deleted.

There is a longer legal, moral, and societal tradition behind our position than there is behind yours. It has never been acceptable to grope innocent people as your agency is groping them. Until TSA sprang the October surprise last year on an unsuspecting populace using badly trained personnel.

So, Yeah. We should ignore uninformed opinions of those who think it just dandy for innocent people's crotches to be felt up against their will.

I thought your duties revolved around guarding inanimate things and parking lots.


Do you want a medal? We'll send you one if you'll share the
gropus operandum with us.

Oh, you're starting to make me cry some real sympathetic tears here. NOT. TSA agents are caressing people's butts, rooting around in the private areas of people, touching their crotches, labia, testicles, breasts, anuses sometimes out of bad training, or carelessness, or malice, or perversity. There have been way too many reports of this from credible sources for this not to be true. And there are those pesky videos.

TSA agents ARE doing this. I don't know why, but despite myself, I do take gsoltso at his word that SOP forbids this, but proximity is what it is. You're getting way too close.

"Innocent until proven guilty" was lynched by you folks at the airport. Don't come crying to us now for understanding. There is a very small strand of basic civility remaining between the TSA and those they are groping.

And when you pretend to have better knowledge than this you get your butt handed to you by real lawyers who post here, don't you?

The same that you provide. I have it, I just can't share it with you. Might fall into the wrong hands.


I don't regard changing from white shirts to blue shirts a big deal, but if means a lot to you, then by all means.

Oh yeah, those technologies are exactly in the same order of magnitude as you folks feeling my kid's crotch.

In a free society, you have a responsibility to disclose your groping procedures. It fools no one, is easy to figure out, and serves only to intimidate the innocent flying public and to prevent them from seeking redress from those who violate the procedure.

And that basic concept has nothing to do with you folks goosing passengers and caressing their boobs and butts. You say this to make those awful procedures seem important and they are not.

Believe it or not, I have nothing against the TSA or its personnel apart from this specific abusive process. I would like the TSA to rejoin the rest of us in civilized behavior and stop rationalizing away what they are doing when they strip search us and grope our bodies. There are other ways to solve the security issue. We have to find them. I think you would have all the support you need if you would attempt to find those other solutions.

Nope! Because you still can get the TSA all over the body rubdown/up the inner thigh until it meets resistance treatment after being scanned because the TSA screener viewing the image in the secret room imagines he/she saw an item on the passenger or he/she simply wasn't paying attention to the monitor so he/she gives the patdown order to cover his/her behind.

I think all the relevant points now seem to have been brought out as to why 'a big pack of dogs' might not be the solution (at least as a direct substitute). Just to add that a big pack of dogs don't always see eye to eye with each other and that particular dogs just can't work in the same area and that many dogs working an area is not the optimum working scenario. You might say the same of humans but at least they can usually be convinced to get on with their job in the same space and attempt to work as a team. In other words behavoiral issues are a bigger issue with dogs than with humans (even though it might not seem that way sometimes).

The cat!!

No, you live in a country that has a crime problem and what FB describes is what is necessary for the safety of both the officer and anyone else that the suspect may come into contact with. :(

Please, the histrionics are inane and offensive to anyone who knows the facts. :td::td:

You are assuming many things here. TSA takes great pains to ensure that the operators do not get fatigued enough to loose concentration while working any of the imaging systems. But they continue to be human, and are subject to human frailties. Oh, and BTW, the images do not scroll off the screen until the operator tells them to. So taking one’s eye’s off the screen for a few moments is not a factor.

The new software that was mentioned at the TSA blog would be a great addition to our systems, ”if” if can do the job as well as specified. That way there is no “Image officer” and no chance of them taking their scheduled nap. The passenger themselves will be able to see where the suspect item is on the screen provided at the same time as the searching TSO does.

Well with the people that get patted up down and all around after being scanned by the NOS/WBI but nothing is found on them sure says there is some major problem going on there with the screening process. Either it is the person in the secret room viewing the image or the NOS/WBI is a crappy machine that doesn't do what you all claim it does.

Actually, AIT operators are pretty good at detecting items inside pockets or underneath the clothing. In other words, it is very rare that an operator makes a call and there is absolutely nothing in the area called. A more accurate question is whether or not the operator should be given the latitude to make judgment calls to NOT search an area based on the belief that the item detected is not a prohibited item. In order for THAT to occur, we would need to rev up the resolution so that we can see more than the cartoonish figure we currently see.

How do you see it? Have AIT operators see much more revealing images? or have them call anything and everything that is an anomaly even if it's something as innocuous as a handkerchief or pocket change?

You can't have it both ways. It's either one or the other.

Are you speaking about the TSA as a whole or just your airport?

Are records kept or is the above merely an observation?

How about the third way? We just get rid of the useless invasive machines that could easily be defeated by any terrorist by simply carrying their bomb internally. What you are saying is the only way the machines are useful at all is by cranking them up to a resolution that literally shows each and every man, woman and small child completely naked in high resolution, and even then the device is easy bypassed by a terrorist so all you have accomplished is seeing a bunch of children and everyone else naked for no increase in security.

Compared to what you and others post? Oh give me a break.

That is like comparing a rattlesnake to a king cobra. I don't want neither one of those creatures anywhere near me and that is my same opinion for the enhanced all over up to resistance rubup/down and the AIT/NOS/WBI body scanning machine. I don't want to go near the AIT or be patted down in places that only I should decide who gets to touch me in those places. Especially not when there are already less intrusive procedures available to detect explosives and other dangerous weapons concealed on a person that you all could be using.

Bart, people are going to believe what they wish to believe, no matter what the facts are. Ignorance is curable, but only if one wants it to be.

And no one is forcing you to madam. There is nothing easier than avoiding the screening checkpoint, just don’t go there. No one is going to force you there, no one is going to drag you screaming through the airport and shove you through the checkpoint. Simple.

Such as? Please, tell us what is going to detect both metallic and non-metallic threat items on the human body? Please, tell us what is going to tell us at the checkpoint what IS a bottle of water and IS NOT. And assuming that you have such a device in mind, please tell me just how one is going to confirm its location if the object is a bit ambiguous, or confirm what it is, without a human doing a pat-down?

You have no idea how many times I have asked these questions. And every single time someone attempts to provide an answer they bring up the past, the impossible, or the vastly expensive. None have ever come up with an answer that is workable, not given the threat we face or the environment we are forced to work within. But please, this conversation has been quite enjoyable so far, give it a try. Give us your thoughts on the subject, what do you think would work?

Or would you prefer that we turn away every single passenger that has an anomoly in those areas of concern without any way for them to explain or to determine what that anomoly might be?

Apparently the Nude-O-Scopes can't detect metallic items, as seen in the failed tests, where by a gun got through FIVE TIMES! WTMD would have picked it up on the first trip

Oh don't worry I have no intentions of going any where near an airport as of November 2010 unless it is an absolute life and death situation where I have absolutely have no other choice. It will have to be the only choice I have because I will have to be so upset already that I could care less what a TSA Screener is doing to me to get through the security check point for me to put myself through alot of this all in the name of security. I sure wouldn't do it for fun.