On PV, BB wrote:

Remember this folks when the time comes......

I guess BB is a mushroom, kept in the dark and fed BS....

Perhaps he is lying behind the log on this one. It may be optional in the way that shoe removal is optional. If you have a medical issue, then you have the option to have a pat-down instead.

And nothing says that this won't be used as the primary screening device. At best, this should be a secondary screening and optional. If you don't want the WBI for your secondary, then you get the pat-down.

"Plans" will change. And then it will be mandatory and the primary screening means.

One of the biggest problems TSA has is with poor documentation of procedures (probably to TSOs as well as passengers) and that often results in no one actually knowing what the true intent of the SOP actually is. Stating what is required for a passenger to enter a checkpoint, be screened, then go to their gate shouldn't be SSI. It would allow the passenger to determine if a TSA employee was attempting something way outside of TSA's screening procedures.

It is rather like all the other "optional" choices. One need not submit to a breathalyzer either, but refusing to do so will probably cost you your drivers license. I view these machines as mandatory. I actually think there may be some overreaction on the subject too. remember most of the people passing through will be overweight Americans. Not too many people get off on that, I suspect.

I don't need a license to ride in a car as a passenger nor would I be required to take a breathalyzer.

Your argument is faulty.

Nice generalization. Beyond that, are you not aware that WBI is fundamentally flawed?

As reported in the Montreal Gazette (with a rebuttal by Blogdad Bob in the comments):

Kathleen Petrowsky, the TSA director at O�Hare, said she anticipates the body scans -- now optional for passengers -- will become mandatory in the future to guard against improvised explosive devices being smuggled onto airliners.

Some TSA spokeholes say it will become mandatory. Some spokesholes don�t. Each spokeshole is different.

He's catching some heat over this at PV. TSA needs to speak with one voice otherwise they come off sounding like they don't know what they're doing.

Like?

Until Bob says "we will not...." (even then I still might not believe it), when you say "there are no plans..." you're leaving the door wide open for future opportunities.

I'm still waiting for Bob to post and comment on when TSA plans to introduce psychological evaluations to ensure that those who are sitting in their dark private screening booths leering at our images aren't some sort of sexual deviants.

It is unfortunately far too likely that perverts or pedophiles will now be attracted to the TSA for work. The possibility of being able to look at naked adults and children all day in a private room will just be too tempting for them to overlook.

As long as the public is subjected to whole body imagers by TSA, the agency should:
1) Require a psychological examination of every new employee, in an attempt to screen out the bad ones before offering them a position.

2) Require all current employees to undergo a psychological examination immediately, to ensure that those who are there aren't sexual perverts, deviants, and pedophiles.

3) Require periodic reinvestigations (at a maximum of every 2 years) for every TSA employee that has access to one of these machines, no matter how minimal. (After all, wasn't it TSA that stated their background investigation process can only weed out those who have done bad in the past, and that the past isn't necessarily a guarantee of the future?)

The TSA owes the American public assurances that the wrong people won't be placed in a position to view these images. Psychological examinations are a good first step at providing them.

Why go to the effort and taxpayer expense? Privacy concerns aside, WBI is a flawed technology.

Of course, it's more than likely that they DON'T know what they're doing.

In recent months, TSA has reminded me of a 3-year-old who got one of those toy tool sets for Christmas; they're madly running around the house banging away on everything with their toy hammer or prying at things with the toy screwdriver. Witness the glee over the mobile ETD setup: "Let's use it at the gate! Let's use it before the TDC! Oooh, let's use it in the parking lot! I want to use it! No, me next!"

Now they're doing the same with the nude-o-scope. Since the undie bomber, they feel they can roll these out without any control. Ms Petrowsky, TSA director at O�Hare, is simply giddy with the thought that they can make this mandatory. It's like the toddler just found that the toy screwdriver actually works. Wheeee!!

Don't expect an "authoritative" statement. TSA has used this kind of confusion to their advantage all along. BB says one thing, the website says another (or different parts of the website say contradictory things), and various TSA supporters here and at PV have given yet other views. (Recall the BS ice debacle, or the shoes on belt/shoes in bin debate.) All part of keeping 6 terrorists and 100s of millions of passengers deliberately confused.

Hey, it's never going to be "mandatory." Just like how it is not mandatory when the TSA confiscates your liquids. You voluntarily surrender them. Someday, you will "voluntarily surrender" your right to travel if you opt out of the strip search machine.

Mike