obviously NAL. :D

That seems to contradict what Pistole was quoted saying a couple of days ago:


Pistole said he hopes the agency can implement full-body scanners that show a less graphic image within a year or two. The equipment currently in use records a “high number” of false positives, he said.

Which is why some country in Europe, Italy(?), stopped using them!

Pistole went on to explain, 'See, it turns out these NoS' don't really work that well, but you know, we spent a couple of billion on them, mainly to help out Mike as he was getting ready to retire from his gov't job & get his company up & running, so it was kind of the least we could do to help a guy out, you know? Yeah, I know-some people are gonna think it's the puffers all over again, but I wasn't in charge then & how was Mike supposed to know airports are dirty, dusty places that would screw up the sensors? I'm in charge now, though, & I've got a line on these sweet new machines that will take care of everything. Would I be going to work for the company & have stock in it if it didn't work & I didn't believe it in it? Come on, just trust me...'

:D

If this is true, then deployment of the machines needs to be halted NOW so that we don't spend any more money on faulty equipment.

He's enough of a politician to talk out of both sides of his mouth. For example, he states in this interview published today in the WSJ:

"It really comes down to what is that balance between privacy and security, and without profiling," he said. "We don't do that here in the U.S., but we use all the latest intelligence. We have watch lists. We know about people who pose a threat to aviation security. It's those we won't know" that cause concern."

Taking racial and religious profiling off the table, doesn't much of law enforcement and intelligence work consist of profiling, as this article outlines?

The article states that "Transportation Safety Authority rules have since been changed to clarify that racial profiling at airport security checkpoints is not legal, and newer security systems are designed to be race-neutral, focusing instead on behavior patterns."

An earlier thread discusses Pistole's claim that he wants "more informed screening." Wouldn't that be, uh, profiling of one form or another?

Profiling of any kind should be monitored and subjected to legal restraints. OTOH look what's currently going on at TSA check points right now.

I was admiring Pistole at least for being a straight talker but I guess I don't need to do that any more. :td:

I thought Evolution was the whole purpose of Propaganda Village so that TSA could "dialogue" :rolleyes: with us on the security process so we could "evolve" it together.

Evolve is one of those slippery political words / expressions, like "revisit." I also agree with what you stated in your ABC Poll thread about not trusting the TSA to undertake profiling - intelligence gathering is a job for law enforcement and intelligence organizations.

That would be AIT with ATR. Yet if it uses backscatter, sounds like it doesn't deal with the radiation concerns.

first chink in the armor?

I think he may have been referring to the Automatic Target Recognition upgrade that is only in the test phase.



Early on, Pistole spoke of "educating" the public, perhaps he is beginning to understand that tactic is flawed.

Heh. I've long since tired of that particular argument. They work for us and finally we're educating them. ;)

I can agree here. We need opt-out every day. The only way to get rid of these scanners is to make them useless.

The TSA is engaged in a process of "frog in boiling water". They turned the heat up too high, too fast. They will learn by cooling it down for a bit and slowly cranking it up. I would not be surprised if some folks at the agency are looking forward to doing cavity searches.

TSA chief: Screening will be 'minimally invasive
 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40302432/ns/travel-news/

The head of the agency responsible for airport security, facing protests from travelers and pressure from the White House, appeared to give ground Sunday on his position that there would be no change in policies regarding invasive passenger screening procedures.