Uncomfortable Pat Down at IAH E
Oct 8, 2009 | 12:15 am
#46
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cypress, TX
Programs: CO Plat, Priority Club Plat
Posts: 641
I walked through Terminal E security this afternoon... there was 2 lines going, one through the WTMD and the nude machine...
NO SIGNS were posted, for those going into the nude machine... and there was a TSA agent who almost seemed to direct people away from the short line at the WTMD and into the longer line of the nude machine...
Why would they be directing people into a LONGER line... avoiding the WTMD... smells fishy to me...
People really need to be made aware of these machines... as they have no idea what is going on, not to mention I wonder if the frequent dose of radiation from a frequent flyer going through often, would cause any long term problems?
NO SIGNS were posted, for those going into the nude machine... and there was a TSA agent who almost seemed to direct people away from the short line at the WTMD and into the longer line of the nude machine...
Why would they be directing people into a LONGER line... avoiding the WTMD... smells fishy to me...
People really need to be made aware of these machines... as they have no idea what is going on, not to mention I wonder if the frequent dose of radiation from a frequent flyer going through often, would cause any long term problems?
Oct 8, 2009 | 12:20 am
#47
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cypress, TX
Programs: CO Plat, Priority Club Plat
Posts: 641
Taking pictures of signs posted... then removing said signs... does not mean signage is up...
I bet if someone was to file a freedom of information act, requesting video footage of Terminal E checkpoint... it would show the pictures being taken this morning... then sometime after that signs being removed or taken down...
There was NO SIGNS posted in Terminal E by the nude machine this afternoon/evening... so go and explain THAT to us...
Last edited by Cholula; Oct 8, 2009 at 6:56 am Reason: Removed personal attack on another member
Oct 8, 2009 | 6:20 am
#48
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 555
If I've learned nothing else in nearly three decades in government mid-management, the one thing I've learned is: don't bother to make phone calls and ask the staff (whether directly or peripherally involved) whether they're breaking the rules.
Me: "I have a citizen complaint that the <required sign/form/procedure> is not being followed? Did you disregard Departmental policy and my specific direction?"
Predictable Reply: "Of course not, ma'am! We would NEVER do that! We ALWAYS follow policy and ALWAYS do everything you ask EXACTLY as you ask us to do it!"
Yeah, surrrrrre. The only way to resolve questions like this is to close my box of bonbons, get my buns out of the executive chair, and make an unannounced visit to personally look at the frelling sign/form/procedure in action. MY photograph might mean something to my superiors (and maybe even to Mr. Citizen). Asking the foxes for henhouse photos just gives them time to hide the drumstick bones.
~Irish
Me: "I have a citizen complaint that the <required sign/form/procedure> is not being followed? Did you disregard Departmental policy and my specific direction?"
Predictable Reply: "Of course not, ma'am! We would NEVER do that! We ALWAYS follow policy and ALWAYS do everything you ask EXACTLY as you ask us to do it!"
Yeah, surrrrrre. The only way to resolve questions like this is to close my box of bonbons, get my buns out of the executive chair, and make an unannounced visit to personally look at the frelling sign/form/procedure in action. MY photograph might mean something to my superiors (and maybe even to Mr. Citizen). Asking the foxes for henhouse photos just gives them time to hide the drumstick bones.
~Irish
Last edited by IrishDoesntFlyNow; Oct 8, 2009 at 6:22 am Reason: fixed a typo
Oct 8, 2009 | 10:23 am
#49
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Finally back in Boston after escaping from New York
Posts: 13,684
Here's the reply, in all of its glory. If you can interpret it, let me know:
Thank you for your email message concerning the Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) deployment of whole body imaging technology.
Ongoing threats to aviation security require that certain security measures be undertaken. The Supreme Court has held that administrative searches are reasonable to undertake without first obtaining search warrants. Airport checkpoint searches are administrative (or "special needs") searches. Several federal appellate courts have held that airport screening searches are reasonable, in that they appropriately balance the privacy interests of citizens against the compelling goal of protecting the traveling public. While all passengers must submit to an administrative search to gain access to an aircraft, TSA's policy is to afford passengers professional and courteous treatment with dignity and respect.
Whole body imaging provides TSA with a means of detecting a wide variety of threats, including suicide vests and other Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) that are hidden under individuals' clothing and that may not be detected during metal-detection screening. TSA is sensitive to passengers' concerns about protecting their privacy as it relates to the security screening process, and in particular the use of whole body imaging technology.
To date, TSA has used whole body imaging on a purely voluntary basis as an alternative to a pat-down inspection. Passengers who have been identified for screening with whole body imaging may opt for a pat-down instead, if that is their preference. In addition to effectiveness and suitability assessments of the whole body imaging technology, TSA is examining operational issues associated with the technology, including efficiency, privacy considerations, training, safety of use, and perceptions by the traveling public.
TSA has established rigorous controls to ensure privacy during whole body imaging screening. The Transportation Security Officer (TSO) attending the passenger will not view the image, while a second TSO will view the image in a separate, remote location and will not be able to view the passenger. No cameras, cellular telephones, or other devices capable of capturing an image are permitted in the image viewing area. The image cannot be stored, transmitted, or printed and is permanently deleted after each passenger has been screened.
We have worked very hard to address privacy concerns while testing whole body imaging technology. We believe that whole body imaging technology will be an effective tool in detecting terrorist threats. We look forward to continued public dialogue as we assess the effectiveness of the technology in the airport setting.
We encourage you to visit our website at www.tsa.gov for additional information about TSA. We continue to add new information and encourage you to check the website frequently for updated information.
TSA Contact Center
Mike
Thank you for your email message concerning the Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) deployment of whole body imaging technology.
Ongoing threats to aviation security require that certain security measures be undertaken. The Supreme Court has held that administrative searches are reasonable to undertake without first obtaining search warrants. Airport checkpoint searches are administrative (or "special needs") searches. Several federal appellate courts have held that airport screening searches are reasonable, in that they appropriately balance the privacy interests of citizens against the compelling goal of protecting the traveling public. While all passengers must submit to an administrative search to gain access to an aircraft, TSA's policy is to afford passengers professional and courteous treatment with dignity and respect.
Whole body imaging provides TSA with a means of detecting a wide variety of threats, including suicide vests and other Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) that are hidden under individuals' clothing and that may not be detected during metal-detection screening. TSA is sensitive to passengers' concerns about protecting their privacy as it relates to the security screening process, and in particular the use of whole body imaging technology.
To date, TSA has used whole body imaging on a purely voluntary basis as an alternative to a pat-down inspection. Passengers who have been identified for screening with whole body imaging may opt for a pat-down instead, if that is their preference. In addition to effectiveness and suitability assessments of the whole body imaging technology, TSA is examining operational issues associated with the technology, including efficiency, privacy considerations, training, safety of use, and perceptions by the traveling public.
TSA has established rigorous controls to ensure privacy during whole body imaging screening. The Transportation Security Officer (TSO) attending the passenger will not view the image, while a second TSO will view the image in a separate, remote location and will not be able to view the passenger. No cameras, cellular telephones, or other devices capable of capturing an image are permitted in the image viewing area. The image cannot be stored, transmitted, or printed and is permanently deleted after each passenger has been screened.
We have worked very hard to address privacy concerns while testing whole body imaging technology. We believe that whole body imaging technology will be an effective tool in detecting terrorist threats. We look forward to continued public dialogue as we assess the effectiveness of the technology in the airport setting.
We encourage you to visit our website at www.tsa.gov for additional information about TSA. We continue to add new information and encourage you to check the website frequently for updated information.
TSA Contact Center
Mike
Thank you for your email message.
TSA has used whole body imaging on a purely voluntary basis as an alternative to a pat-down inspection. Passengers who have been identified for screening with whole body imaging may opt for a pat-down instead, if that is their preference.
We encourage you to visit our website at www.tsa.gov for additional information about TSA. We continue to add new information and encourage you to check the website frequently for updated information.
Hmm, sounds like you will only get the strip search if you are "identified" for it. No comment on how they define identified, though, since the strip search is supposed to be voluntary. Seriously, this should have been a yes or no answer. Naturally, I replied. Unfortunately for the TSA, it is up against the worst kind of opponent: someone with nothing better to do.
Mike
Oct 8, 2009 | 10:57 am
#51
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: IAH/HOU
Programs: CO/DL
Posts: 349
Taking pictures of signs posted... then removing said signs... does not mean signage is up...
I bet if someone was to file a freedom of information act, requesting video footage of Terminal E checkpoint... it would show the pictures being taken this morning... then sometime after that signs being removed or taken down...
There was NO SIGNS posted in Terminal E by the nude machine this afternoon/evening... so go and explain THAT to us...
I bet if someone was to file a freedom of information act, requesting video footage of Terminal E checkpoint... it would show the pictures being taken this morning... then sometime after that signs being removed or taken down...
There was NO SIGNS posted in Terminal E by the nude machine this afternoon/evening... so go and explain THAT to us...
I also know someone arriving on an international flight making a connection to AUS, I have talked with them and they too will make a point to see what is there for signage at the FIS checkpoint. Will post later tonight.
Last edited by RoadVeteran; Oct 8, 2009 at 11:22 am
Oct 8, 2009 | 11:25 am
#52
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 29,078
)
Oct 8, 2009 | 12:50 pm
#54
Original Poster
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: PDX
Programs: AS Titanium, Marriott Lifetime Plat, UA Gold
Posts: 11,594
I will be at IAH terminal E this afternoon around 5pm (central time, Thursday October 8th) dropping a few coworkers off for a flight, they hate the TSA and the nude a scope just as much as anyone else, they have all agreed to make a point to see if the signs are still there or have been put back up (they should never have been taken down), and they will contact me as soon as they have cleared.
I also know someone arriving on an international flight making a connection to AUS, I have talked with them and they too will make a point to see what is there for signage at the FIS checkpoint. Will post later tonight.
I also know someone arriving on an international flight making a connection to AUS, I have talked with them and they too will make a point to see what is there for signage at the FIS checkpoint. Will post later tonight.
Oct 8, 2009 | 1:05 pm
#55
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,195
On a recent trip I "opted-out" of the naked scanner (they were requiring everyone to go through it) and was subjected to a somewhat embarrassing pat down.
Right out in the open I was felt up and down. With parts touched that only my wife and doctor are allowed near.
Are they doing these pat downs in the open to embarrass us into going through the machine?
From now on I'll go through Terminal C, especially when traveling with my wife, I can't imagine subjecting her to a similar pat down, she'd never fly again.
Right out in the open I was felt up and down. With parts touched that only my wife and doctor are allowed near.
Are they doing these pat downs in the open to embarrass us into going through the machine?
From now on I'll go through Terminal C, especially when traveling with my wife, I can't imagine subjecting her to a similar pat down, she'd never fly again.
Every passenger has this right. No exceptions. One only need ask.
Oct 8, 2009 | 1:14 pm
#56
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,195
As I understand, you are contending that within 25 hours:
1. The OP made his post.
2. TSA Bob saw it and contacted Public Affairs at IAH.
3. They had the signs printed, framed, and put onto stands at the checkpost.
You might be right, of course, but I have never heard of any government agency moving that efficiently and quickly on anything at all.
1. The OP made his post.
2. TSA Bob saw it and contacted Public Affairs at IAH.
3. They had the signs printed, framed, and put onto stands at the checkpost.
You might be right, of course, but I have never heard of any government agency moving that efficiently and quickly on anything at all.
Oct 8, 2009 | 1:21 pm
#57
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,444
Oct 8, 2009 | 1:26 pm
#58
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 29,078
Hey, Bob, a question for you.
The sign in the photo you posted says "Use of this technology is optional. You have a choice of a pat-down as an alternative."
Your own website says, at http://www.tsa.gov/press/happenings/...d_patdown.shtm says
"The enhanced pat-down will be used only after all other screening methods have been used and the alarm remains unresolved."
On your web site, the pat down is the last resort. On your signs, it's the initial default should you refuse to use the nude photo machine. If I refuse to submit to your pornographic fantasy, why can't I be directed to a WTMD?
The sign in the photo you posted says "Use of this technology is optional. You have a choice of a pat-down as an alternative."
Your own website says, at http://www.tsa.gov/press/happenings/...d_patdown.shtm says
"The enhanced pat-down will be used only after all other screening methods have been used and the alarm remains unresolved."
On your web site, the pat down is the last resort. On your signs, it's the initial default should you refuse to use the nude photo machine. If I refuse to submit to your pornographic fantasy, why can't I be directed to a WTMD?
but for his take as you can read that one can opt out and is only subject to the epd only if there is an alarm and the alarm cannot be resolved. so why are pax being given an epd for simply opting out and not alarming? the tsa website states very clearly that the epd is to be used only after all other methods have been used. are you at liberty to say which is correct as i have a funny feeling "me and my orthopedic shoes" are gonna experience this someplace over the next 3 1/2 weeks
Oct 8, 2009 | 1:29 pm
#59
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 30,971
Do those 3-1-1 signs say 3.0 or 3.4 ounces/100ml?
Oct 8, 2009 | 1:57 pm
#60
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 8,957
What may be "far, far, FAR more likely" is that the sign was turned around so that no one could see it as I noted earlier in this thread. And if it was turned around facing the "correct" way, it is not noticeable by those in the MMW line.
Last edited by ND Sol; Oct 8, 2009 at 2:49 pm