AIT information
 

IT is suprising how many people today thought that the AIT was an X-ray machine. Had 2 opt outs. AND NOW THE COMPLAINTS ARE COMING!!!

You just keep pushing your agenda, don't you?

They SHOULD be complaining.

Hopefully the TSA employees are being identified by name in the complaints.

If the post in this forum is correct, DEN has MMW not backscatter. *But* the majority of nude-o-scopes employed by TSA are backscatter and are in fact x-ray machines. It's unreasonable to expect the general public to know the difference.

And nobody else here on this board is pushing any kind of agenda?

I'm not defending eyecue or the TSA, but seriously....c'mon.

Nice post thank you.

Mom? Is that you?
;)

2 opt outs out of how many? 2 out of, say, 6 people is pretty good; 2 out of 200 is pathetic.

What was the basis for the complaints? The AIT itself, or the "fact" that it was an x-ray, or were the opt outs complaining about getting a patdown?

I will agree that everyone has their own agenda. My point was more to the fact that the OP has started 4 topics in the past two days that are all saying the same thing.

yeah it seems like curtis has grab the strings and is guiding this puppet.

"Civil disobedience becomes a sacred duty when the state has become lawless or corrupt. And a citizen who barters with such a state shares in its corruption and lawlessness."

-Gandhi

Yoo Hoo eyecue........even at a low dosage the AIT unit is technically an x-ray unit.

Let's you and I argue this.......I dare you. My 27 years in the radiology profession against your years in the TSA.

Come on......

:-:


Once again in FLL today at 1130am, they were using the AIT as the primary method of passenger screening.

What I found interesting that they only had lanes 1 and 2 open. Both of these lanes flow through 1 WTMD. If you placed yourself in lane 1 you went through the AIT while if you were in lane 2 you only went through the WTMD.

I was in no mood to opt out today so I stayed in lane 2. But I'm getting sick and tired of the TSA using the AIT as the primary method of screening when it's supposed to be used when the WTMD alarms.

.

What about MMW? An x-ray unit?

MMW is not considered to be ionizing radiation from what I've read.

So the minority of the WBIs are not actually X-ray machines in that they do not use X-rays. However, it's still somewhat misleading to insist that they are 'not X-ray machines' since most of the uneducated public would take that to mean that the machine doesn't depict them naked.

The whole truth in this case would be 'It doesn't use X-rays, but it still shows you without your clothes on.'

My concern to "MY HEALTH and WELL BEING" is that I don't want to be exposed to any unnecessary radiation. There are signs posted that clearly state what type of unit is being used.

I'm in an airport every week. And since the WBI/AIT units have come in to existence it's amazing that there seem to be more of the backscatter x-ray units in operation than the MMW units.

If they want to see my "junk" I don't care. Hell I'd even drop my shorts just for the shock value that I'd enjoy. But the TSA will never expose me to unnecessary radiation.

Who in their right mind thought it would be OK to expose the population to ionizing radiation versus a technology that doesn't is beyond comprehension.


And as for the uneducated population......only when FOX News does a complete investigative story will the Kettles in this country begin to care what is being done to them. Until then, the WBI/AIT units are here to stay.

Because they are the only ones who really care about security :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I assume that the back scatter was cheaper or the makes of the back scatter knows someone with buying power.

Does the name Michael Chertoff ring a bell?

Ding, ding, ding!

Group slams Chertoff on scanner promotion

Since the attempted bombing of a US airliner on Christmas Day, former Homeland Security secretary Michael Chertoff has given dozens of media interviews touting the need for the federal government to buy more full-body scanners for airports.

What he has made little mention of is that the Chertoff Group, his security consulting agency, includes a client that manufactures the machines. Chertoff disclosed the relationship on a CNN program Wednesday, in response to a question.

An airport passengers’ rights group on Thursday criticized Chertoff’s use of his former government credentials to advocate for a product that benefits his clients.

And the moral authority of Gandhi is only strengthened by the fact that he was NOT found worthy of a Nobel peace prize by the peaceniks in Oslo/Stockholm.

Kind of curious - how many threads are there regarding WBI each week?

Sadly, it's probably up to Fox to do that. The other channels like MSNBC seem to be lap dogs to the gov't and have no interest in such things.

Too many, but they are started by different people.

.... in some opinion only.

.... started by the same contributor?

Thank you for understanding. Really, the OP could have just had one thread entitled "In the life of a screener at a checkpoint"

It is always more effective to fish with more lines in the water...

Touche.

So essentially you're saying that people weren't properly informed because the appropriate signage was either not put out or intentionally confusing in its nature.

Why am I not surprised?

Conversely, if you're using crap bait that the fish don't want, you're 4 times as likely not to catch fish.

Oh... No. You would most likely be in correct. In 99% of the case there is signage posted in front of the machines.(please don't post back saying that the signs are after the machine or not there at all, because I know it has happened in the past) The problem is that most people fail to read any type of sign. I get asked questions that are all answered on the posted signage at the checkpoint. Last week a female came through the AIT and after she stepped out asked "So, what is that thing? What does it do?" I of course explained to here what it was. She replied that she did not want to go through it. (ummmm... too late??) Why didn't she ask someone before going into it?? Better yet why didn't she read the signs? The first line in bold print on one of the 3 signs says "The use of this technology is voluntary." That statement is also on one other signs which are posted on both sides of the AIT unit.

In no way is the signage confusing. If you would like I can post photos of the signs. And then you can tell me which part is confusing, maybe I can help you to understand it a little bit better.

I can't speak for ORD, but in the airports I've been to recently, the signage is completely ineffective.

The signs I have seen are no larger than an 8.5" x 11" sheet of standard size paper. The words stating that the technology is optional are, most certainly, not in a bold typeface. In regards to the typeface it appears to be a standard 12 pt. font. The problem with choosing this size font is that, again in the airports I have transited, the signage is either not in an appropriate place, or placed in such a manner as to be unreadable by the people approaching the WBI machine.

Case in point - I have seen signage for the WBI on the stanchions for the line leading to the ...drumroll please... WTMD. Now, what good does this signage do there? I have also seen signage placed on a WTMD/WBI shared line where the signage is placed in such a way so as to be at the backs of the people approaching the WBI. Just curious, does TSA believe that terrorists have eyes in the backs of their heads? That is the only explanation for this poor placement of obligatory signage.

Sure, the signs are there. Sure, the signs are prior to the machine. Where TSA has failed, again, is that while living up to the letter of the law, they have completely ignored the spirit of it for their own apparent purposes.

I welcome you to post a picture of the sign. If allowed to take pictures I will show you where the signs are poorly placed.

What about the images that are posted on the machine itself! By the time those are seen, if they even are, it's way too late.

Please, please take pictures of the improperly/poorly placed signs. TSA can't stop you from doing it, although they will try. But maybe you could get them to back off if you tell them that you are taking pictures to prove to your disbelieving friends that proper signage doesn't exist. :D

Must be a lot of folks that don't like the Nude-O-Scope. What a shocker! :eek:


Feel free to take all the pictures you want, with the exception of the x-ray screen. The screening clerks may stomp their little feet up and down, but there is nothing they can do. ;)^

No signs like that here.

Despite the signage for other things like shoes, laptops, liquids, etc, TSA has barkers constantly reminding people. If the barkers are already there, and they're trying to "help", why not actually have them help and saying "this is optional."?

Hell, when I've been "invited" into the machines, no one ever said it was optional. I always opt out, but most people don't know. It seems that in one instance TSA could actually inform people, they choose not to. That says a lot.

Bingo.

I've seen the signs in multiple airports that I fly to and from on a weekly basis. Never, not once, have I ever been able to actually read one of those signs. They've been placed less than a foot from the outside of the WBI, and the TSA employees who work in front of them have absolutely no interest in letting anyone pause long enough to actually read the signs that are there. The font is either 12 or 14 point, which isn't something you're going to be reading from 3 or 4 feet away, or more.

And even though I have the knowledge of what is supposedly on those signs I still can't find the opt out language when I'm actually in an airport.

The solution is to stop and read the sign. IF the TSA clerk says to move on then tell them you have not finished reading the advisement.

After reading then Opt Out!