|
Latest TSA Training Video - shhh SSI!
|
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 14696386)
You are kidding right? Tom was a deputy administrator with TSA for about 2 years. I would be willing to bet he has had some pretty good insight and information on screening processes. Many machines work well in some locations, not so well in others. TSA determined that the puffers in their current format were simply not up to the task set before them. I liked the puffers, but if I have a choice between a machine that costs $120k and needs only rudimentary maintenance, and a machine that the agency spent $29.6 million on the program and procured a total of 207 units (only 94 of which were deployed) and over $6.2 million was spent simply on maintenance of the equipment - that is a simple choice based on the math. I believe the major concerns with the machinery were dirt/dust/gunk in the sensor inputs, and humidity. So far, those do not seem to have generated the same set of challenges for the AIT.
|
Originally Posted by birdstrike
(Post 14701365)
You'll never get me to come to the Dark Side. Never! :p
Originally Posted by N965VJ
(Post 14761815)
The same revolving door that screeners go through after finding that there are more lucrative opportunities elsewhere? :p If he truly wanted to see effective security equipment being used, he would be advocating the use of ETP/ETD since that technology actually finds explosives. Instead, he, his firm, the Chertoff Group, etc. have decided to chase after the money trail of the Nude-O-Scopes.
You do remember Chertoff saying how great the Nude-O-Scopes were, then being busted when it was revealed he had a financial interest in their acquisition, don't you?
Originally Posted by Combat Medic
(Post 14766923)
I agree that the puffers had problems, but it should be pointed out that the TSA / DHS wrote the specifications for the puffers. If the puffers failed after being accepted by the TSA / DHS then the failure is not with the equipment.
|
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 14767373)
It gives the workforce a better chance to clear a person for things that would not necessarily alarm a WTMD.
You are ASSUMING that every passenger is guilty and that they should be denied unless they are cleared by you. The correct posture should be that the passenger is innocent and should be allowed to pass unless WEI is found. It's a subtle difference, but it shows how the TSA has perverted the Constitution and presumption of innocence. It also goes to how the screeners think. The process is not supposed to be about finding drugs, pornography, or any other item that might possibly be illegal. It's supposed to be about keeping WEI that could be used to commit an act of terror off of airplanes. I'm only picking on you because you expressed that sentiment very clearly. It has become clear to many of us that your leadership operates as if the presumption of guilt is true, and it's clear that the same sentiment is shared by several of the other folks here that claim to be TSA employees (it's the internet, we never know for sure). |
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 14767373)
Chertoff may be pushing the machine for his own agenda (i.e. Moolah), but the machines capabilities speak for themselves. It gives the workforce a better chance to clear a person for things that would not necessarily alarm a WTMD. It gives folks with medical implants a chance to NOT be patted down (which was/still is one of the most frequent complaints) or wanded. Currently they are researching and testing the ATR protocols which would render much of the privacy argument moot. I personally like the AIT because it gives us a better chance of finding most of the items that we might miss with the older equipment.
They say they are not effective, slow down screening among other reasons. |
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 14767373)
I personally like the AIT because it gives us a better chance of finding most of the items that we might miss with the older equipment.
|
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 14767373)
Chertoff may be pushing the machine for his own agenda (i.e. Moolah), but the machines capabilities speak for themselves. It gives the workforce a better chance to clear a person for things that would not necessarily alarm a WTMD. It gives folks with medical implants a chance to NOT be patted down (which was/still is one of the most frequent complaints) or wanded. Currently they are researching and testing the ATR protocols which would render much of the privacy argument moot. I personally like the AIT because it gives us a better chance of finding most of the items that we might miss with the older equipment.
Privacy? there's no way you can do an full-body, open-palm probing frisk and non-invasive. |
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 14767373)
Chertoff may be pushing the machine for his own agenda (i.e. Moolah), but the machines capabilities speak for themselves.
|
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 14767310)
Given time, I can convert most I have met... Some day you too will understand...:D
|
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 14767310)
Chertoff may be pushing the machine for his own agenda (i.e. Moolah), but the machines capabilities speak for themselves.
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 14767310)
It gives the workforce a better chance to clear a person for things that would not necessarily alarm a WTMD.
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 14767310)
It gives folks with medical implants a chance to NOT be patted down (which was/still is one of the most frequent complaints) or wanded.
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 14767310)
Currently they are researching and testing the ATR protocols which would render much of the privacy argument moot.
Blogdad Bob said back in April that
Originally Posted by BB
We’re very interested in this next generation software, but ATR in its current form does not meet TSA’s detection standards.
Software development is currently underway and will be followed by testing to ensure it meets our detection standards.
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 14767310)
I personally like the AIT because it gives us a better chance of finding most of the items that we might miss with the older equipment.
|
Originally Posted by polonius
(Post 14765463)
BB, Skeltor, and Hawley have all failed to provide any response to my question about how it is that we, as a society, can casually accept a million annual deaths from automobiles without feeling the need to impose draconian restrictions on cars and drivers, or multiple millions of annual deaths from heart disease without feeling compelled to shut down McDonalds and KFC, yet we are expected to accept as rational the decision to systematically deprive citizens of fundamental rights and liberties in response to the few dozen annual deaths caused by terrorism.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 5:51 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.