As far as covering up the images, it is no different than the images from the x-ray machines. Those are SSI too.

And I don't think TSA has put out bad info about the WBIs, nor do I believe TSA is trying to cover up health issues.

And yet Curtis "Bob" Burns has posted images on the TSA blog, albeit inaccurate images which he took a year to admit were not of the same size and resolution as those seen by the operators of TSA's strip search technologies. And since you yourself admit SSI is used indiscriminately and needlessly, it's hardly a defense of TSA's refusal to share accurate samples of the naked pictures you take of passengers, including minor children.

And yet it is incontrovertibly true that TSA has been deliberately dishonest about its strip-search technologies from the start. Your opinion in this area is, as always, irrelevant to the truth.

So, if I tell other passengers that it can see enough detail to see the size of your junk and then recount the MIA incident, isn't that info in the know?

Or is that not good enough?

I am not the one trapping passengers at the CP, the TSO's are the ones that don't allow them to leave. I am also not forcing anyone to listen to me, I am just speaking freely. When I educate passengers about the strip-search scanners I am in no way stopping them from using the technology. I am just informing them of the research I have done on the machines. Oddly enough I've never had a passenger say they didn't want to hear my info/opinion on the machines. I usually get a "thanks for letting me know" or "I was unaware of that".

^ This is what will ultimately prevail against the TSA. They can lie and distort, but they can't yet prevent the public from expressing the truth. McCarthy fell. So will the TSA as long as a very few keep up on exposing their lies.

The TSA destroyed its veracity when the truth was discovered about the scanner images being less than family friendly.

Your agency covered up that, so why would I not believe it is capable of covering up "health issues" surrounding the machines?

it is completely within one's right to express their dissatisfaction with the nude-o-scope to anyone who will listen (n.b. will listen) and then it is up to the person listening if they want to act on that opinion. if it causes a delay due to that person having concerns or not kowing what the machine does/does not do, it causes a delay and afaic, that is no different than getting stuck behind a kettle who does not know that you have to take all metal objects out of their pocket, remove their shoes and that all l's, g's and a's must be less than 3.4oz and in a freedom baggie

what Scubatooth says is something to consider very strongly as it would "not be a good thing" to make a scene (physical, verbal or otherwise) at the checkpoint as more often than not, "witnesses" will see only "the retaliation" with the retaliator getting in trouble (just like in hockey where one player is cheap shotted and the ref misses it but sees the retaliation with the retaliator getting called for the penalty).

I seem to sense some discomfort from our TSA contributors if we discuss the realities of WBI while waiting in line at the checkpoints.

Have to wonder why they would be concerned?

I love the way the "security" freaks think it's OK for them to impose their paranoid view of the world on the rest of us, forcing us to go through all sorts of rigamorale just to get on an effing airplane, but when we fight back and make THEM go through some inconvenience then they are all critical.

It IS my own time. It is my time that is spent taking off shoes, removing my laptop, arguing about whether I can carry water on board, etc. You don't like it? God gave you a special place to put it.

Isn't it the responsibility of every person on the planet to do what they can to protect another person from harm, as best they can, without putting themselves in harm's way?

Since the TSA has chosen not to reveal complete an accurate data about the radiological impact of the new devices along with full disclosure of the images generated, it falls upon the people to educate each other. That is the only way to protect them from both potential physical and sexual harm.

My belief regarding the freedom of speech is that all speech appropriate at all times when on public grounds, with the government only deriving the authority to limit that speech under limited, SCOTUS approved, constitutionally sanctioned, guidelines. As the CP has been federalized (for the sake of professionalizing), I find no reason to share with my fellow travelers the simple facts about what the images have been alleged to reveal, that an incident in MIA led to one Smurf assaulting a supervisor because of of taunts that came up when the supe could clearly see genetalia, about the lack of information about the radiation from the machines, about how the TSA claimed that they would only be used for secondary screenings but are now being moved to primary screenings, how to truly check for dangers a Smurf may have to lift up grandma's mammary glands, how I won't let some perv look at my kids and I can't imagine why they think that is appropriate.

Is there anything wrong with that? As you can see, I'm even curtailing myself by refraining from mentioning WEI.

No, not discomfort. It amazes me that people complain, partially, the WBIs are a violation of privacy - but seemingly have no problems forcing a captains auidence to listen to what they want to say. Yeah, I know, it's in public, so people have no expectations of privacy (except, strangly, considering the use of the WBI), but why would a critic of TSA seem to care if they force people who can't go anywhere to have to listen to what they have to say. Make all the claims you want, planning on specifically talking about a specific topic to people you know can't leave is nothing more than an ambush.

As a similiar example, last year I was on a subway and we were all packed in there. A man waited to the very end to enter and then waited till the doors closed, and only then started to spout to everyone the evils of this or that. So much for my conversation with my friend, huh? This guy had a right to speak - we were in public - but I had no right not to listen or walk away.

Basically the same thing at the checkpoint.

Just because I'm in public doesn't mean TSA can use a machine to look under my clothes. There is an expectation of privacy that what is under my clothes is private.

If anyone is setting up an ambush, it's TSA - especially when it's punishing people for opting out.

You can't control the "noise" around you in a given situation. Some of it may even annoy you. That doesn't mean you have to pay attention to it. My kid's very good at pretending not to hear when I yell at him (until he gets in trouble ). You're still free to carry on your conversation. Whether it's someone talking loudly, a jack hammer, or subway noise, you're still free to carry on.

Think about your complaints and apply them to what TSA does. How is it wrong when it's someone else doing it, but ok when TSA does?

You are confusing the meanings of the words "privacy" and "quiet". As far as I know, the only way someone can violate privacy by using words is by sharing someone's private information. For example, if a TSA employee talks about a passenger's private medical information in public, he she is violating the passenger's privacy.

A loud or annoying conversation or noise does not violate privacy if it does not communicate anyone's private information.

Do you think that a dog can violate your privacy by barking loudly and interrupting your conversation?

However, looking under a person's clothes is a violation of that person's privacy.

Courts disagree with you concerning privacy and TSA. But I suspect that doesn't matter to you. but I actually agree, to a very large extent we have no expectation of privacy while in public. I do not think the WBI is an invasion of privacy, but I suspect most here will disagree. I am sure, eventually, a court will decide.

I'm rooting for sooner than later:

http://epic.org/privacy/litigation/E...DHS_Motion.pdf

"Fourth Amendment safeguards "dictate a critical examination of each element of the airport security program." Davis, 482 F.2d at 913."

"Searches are reasonable if they "escalate in invasiveness only after a lower level of screening discloses a reason to conduct a more probing search." Hartwell, 436 F.3d at 180."

"The TSA' s full body scanner program fails to meet these standards. The
TSA subjects all air travelers to the most extensive, invasive search available at the outset."

Keep your fingers crossed, Free Americans! There's plenty of room for the WBI machines right next to the puffers in the warehouse.

Support EPIC !^