wasn't something she felt she could assist with. She is not allowed to override screeners, so if they decided to confiscate my pills again, she wouldn't be able to stop them. I ended up having to cancel the trip.
What your replies have consistently demonstrated for everyone is that yes, TSA can confiscate medical nitro pills and no, nothing will be done about it.
There is an old dishonest blog post that says nitro pills are always allowed. It did not acknowledge a problem. Blog posts are not binding at the checkpoint, as I'm sure you know.
The current rules published on the website do not guarantee that medical nitro pills will be allowed. They are only permitted at screener discretion and the website is not binding at the checkpoint.
I called TSA Cares once about this matter. It took a couple weeks to get through.I wasn't optimistic - a friend in a wheelchair who had gotten hassled tried to arrange an escort through the checkpoint. TSA Cares stood him up. I made it clear I wanted an escort at the checkpoint, not advice. When I got to the reason - hoping to be allowed to take my medical nitro pills with me, because my heart had really been acting up, she declined because it wasn't something she felt she could assist with. She is not allowed to override screeners, so if they decided to confiscate my pills again, she wouldn't be able to stop them. I ended up having to cancel the trip.
What your replies have consistently demonstrated for everyone is that yes, TSA can confiscate medical nitro pills and no, nothing will be done about it.
Last edited by chollie; Jun 26, 2017 at 11:29 am
Jun 26, 2017, 11:52 am
#56
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,094
I will defer to your contacts on the ground there in PHX, I have only been there for some training - and it was hot. I have an official press release from TSA saying that it did not happen as was reported, including some video, and a whole collection of sworn statements and an investigation of the whole thing. The two sides differ, this is not new or even news. You will believe what you choose to, my statements or discussions or opinions, will not sway you either way. I will continue to believe the results of the investigation, because I have seen these investigations and even been a part of one. The people appointed to perform these investigations take it seriously for a couple of pretty outstanding reasons:
1. It is what they are supposed to do
2. There is always the threat of OIG/Professional Standards review of the case and all related materials
If these folks are found wanting or out of round on an investigation, it is really not good for them - in several ways.
I guess we will simply have to disagree on this one, it is not the first time we have disagreed, and I am pretty certain it will not be the last.
As always, you are certainly entitled to your opinion.
I do not assume anything in a case involving a complaint with a passenger. I simply choose to wait until I have something substantiated or investigated before I make a call on a situation. Just because someone "says" something happened, does not make it so, and bandwagoning is simply not my style. I want the truth in all issues, and a facebook or twitter comment is not proof, it is simply a comment until substantiated.
Your suspicions are completely your own, I have simply asked for proof or substantiation on situations. The ability of some folks on this forum to take a comment here and there as fact without verification is simply amazing to me - the converse of that, is when someone asks for proof or substantiation, they are regarded as a pariah... unless they are supporting the same side as the person making the comment. I will continue to ask for proof in these mentions, I would hope that you would continue to do the same thing, so we don't wind up with situations where people make false claims, get tons of publicity, then we come to find out that the story was hokum.
1. It is what they are supposed to do
2. There is always the threat of OIG/Professional Standards review of the case and all related materials
If these folks are found wanting or out of round on an investigation, it is really not good for them - in several ways.
I guess we will simply have to disagree on this one, it is not the first time we have disagreed, and I am pretty certain it will not be the last.
As always, you are certainly entitled to your opinion.
I do not assume anything in a case involving a complaint with a passenger. I simply choose to wait until I have something substantiated or investigated before I make a call on a situation. Just because someone "says" something happened, does not make it so, and bandwagoning is simply not my style. I want the truth in all issues, and a facebook or twitter comment is not proof, it is simply a comment until substantiated.
Your suspicions are completely your own, I have simply asked for proof or substantiation on situations. The ability of some folks on this forum to take a comment here and there as fact without verification is simply amazing to me - the converse of that, is when someone asks for proof or substantiation, they are regarded as a pariah... unless they are supporting the same side as the person making the comment. I will continue to ask for proof in these mentions, I would hope that you would continue to do the same thing, so we don't wind up with situations where people make false claims, get tons of publicity, then we come to find out that the story was hokum.
Would you deny, at least in the past, that TSA often made a public statement that "procedures where followed" before having all the facts in hand?
TSA had the opportunity to provide full disclosure but decided to only release video that shows what TSA wanted to be shown. I find that suspicious.
Jun 26, 2017, 12:05 pm
#57
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,165
There's a report today on @TSA that either WTMD or scanner detects rods one woman has in her back and she is forced to go to a private room and undress so that she can show them her zipper scar.
Update: TSA took her to a private room and lifted up her shirt to see scar on her back. They wanted her to drop her jeans so they could see scars on her hip, but she refused to do so.
Update: TSA took her to a private room and lifted up her shirt to see scar on her back. They wanted her to drop her jeans so they could see scars on her hip, but she refused to do so.
Jun 26, 2017, 12:11 pm
#58
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,094
I truly hope that never occurs, I do not dislike you, regardless of our interactions here. I understand that you are frustrated and angry and demoralized over your personal experiences. I have given you what steps I would take if I were in your shoes (or any other set of shoes like yours). I have never said anything to you to indicate that I did not/do not believe that you have had problems bringing your medications - because I do believe you have. I have always told you the company line has been nitro medications are allowed, we see them all the time. All of our publicly disseminated advisements (and online) regulations indicate that nitroglycerin medications are allowed in checked and carry-on. TSA does not prohibit the carrying of nitro medications, someone not following the regulations and publicly posted/disseminated guidelines did. I hope that you file a complaint every single time that you try to bring a medication and it is not allowed, without those complaints, the folks at HQ are unable to rectify those that are in the wrong.
I can speak for no one but myself, when I say I do not treat anyone like a liar unless they earn it, and even then I do so as professionally as possible.
I can speak for no one but myself, when I say I do not treat anyone like a liar unless they earn it, and even then I do so as professionally as possible.
I was happy to see that TSA finally fixed that issue with its latest version of the tool and there is a definite answer that the public receives on this question.
Jun 26, 2017, 12:48 pm
#60
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
The TSA "Can I Bring" tool only recently gave a positive answer regarding Nitroglycerin medicines. Before it only had verbiage concerning larger LGA's which was off topic for that particular inquiry.
I was happy to see that TSA finally fixed that issue with its latest version of the tool and there is a definite answer that the public receives on this question.
I was happy to see that TSA finally fixed that issue with its latest version of the tool and there is a definite answer that the public receives on this question.
1) nothing on the website is binding at the checkpoint
2) the screener still has the final say as to whether or not nitro pills (or any other medicine) will be allowed.
So nothing has really changed. TSA Cares can't help and the rules still leave it up to the screener.