Lindbergh Field security checkpoint briefly closed Monday

SAN DIEGO (CNS) - A security checkpoint in Terminal 2 at Lindbergh Field was closed for a time Monday after a woman wandered toward the gates before agents could finish examining her.

The woman went through a full-body scanner around 10 a.m., and officers saw something unusual that made them want to check her more thoroughly, said Nico Melendez of the Transportation Security Administration.

The passenger walked off toward the gates before TSA personnel could finish scrutinizing her with a hand wand, Melendez said.

The checkpoint was shut down until they found her, and was re-opened around 10:40 a.m, he said.

It's not so much about the person that wandered off, but the fact it took 40 minutes to rectify the situation.

It makes you wonder what would happen if they found an actual threat. With the culture in the TSA being what it is, does the screener have to call the lead, the lead call the supe, the supe call the screening manager, then an AFSD, then the FSD, then maybe call the police?

OK, I can understand why they wanted to find and screen the person but why close the checkpoint if that one person has already passed through? Does TSA think they will find the person in the gaggle of people waiting for screening?

Oh, and if TSA's Nico Melendez said it you can almost bet the story is not completely true.

I wonder if Nico has gotten around to running his wife (who is a local politician) & kids through the nude-o-scope like he said he would have no problem doing?

This is completely speculative on my part, of course. But I suspect that TSA had to shut down the checkpoint in order to have some employees available to send out to search for the passenger in question. (Recall that part of the problem with the infamous EWR terminal shutdown was that when the TSO on duty discovered that someone had breached security, there wasn't anyone available to follow the passenger into the sterile area.)

So ... it's not that the people standing in line posed a "threat" ... it's that they needed extra people to go and search, and the only way to accomplish that is to remove them from their normal screening duties.

Good point but every airport I have been in have had numerous TSA workers doing gate checks. Surely those people could be dispatched to search for a single individual.

+1

Any many more just roaming around the terminal, playing police officer...

I like this quote:

Possibly. But depending on the airport, the number of gate check folks available versus the size of the concourse might not be enough.

Plus ... the folks at the checkpoint being closed down would have actually seen the passenger in question. Far better to send the folks who'd actually seen the passenger than try to describe the passenger to someone else.

(Far better, still, to not have to do this in the first place ...)

He's had 2 1/2 years now, but why hurry?

In a post on the TSA blog, TSA blogger Nico Melendez endorses the technology. "As a married father of five small children, I wouldn't think twice about sending my wife, my four boys or little girl into this machine," he says. "I've seen the image it produces and I am not only confident as a TSA employee -- but as a citizen -- that TSA has done everything possible to address passengers' privacy concerns regarding whole body imaging."

Being Navy I had higher hope for him.

"Oh, and if TSA's Nico Melendez said it you can almost bet the story is not completely true."

This annoys me! To call Nico a prevaricator is not true, I have always found him committed to his position as a TSA employee and is held in the highest regards by his fellows at TSA and media.
Signed, His Father

Another isolated incident:

http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?se...7711608&hpt=T2

TSA's trampling of the Constitution annoys me.

Think what you want but Nico is a propagandist working for TSA.

Did you, as his father, ever read his postings on the TSA blog wherein he stated that images produced by WBI are fit for the cover of Reader's Digest or for a class of kindergarten students? If those statements were not prevaricating, nothing is.

I offer this statement from your son also:

Quotes from Nico for your reading pleasure.

I was just reading those PV post. BB is the one who posted this: "These images are friendly enough to post in a preschool. Heck, it could even make the cover of Reader’s Digest and not offend anybody. Privacy and security go hand in hand, so the millimeter wave must pass muster with the public."

from the article :
Nico said he would not hesitate to have his wife and children Electronically Strip Searched by TSA.

Both have defended E-Strip Machines but will not provide the evidence (images) needed to show the public the facts.

That alone is why I suggest that neither person is being truthful.

Edit to add. Bob also said this: "5.09.2008
You asked for it...You got it, Millimeter Wave images.

Here are the much requested, much anticipated, full body images of millimeter wave - both front and back, male and female just like so many of you asked for.

These were provided to TSA by the manufacturer of the technology, L-3. We asked L-3 to blur the facial features just like they are blurred when our officers see the images in Phoenix, Baltimore, LAX and JFK. These are exactly what officers see at airports today and will see in future deployments."

The just a few months ago Bob said that he never said the images provided by TSA were exactly like their employees sees, another blatant lie.

I have to wonder how these TSA employees can lie to the public after having taken an oath and still keep their jobs?

No credibility and no accountability for ones actions seems to be the answer.

Edit to add: You guys are killing me (and others) with this. These pictures were provided to TSA by the vendor. I have never claimed they are the exact size and resolution that our officers see. I have provided video examples showing what our officers see. I have requested the resolution and size and was told it was proprietary information that I could not release. I'm still looking into being able to get that info for you, but I can't promise anything.

Thanks,

Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team

February 3, 2010 1:22 PM


Blogger Bob said this:

and this