As I understand it, the premise of this program is that people have certain things they do (sometimes called "tells") that show that a certain kind of deception may be occuring. Is that correct?

Then we're told that these things are involuntary and people cannot stop doing them. Is that correct?

If so, then why is a description of such things SSI? As I understand SSI, it relates to information that can be used to subvert security systems. But if this is involuntary, then knowing about them can't stop them. Right?

But if that's true, then how is the information legally SSI?

It is SSI so that the "science" can't be reviewed and called out as nothing more than traveling carnival side show tricks.

On the plus side, BDO's get something like TWO DAYS of training. More than enough to separate someone who is nervous about flying from someone who has had a recent mild stroke...

As a reminder, no one is under any obligation to speak with a BDO, nor does a BDO have any legal authority to arrest or detain. Once you're in the sterile area, i.e. you've submitted to and passed screening, the BDO can not remove you.

If you have any problems with a BDO or anyone other TSA employee, immediately demand to speak with the GSC.

I'm not saying it's much more, but the training is longer than two days. Also, a lot of the BDO's I know are retired cops. FYI.

What does ones past career have to do with being a BDO?

Isn't it the specific training that you receive that supposedly enables you to pick up on these unconscious signals?

Based on what has been disclosed on PV with training even a rock could do what BDO's do.

First, I'm not a BDO. LEO's learn over their careers how to pick up on the subtle signs that BDO's learn about in a week. Guess they must be smarter than me. My point is, someone who is a retired LEO and now a BDO will be better at picking out the "bad guy".

http://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/layers/bdo/index.shtm

Some people refer to these behaviors as "tells" because it seems to be better understood by the general public. It's not an exact analog.

Your statement is close to correct. The difference is that the behaviors BDOs look for are related to "fear of being discovered," not necessarily just "deception."

Correct.

The tricky part is that the SSI regulation doesn't actually say that it relates only to info that can be used to subvert security systems. I'm guessing, but I think this is the relevant part:

49 CFR 1520.5(b)(9)(i) and 49 CFR 1520.5(b)(9)(ii)

Of course, the stated purpose of the SSI regulation is to prohibit the release of info that could be used to subvert security.

Be careful with this one. First, you do have to pass through screening at the checkpoint. If you exit the checkpoint into the sterile area before TSA personnel (BDO or not) complete your screening, bad things will likely happen to you.

Second, TSA considers gate screenings to be part of their screening operations. If you refuse gate screening, you are refusing TSA screening procedures. This may make for an interesting test case one day, but it may also cause problems for your immediate flight plans.

http://www.tsa.gov/press/happenings/..._at_gates.shtm

http://www.tsa.gov/press/happenings/..._bdo_spot.shtm

Prior knowledge and experience in the field tend to make one a better BDO, and allow one to pick up on the specifics of the program more quickly.

I can't find a source for statistics at the moment. The BDO selection process and training class both have significant washout rates. So, no, it is not something that "even a rock could do"

Also, what items on PV led you to this conclusion? I don't always agree with what they post, but I don't recall anything that would lead a reasonable person to this conclusion.

Which is what I said.

If you're referring to a BDO who approaches me on the other side of the WTMD, after my things have been x-rayed, I believe you are mistaken. As I read the case law, you can exclude me from the sterile area if I have weapons or explosives -- that is the sole and very limited function of the administrative search procedure. I am not required to answer any of your questions, nor am I even required to talk to you. You can not physically prevent me from leaving the checkpoint and, if you call for a LEO and tell him that you wish him to detain me because I refused to answer your questions, you and the TSA will find themselves on the receiving end of a lawsuit.

I am aware of that. I consider them unconstitutional, based on the my review of the case literature that defines the scope of the administrative search procedure, as well as related case law involving random checkpoints. If you're interested, I'd be happy to explain, with cites to the cases, why I believe gate searches are unconstitutional. However, it will have to wait until this weekend as I am too busy tomorrow with work.

If I refuse gate screening, I am refusing an unconstitutional usurpation of rights reserved to the people pursuant to the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.

I would expect it to cause problems for my immediate flight plans. That's a prerequisite for the suit against Janet Napolitano, i.e. there must be actual harm that results from the government's violation of constitutional rights. I might add, and please don't take this personally because it's not so intended, that I find it disgusting and completely un-American that TSA's position is, essentially, challenge our procedures because you believe they are illegal and we will make trouble for you.

I don't know why you've included this link. TSA does not make the law nor does it determine whether its administrative procedures are constitutional. That is solely the function of the judiciary, who decide the constitutionality based on legal arguments presented by lawyers like myself, and not based on PR published on TSA websites. I am no stranger to arguing before federal District Court judges, and justices who sit on Circuit Courts of Appeal. I am admitted to the United States Supreme Court and, should I decide to pursue an action against DHS and Ms. Napolitano, I expect that I would receive plenty of support from the ACLU and similar organizations that find the usurpation of constitutionally-secured rights by TSA as repellent as I.

You seem like a reasonable and intelligent person (and unlike one or two other TSOs who post here). In fact, overall, with the exception of the aforementioned one or two, I'm impressed, overall, with most of the TSA personnel who post on FlyerTalk. I'm sure you're all sincere and only trying to do your jobs to the best of your abilities. However, though I may respect you as individuals, I feel it is my civic duty, both as a citizen and an officer of the court, to oppose attempts by my government to usurp powers expressly denied it by the Constitution.

I will take you up on the offer. Do me a favor and do not dumb it down.
Thanks.

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. My response to you was meant to make sure we both had a clear understanding of current TSA rules and procedures. (At least, to the extent where such things are clear and available to the public. )

I know this puts me in the role of TSA apologist. For the record, I don't like that role very much, although I think it is important for people reading this forum to understand the way TSA seems to think and react on these issues.

In this case, I was attempting, to the best of my unofficial ability, to explain the TSA position and approach. My personal beliefs are quite another matter.

Just wanted to make sure we understood one another.

Correct. As I understand it, you are not required to answer questions or talk to any screening personnel. You are required to submit to screening of your person and property at the checkpoint in order to access the sterile area. That screening is supposed to check for weapons and explosives. If you decide to leave the checkpoint into the sterile area before the TSA personnel decide the screening is completed, TSA will attempt to stop you from doing so with non-physical methods. If that doesn't work, a security breach will be called, and LEOs will be asked to escort you out of the sterile area. Is this more clear? If not, I can try again.

I am always interested in a discussion of Constitutional law, if you wish to so indulge me. I can certainly understand if you're busy with work until the weekend. I won't likely have time for heavy reading until Tuesday or Wednesday, anyway.

I wouldn't stop with the 4th and 5th amendments, actually.

I am glad that you understand what you would be getting into with such a battle. I'm not sure every reader in this forum has a similar perspective.

I try to be somewhat careful to keep my personal political beliefs out of online forums, especially if people do not specifically ask for said beliefs. Suffice to say, were I to get into a heated political discussion about the current state of the executive branch, I would likely say things I shouldn't say in unknown company.

The page is not loading right for me at the moment. I assume, from context, that this statement refers to the gate screening link.

I included that link because I try to take my statements of TSA positions and policies from published public sources whenever I can do so. I do not offer it as an argument for the legitimacy of the TSA policy/position, but as proof that such a policy/position exists. It also puts me on firmer ground if I were ever to be accused of violating SSI regulations, as official material developed and published for public consumption is defined as "not SSI."

Thank you for the compliment. In my experience, I find that most of my coworkers are decent people who are trying to do the job to the best of their abilities.

As to civic duty:

From the PV Blog BDO thread and other comments that is my take on the program.

It has been stated that the things looked for are unconscious things the observed person does and they are not in control of those actions. It doesn't take a lot of intelligence to teach a person to look for certain actions. Will some be better observers than others? Certainly, just in all other areas of education and training.

So tell me, what are the educational requirements to enter the BDO program?

No degree required? A degree in any field required? A degree in human sciences? A degree in Law Enforcement? An advanced degree?

Just wondering!

Behavioral detection is not hard to figure out. There are several books published available to you to read from dozes of sources. Take your pick and figure it out. I find it most amusing in these posts the threat of lawsuit if "this or that happens". What a farce. Do it, dont just run your mouth. Go ahead and fork out your $$$$$$ Lets see what you got.

I don't have enough funds to initiate a lawsuit against the government. They own lots of ink, the paper, and the printing presses. TSA IMHO greatly exceeded their authority when they began expanding into other secondary activities. When you have an organization with great powers while being held accountable to no one (at least anyone willing to shut down the quasi-legal actions) you're now running with an open loop, out of control agency.

None of the bdos I know in my station were former leos. IMO they are not very with it either