I am all for security.
I dont knoe you.

You might be a good person.

I have run into mostly bullies at the airports.

And everybody I know ( and that is a lot of people) say the same.

Thast security needs to employ more people with manners , education and so on.

The end of this is actually that we will not see each other for a long time. They dont want their son to go throw this with un educated bullies. Neither do I.

Sad but true. We will stick to computer, phone and everything else.

I never thought that the world would be this bad.
Thank you for answering my questions.

Most people from Europe will not read TSA guide lines for travelling.
The reason is that they dont know about it.

My family and me have no problem with screening.
It is how it is done. And how the TSA do it.

We all want to be safe. You dont know me and I dont know you.

With a little respect and working with people everybody goes a long way.
I do know what I am talking about. Since I do have people around me in security and so on.

Madam, I am more than happy to answer any questions I can. It’s the reason I post here. You are welcome.

Your grandson is severely disabled. The child’s parents have already had to make massive changes to their lifestyles to accommodate his needs, and I can only assume that they do so because they love him. The TSA’s checkpoints are extremely minor when compared to the things they have had to go through in the years they have had him, and refusing to deal with this minor inconvenience is just a bit childish in my opinion. And it is minor no matter the comments of the other posters here.

Tell the kids to come on over. Bring the grandson. They will have a great time. If they let their fears of the TSA’s checkpoints prevent them from coming it does a disservice to the child.

So, how, exactly, do you perform a physical screening of a passenger again? :rolleyes:

I'm not talking about all the second-hand rumors and eyewitness accounts. After all, you can't trust anything on the Internet, which is full of self-righteous, self-appointed experts in everything, right?

A passenger with special needs may have, in fact, the need to know exactly how a physical screening is performed, in order to make this "informed decision". But TSA refuses to provide that information.

Like I said before it all has to do how it is done.

My daugther hates to fly , she is terrified.

But you do know as I know that there are a lot of people that should not work in security and/or being a TSA.

We are not bad people. we just dont want the family (the boy) more distant to people than he is.

And maybe have the boy screened by a person who doesnt know kids and /or a disabled kid. That is damaging.

What do you define by "special needs"? Is it the same as everyone else? Are all "special needs" similiar? I'll answer - they are not. I can easily list dozens and dozens of situations where special needs changes from person to person, and that would not cover nearly all special needs people, be they child or adult.

So im a little confused, as I am sure you are aware of this fact, as to why you ask how a special needs person can find out how they can be screened? You should know the answer - they can contact a TSA employee, by phone, email, or in person and explaining their particular situation, ask. It is not secret, as you seem to suggest. Or did I misread your question/statement?

What do you define by "special needs"? Is it the same as everyone else? Are all "special needs" similiar? I'll answer - they are not. I can easily list dozens and dozens of situations where special needs changes from person to person, and that would not cover nearly all special needs people, be they child or adult. So how can contacting a TSA employee by phone, e-mail or in person answer the question?

But since "it is not a secret" answer us this.

A special needs person, wearing an adult diaper, goes through the AIT. If there are contents in the adult diaper, how exactly will he be cleared?

The TSA REFUSES to provide OFFICIAL information regarding screening procedures. Sure, we can infer on what they are without official information, based on personal experience and ancedotes from those who have been through hell at the hands of you and your buddies.

However, until YOUR EMPLOYER provides official information on screening procedures, we're only able to guess.

That you support this position 100% is a crying shame. How can you call yourself an American? A real American would have walked from this long ago.

[QUOTE=mikemey;14918615]The TSA REFUSES to provide OFFICIAL information regarding screening procedures. Sure, we can infer on what they are without official information, based on personal experience and ancedotes from those who have been through hell at the hands of you and your buddies.

However, until YOUR EMPLOYER provides official information on screening procedures, we're only able to guess.

That you support this position 100% is a crying shame. How can you call yourself an American? A real American would have walked from this long ago.[/QUOTE]


Seems you may have answered your on question.

Nice try at a trick question. Can I ask you annuinest question, do you or someone you know wear adult diapers? Honest answer please. Or are you just looking for something to find fault with?

Here is the problem with your question (and there is an answer or I should say many multiple answers): what kind of contents? How much contents? What kind of garnet is being worn above the diaper? How tightly/loose does that garnet fit the person? Is the garnet skirt, pants, shorts, etc. How well can we see the contours of the body under eat the clothing? I could go on....and each variable changes how that person may be or may NOT be screened.

You also seem to be making assumptions regarding the WBIs. What do they say about assumptions...?


However, usually what you ask will result in no additional screening. Why should it? Let's imagine the contents are liquid, or almost entirely so. Wet clothing is no problem for the WBIs. If so, every passenger rained on would receive a pat-down. Spill your drink on your pants before you go through the WBI, no problems.

Again, you seem to be making assumptions about the WBI. But that's ok. Personally, I believe you and others here will never be happy with them. So feel free to be critical of what I have written.

And have a great day!

:)

Gee, it's almost like your agency and its clerks and apologists have been consistently dishonest and evasive about this strip-search technology from day one.

We kind of have to, since you people won't be honest about them. Keep in mind that you yourself claim that images that show people's genitals are somehow not nude images. It's not as though you have a single shred of credibility or something.

Except that you, and other TSOs here, have stated that you won't explain the details as to how a physical screening is conducted ... because those details are SSI.

There is an inherent contradiction between "if you have a question, ask" and "I can't reveal the details because they're SSI."

Yawn. I guess a a dead horse can always be beaten.

And this is what actually confuses me. Any "alarm" can be cleared using pat-downs, HHMD, ETD. You know this. So what specifically are you asking?

FYI - The MM Wave scanners cannot see through wet clothing. It's the moisture content of the human tissue that creates the image by absorption of the waves. That's why (1) the images are fuzzier than x-ray (2) They are foiled by wet clothing or conductive fabrics.

The X-Ray kind can see through wet clothing, conductive fabric -no problem.

Good thing I don't work for TSA - I'm sure the above is SSI :D

Thanks for admitting these are legitimate points you're incapable of addressing.

I have no idea what 'annuinest' is, but my answer is 'Yes'. It has been no issue in his travels around much of the world.

And they have requested one 'last' trip to Hawaii. I am extremely hesitent to take him to the United States, although I do wish to honour that request, based mostly on what I read here from TSOs.

I will ask the question in another attempt:

Will a TSO perform a pat-down on an injury?

My grandson is 8 with adult diapers.
And No it is not only liquid in the diapers.

What would happen to him? He is very aware that he has private parts and diapers. But he cant control it all.

Seems like they want to make sure it is not a fake injury.

Great.

I am not proud any more to live in this country. And I use to be.

If you think so. More power to ya.

Ah ... but there are pat-downs, and there are pat-downs. At least, that's what the report seems to be.

It used to be that a pat-down never directly touched one's genitalia; if a pat-down in that area was required, it was always conducted with the back of the hand, and always carefully announced in advance. Now, there are tons of reports that a much more invasive form of pat-down is in use in some (but not all) locations --- in particular, involving using the front of the hand to screen the genitalia, and perhaps even involving squeezing the bits-and-pieces.

TSA won't confirm anything about these new screening techniques, except that "enhanced patdowns [are] part of our layered approach to security". So, there's no way for a common passenger to know (a) if they're going to be required to receive a patdown, (b) whether or not that pat-down will be "enhanced" or "non-enhanged", and (c) in either case, specifically what physical contact will be required in either scenario.

So, suppose for a moment that I'm the legal guardian of a passenger for whom physical contact is a concern. (The reason doesn't matter; pick your favorite reason.) How am I supposed to prepare my ward for a TSA checkpoint ... when TSA won't tell me what to expect?

Stupid auto-correction on my phone....meant to ask the other poster "honest". Oh well.

Nah, adult diapers are not a problem. Oh, people here like so spread fear. But wearing then wi not be an issue.

What is that suppose to mean./ That you will look in the diaper?
Can you change it to while you are at it?

Another attempt? I didn't realize you had asked me eariler, sorry I missed it. Will the wound be covered, will their be a reason to pat that area down?

It does happen, yes. And if we didn't do so when the HHMD alarms, or WTMD alarms, or ETD alarms, etc, people here would post what they love to post: "FAIL". Many here would point out that a bandage could be used to conceal a threat item - and you know what I'm saying is true.

But do we pat people down simply because they have an injury? No. It all depends if they wear a brace, cast, etc, which determines additional screening.

Where did I say we would look in the diaper???? In fact, we can not do that.

Here are two 'L's for you ;)

But I am concerned; based on the several reports here (including my own), some ( a few? several? most?) TSOs don't seem to be aware of or concerned about causing further pain or damage to injuries. There was another report of this yesterday here.

This traveller has been around the world multiple times, and recently even did a long haul medevac flight. I don't want to knowingly have him face people who don't seem to be as aware or understanding of injuries. I know that this isn't the case everywhere, but the lack of responses or the vague responses by some TSOs and what we see in person does concern me.

Then again, perhaps I should just agree with chollie that things are not always as they appear, and that perhaps some posters just like to create the confusion and concern that appears throughout this thread.

I don't believe that I asked you specifically earlier; it was a general reposting of the question which had not been answered, as OP's original question has been somewhat muddied as there are several tangents on this thread.

I went back and reread your answer and unfortunately it doesn't alleviate my concerns.

If I presented to you with a sling, or a bandage, or a covering on a wound, and there was some reason to perform a secondary, does your training address how you deal with those situations? Are you taught how to examine an area with a dressing covering some of the body for instance? I know that some TSOs ask if there are sensitive areas; if the passenger points one out, how does the TSO then check that area without causing more pain or injury?

AngryMiller reported something earlier in this thread about a surgical wound for instance.

If you receive the front the hand pat-down you HAVE to be told it's about to happen, asked to bring a witness (ask a LEO if your by yourself) and the TSA employees wl have to write a report to justify why they did so. A TSA employee who violates such a procedure will most likely be fired.

The body scanners have found many people who hid things in the front of their underpants. Unlike the WTMD you get one pass through the WBI. So if you stuff something there, you will get that pat-down - easy to remove one thing and leave another item there. And to be honest, if any passenger stuffs something there to bypass security, they are lucky that's all that happens, if they are not arrested.

Why is it being reported that it's happening wide spread? My opinion is there are several reasons, one being people like to spread fear. Another is if you opt out of the wbi you get the full pat-down that has exist for years, comes close to the genital area, and does use the back of the hand.

Ah, ha! So now the terrorists know that all they have to do is wear an adult diaper through security in order to smuggle something on board a plane. Good to know, for terrorists and non-terrorists alike. :D

To be honest, you believe as you feel. The only time I think I could get someone on this site to believe what I say is to agree with the preconceived notions/beliefs already widespread here based on incomplete information and faulty assumptions.

Ok, I'm finished for the day. Have a good night! :)

And yet, abundant reports indicate that front-of-hand genital fondling has been implemented alongside your strip-search technology, with no indications of written reports or fired screening clerks.

Methinks you don't know what you are talking about.

1. Is there any public documentation regarding this? The TSA Blog's posting on this subject was completely uninformative. In short ... given that we don't know who you are, why should we trust that your understanding of the policy is correct? (No offense.)

2. There were reports here that the enhanced pat-down was being administered to everyone who opted-out of the WBI --- not the ordinary pat-down, as you report. Obviously, either other TSA sites don't understand the new policy, or you don't --- or, possibly, both.

3. You'll forgive me if I'm skeptical about the claim that a TSO who doesn't follow the proper procedures (as outlined in your first paragraph) will most likely be fired. (Alvin Crabtree, anyone?)

Which returns me to point (1) again. If there was public, verifiable information about this screening procedure, passengers (of all sorts) could prepare for it. But TSA has chosen not to produce that information, claiming SSI.

No you didnt say that. that is why I asked. You talked about liquids. Just a question.

How can you then see that it is not a threat but body ....?

Incomplete information is solely the fault of TSA. Travelers deserve to know what rules they must comply with and knowing the law is one of the tenets of America's supposedly free society.

It truly is a shame that TSA operates the way it does and can con people to work for the agency.

SATTSO, I think you stepped into a minefield here.

If you've read the thread from the beginning, you'll see
what seemed like straightforward, reasonable concerns based on multiple reports (including published reports in a Boston newspaper, I think). Reports were coming out saying that in some cases everyone who went through WBI got a full-body frisk. Further, there were a few too many reports to ignore that said open palms were being used. In some cases, folks reported both palms sliding with pressure down arms and legs (enough to tug at trousers). In some cases, various degrees of genital contact (cupping, squeezing) were reported. Also reports by women, one of whom had to open her shirt - apparently she had some kind of pads under her bra straps that showed up as something unusual on the WBI. This coupled with vague answers from TSA when asked about things like colostomy bags, sanitary napkins, diapers - how would they be resolved? The understanding is that they would appear as an anomaly and require some kind of resolution. In view of the underpants bomber, that's reasonable. Now personally, I don't know why 'anomalies' of that nature (or a bullky dressing on a wound that could conceal something) couldn't be cleared without pain to the pax by the WTMD and ETD - but I'm not the one making those decisions, of course. If genitals had to be probed, it was reasonable to worry that other bulk in that area would have to be also.

I do recall that another TSO posted that infants would not be subject to an open palm frisk or a diaper inspection, that there are already procedures in place for screening infants (since an adult can't be properly screened while holding an infant and TSOs are apparently forbidden to hold the child).

I don't remember where, but I did see something (outside FT) that I believe came from a TSO spokesperson who mentioned that such things as 'surgical appliances, colostomy bags' would be 'resolved' by conversations with the pax and possibly visual clearance. I remember at the time thinking "what terrorist would say 'yes'" if asked about a purported medical anomaly, but I assume if conversation is part of a resolution, BDOs will be involved, although of course the spokesman didn't say.

If you haven't gone through the entire thread, you've missed some (I believe deliberately) insulting and circuitous non-replies from someone who purports to represent your organization. As is often the case, his responses simply accomplished their goal, to confuse and rile folks. I don't even know if the WBIs are at his airport yet, assuming he works at one.

I think it's also fair to say that we know you don't make the rules, your hands are tied as far as what you can say, and ultimately, you can't really speak with a high degree of authority about what goes on at checkpoints that you don't either work at or travel through regularly. I (we) know that.
You certainly know (or should know) what's supposed to be happening, but it may not be.

Classic example (short and simple): NEXUS is listed on the website, Pistole specifically mentioned additional training for it, yet even supervisors will deny that it is acceptable.

To tell a person who will be travelling with a special needs pax, particularly one who has travelled before, that all they need to do is go to the website to find out how things will be handled at the WBI and then go on to say that if they don't get handled that way, well TSOs are human too, sometimes they make mistakes and if it's too stressful now for that special needs pax, well, maybe they should reconsider travelling by air in the future - come on, SATTSO, that's worse than no answer, that's contemptible and inflammatory.

Anyway, i think you're a bit late to the party, just wanted to give you an overview of what you stepped into. :p

chollie summed up this thread nicely, but SATTSO let me say again what I have said many times:

I was if anything 'on side' with TSA, or neutral, until recently. I even defended the TSA on other websites as 'the rules are the rules'. While I don't believe that I was what some here call a TSA apologist, I did think that there was an awful lot of tinfoil scattered around the TS&S forum.

Then I did some research, I began to fly again more in the US, and I started to read here. There are TSOs here who frankly seem to enjoy causing confusion or upset, even if what they say isn't entirely the truth, just as there are TSOs in the real world who seem to enjoy behaving poorly.

I have also experienced several things personally this year which concern me. Those are not second hand reports in my case; they are actual live experiences coming from someone who didn't have any grudge towards TSA or even any negative feelings for the most part, until recently.

One of the moderators here knows me well (albeit she is not a TS&S moderator) For years she has heard about my travel experiences and my opinion towards TSA. Many of the posters on FT 'know' me as well and can certainly support the fact that I was not anti-TSA until recently. Even now, I don't believe that I assume that TSA equates to 'bad', but I do question a lot more than I did in the past, and I am a lot more willing to stand up to TSOs here than I would have done last year.

Wait a minute, I am confused here - you have stated before (can't find the post at the moment) that the "front of hand" pat-down will never be performed by a TSO and will always be done in a private room. Has that now changed?

22 pages in, I don't know if any of us feel more enlightened than when OP began this thread. I know that I am more confused and more disturbed than I was when I started back on page 1.

I couldn't agree with you more...

What I did find out during my travels last week was that, even though I never set off the WTMD at any of the airports that I was flying through, I did get "randomly" selected again at one check point for additional screening. And, the screener DID pat down the recent surgical site on my arm and also patted down my injured shoulder/scapula area. Although I felt some pain from the pressure used, it was not unbearable. However, I still do not understand why this has to be done -- especially when my arm was not even covered by clothing and was totally visible. No doubt, another screener on the old power trip of "I do it because I can".

I think it is more a matter of a very defined way the pat down has to be done, which doesn't account for bare skin. The rules are probably very rigid and simple, and thus easier to remember, rather than more flexible.

To be fair: a rigid and simple rule is also easier to administer consistently --- which is another frequent complaint that passengers have regarding TSA.

Adding that patting down bare skin is not required would not make a simple rule overly complicated.

Eyes can be used during screening to detect threats.

SATTSO, I'm sure you're accurately quoting SOP that I presume is not SSI. What you're consistently failing to take into consideration is -- a very large minority of your coworkers simply do not follow SOP and their supervisors not only overlook the fact, but often participate. Worse still (ask anyone with so much as a modicum of PR experience), for every vocal complainer there are at least a dozen more unspoken complaints. Is the long run, that the the weight that will bow the knees of TSA. You can choose to disbelieve this, of course.

However, for as long as this is common practice and for as long as your employer insists on secret "security" rules, it's a deck stacked against the public and the public will (rightfully and increasingly) resent it and act out against it.

~~ Irish

Rigid and simple rules are also easier for victims - er passengers - to question when the rules are not followed. And that would run counter to the "Ich bin uber alles" mentality among some TSA types.