Revolt over Full Body Scans and Pat Downs at Airports

[Coito ergo sum]

Yes, I read those stories.... that kind of conduct is abysmal, but a modicum of common sense and training would solve those problems. It sounds like the security folks were callous and idiotic.

What do you expect? They're TSA employees. They're not exactly well-paid, and the qualifications to get the job aren't that fantastic. That's the sort of thing that one can expect when scraping the bottom of the barrel. I've dealt with enough TSA employees over the years to know that I don't want them to have any more power over me than what is essential to airport security, and I don't think all of this security theater fits the bill.

There are plenty of conscientious and well-meaning folks who need jobs and will do them professionally without being paid high salaries. I worked extremely hard for very little money in my life, and I worked in customer-oriented businesses for very little money and used my brains to make sure that things were handled correctly. Fire the fuckers and hire someone else. But, if we're not going to do that, then all the more reason to have scanners.

In the overwhelming majority of cases, it's just a quick pat down, and sure it involves hands between and around the breasts and in the crotch. Sure there's a little rummaging around the balls. I see no reason why 99.9% of those searches can't be that, and the small percentage of people with urine bags and prosthetics can't be set aside and handled separately and more tactfully.

One suggestion I would have would be to let people select in advance is they have a disability, prostethic or related issue and at those person's requests, they can send them to a special room for security screening. There is no reason why persons can't then have a notation printed on their ticket and then proceed to a special line for closer, more tactful attention.

What, you mean actually think a policy through before implementing it nationwide? This is the TSA we're talking about, here. Better off asking the FBI to go ahead and catch Whitey Bulger already.

I'm not one to equate the government and competence, that's for sure. But, it's either a government agency, or private security....

[Wumbologist]

There are plenty of conscientious and well-meaning folks who need jobs and will do them professionally without being paid high salaries. I worked extremely hard for very little money in my life, and I worked in customer-oriented businesses for very little money and used my brains to make sure that things were handled correctly. Fire the fuckers and hire someone else. But, if we're not going to do that, then all the more reason to have scanners.

The problem isn't with those specific individuals. As long as you have people that can exercise that kind of power over others at their own discretion, who are allowed to treat people like cattle in the name of "national security", this problem will continue to exist. They need to have limits on what they're allowed to do under what circumstances. We're far past what's reasonable at this point.

I'm not one to equate the government and competence, that's for sure. But, it's either a government agency, or private security....

The problem isn't who, it's how.

[Coito ergo sum]

I'm not one to equate the government and competence, that's for sure. But, it's either a government agency, or private security....

The problem isn't who, it's how.

I'm all ears if there is a different alternative. In this case, leaving it the same is unacceptable. This present scanner and pat down thing is not ideal, but better than before. IMHO. But, if someone has a better idea, I'll support that.

[drl2]

[Coito ergo sum]

We're American airlines! Something special in the air!

[Coito ergo sum]

Is this really how people feel?






Are the above images accurate?

[Coito ergo sum]

Regarding safety - the New York Times reported that exposure to the 2 millirems of a typical dental X-ray would lead an individual to have an increased risk of dying from cancer of 16 hundred-thousandths of one percent. Given that very small risk, it is easy to see why most rational people would choose to undergo dental X-rays every few years to protect their teeth.

More importantly for our purposes, assuming that the radiation in a backscatter X-ray is about a hundredth the dose of a dental X-ray, we find that a backscatter X-ray increases the odds of dying from cancer by about 16 ten millionths of one percent. That suggests that for every billion passengers screened with backscatter radiation, about 16 will die from cancer as a result. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... e-airport/


Ann Althouse surmises that instituting the body searches was part of a psychological agenda:

It seems to me that these 2 things happened together: new machines that see you naked and newly intense body searches. Am I wrong to believe that the new groping procedure was intended to get more people into the scanners they would otherwise resist? Someone, at some level of the Obama administration, decided that the only way to channel people into the see-you-naked machines was to make the alternative more offensive to nearly everyone. Personally, I’d take the grope over being seen naked, but I did a poll yesterday, and I see that the scanner is significantly more popular than the grope. I suspect that was the calibration. And I suspect that if too many people choose the grope over nakedness, the plan is to intensify the grope until they get the scanner acceptance rate they need.http://althouse.blogspot.com/2010/11/do ... tread.html

[Coito ergo sum]

And, we have a winner....it's another government scumbag making money on the deal!

Follow the money:

* In 2008, former U.S. Department of Homeland Security secretary Michael Chertoff authored a 38 page report warning of terrorists exploiting our security deficiencies – including air travel …
* After the [Christmas Day] ‘bombing attempt’ Chertoff made a flurry of media appearances suggesting that the “attempted bombing incident” could have been avoided if all airports were using full body scanners.
* The Washington Post printed an article on January 1, 2010, calling Chertoff out for using his government credentials to promote a product that benefits his clients. It was revealed that Rapiscan Systems, the manufacturer of the naked body scanner Chertoff was recommending, was a client of Chertoff’s security consulting agency.
* Rapiscan has since received over $250 million in scanner orders.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... e-airport/

Ahhh....Chertoff....no conflict of interest there - your client makes $250,000,000 off a deal that you basically broker?

SCUMBAG!

[Warren Dew]

So why do anything? Just don't even have security checkpoints at all, because right now it's 1970's style metal detectors and the odd pat down.

1970s style metal detectors detect the vast majority of weapons that might be used for aircraft terrorism, including the leatherman multitools that the 9/11 hijackers bought. The fact that it's older, proven technology does not make it obsolete, any more than the 1970s technology of most aircraft and jet engines makes them obsolete.

The fact is, the full body scanners offer at best a marginal improvement over metal detectors, at the cost of being a greater health risk.

Israel checks people while they are in their cars on their way into the airport - every car is stopped, and the passengers questioned, behavioral profiling techniques are applied to see if someone needs to be checked out further and if so, that vehicle is taken aside and searched. Once they get to the airport armed guards outside the terminal are trained to observe passengers as they move toward the doors, again looking for odd behaviour. At Ben Gurion's half-dozen entrances, another layer of security are watching. At this point, some travellers will be randomly taken aside, and their person and their luggage run through a magnometer. At the airline check-in desk a trained interviewer takes your passport and ticket. They ask a series of questions: Who packed your luggage? Has it left your side? Etc. - more behavioral profiling. Lines are staggered. People are not allowed to bunch up into inviting targets for a bomber who has gotten this far. At the check-in desk, your luggage is scanned immediately in a purpose-built area. Next, they have a body and luggage hand check.

I'd note that the U.S. used to do much of that stuff, like asking the questions about baggage. That was jettisoned in exchange for the TSA lines. The new scanners are not part of a trend towards greater air safety, just a trend towards more intrusive direct searching.

Of course, Israel wouldn't need all that extra security if they didn't have policies inviting terrorism - and to a lesser extent, that applies to the U.S., too.

[Warren Dew]

Regarding safety - the New York Times reported that exposure to the 2 millirems of a typical dental X-ray would lead an individual to have an increased risk of dying from cancer of 16 hundred-thousandths of one percent. Given that very small risk, it is easy to see why most rational people would choose to undergo dental X-rays every few years to protect their teeth.

What they mean is that most people are sheep and will take whatever X-rays the dentist recommends. Rational people refuse dental X-rays unless there is a clear and specific need for them.

And, we have a winner....it's another government scumbag making money on the deal!

Follow the money:

* In 2008, former U.S. Department of Homeland Security secretary Michael Chertoff authored a 38 page report warning of terrorists exploiting our security deficiencies – including air travel …
* After the [Christmas Day] ‘bombing attempt’ Chertoff made a flurry of media appearances suggesting that the “attempted bombing incident” could have been avoided if all airports were using full body scanners.
* The Washington Post printed an article on January 1, 2010, calling Chertoff out for using his government credentials to promote a product that benefits his clients. It was revealed that Rapiscan Systems, the manufacturer of the naked body scanner Chertoff was recommending, was a client of Chertoff’s security consulting agency.
* Rapiscan has since received over $250 million in scanner orders.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... e-airport/

Ahhh....Chertoff....no conflict of interest there - your client makes $250,000,000 off a deal that you basically broker?

SCUMBAG!

And that, of course, illustrates the real reason why the things are being used - because homeland security is now a powerful lobby in and of itself, ripe for exploitation by special interests.

[Coito ergo sum]

So why do anything? Just don't even have security checkpoints at all, because right now it's 1970's style metal detectors and the odd pat down.

1970s style metal detectors detect the vast majority of weapons that might be used for aircraft terrorism, including the leatherman multitools that the 9/11 hijackers bought. The fact that it's older, proven technology does not make it obsolete, any more than the 1970s technology of most aircraft and jet engines makes them obsolete.

Except...those are the technologies and systems that did not work before.

The fact is, the full body scanners offer at best a marginal improvement over metal detectors, at the cost of being a greater health risk.

The health risk is virtually zero. It's like 1/16,000th of a percent. See above. The amount of x-rays is far less than what you get at the dentist, and you get radiation while flying anyway, and the equivalence is an extra five minutes of flying time.

Israel checks people while they are in their cars on their way into the airport - every car is stopped, and the passengers questioned, behavioral profiling techniques are applied to see if someone needs to be checked out further and if so, that vehicle is taken aside and searched. Once they get to the airport armed guards outside the terminal are trained to observe passengers as they move toward the doors, again looking for odd behaviour. At Ben Gurion's half-dozen entrances, another layer of security are watching. At this point, some travellers will be randomly taken aside, and their person and their luggage run through a magnometer. At the airline check-in desk a trained interviewer takes your passport and ticket. They ask a series of questions: Who packed your luggage? Has it left your side? Etc. - more behavioral profiling. Lines are staggered. People are not allowed to bunch up into inviting targets for a bomber who has gotten this far. At the check-in desk, your luggage is scanned immediately in a purpose-built area. Next, they have a body and luggage hand check.

I'd note that the U.S. used to do much of that stuff, like asking the questions about baggage. That was jettisoned in exchange for the TSA lines. The new scanners are not part of a trend towards greater air safety, just a trend towards more intrusive direct searching.

Of course, Israel wouldn't need all that extra security if they didn't have policies inviting terrorism - and to a lesser extent, that applies to the U.S., too.

Well, we can talk about Israel on a different thread. The reality is that the only policy that Israel can adopt to refrain from inviting terrorism is to cease to exist. Beyond that, Israel is inviting terrorism.

As for the US - I'd have to hear what policy changes would be suggested that would un-invite the terrorism. Haven't heard one that makes sense yet.

[Coito ergo sum]

Regarding safety - the New York Times reported that exposure to the 2 millirems of a typical dental X-ray would lead an individual to have an increased risk of dying from cancer of 16 hundred-thousandths of one percent. Given that very small risk, it is easy to see why most rational people would choose to undergo dental X-rays every few years to protect their teeth.

What they mean is that most people are sheep and will take whatever X-rays the dentist recommends. Rational people refuse dental X-rays unless there is a clear and specific need for them.

I have never heard of anyone refusing a dental x-ray. Having one every couple of years is perfectly safe.

And, we have a winner....it's another government scumbag making money on the deal!

Follow the money:

* In 2008, former U.S. Department of Homeland Security secretary Michael Chertoff authored a 38 page report warning of terrorists exploiting our security deficiencies – including air travel …
* After the [Christmas Day] ‘bombing attempt’ Chertoff made a flurry of media appearances suggesting that the “attempted bombing incident” could have been avoided if all airports were using full body scanners.
* The Washington Post printed an article on January 1, 2010, calling Chertoff out for using his government credentials to promote a product that benefits his clients. It was revealed that Rapiscan Systems, the manufacturer of the naked body scanner Chertoff was recommending, was a client of Chertoff’s security consulting agency.
* Rapiscan has since received over $250 million in scanner orders.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... e-airport/

Ahhh....Chertoff....no conflict of interest there - your client makes $250,000,000 off a deal that you basically broker?

SCUMBAG!

And that, of course, illustrates the real reason why the things are being used - because homeland security is now a powerful lobby in and of itself, ripe for exploitation by special interests.

Shouldn't that be, at least, unethical conduct? WTF?

[Warren Dew]

Except...those are the technologies and systems that did not work before.

When did metal detectors not work? They weren't used at the time of 9/11. Since then, they, along with other policies like locked cockpit doors, have prevented any recurrence of 9/11. In my book, that's working.

Shouldn't that be, at least, unethical conduct? WTF?

It's standard operating procedure in Washington DC. Is it unethical? Most government procurement looks unethical to me. People still do it, because it's not illegal.

[Coito ergo sum]

Except...those are the technologies and systems that did not work before.

When did metal detectors not work? They weren't used at the time of 9/11. Since then, they, along with other policies like locked cockpit doors, have prevented any recurrence of 9/11. In my book, that's working.

They were metal detectors at airports I went to - Newark International - Detroit Metro - Orlando - Atlanta - Tampa - Indianapolis ....

A recurrence of 9/11 is not the only risk.

Shouldn't that be, at least, unethical conduct? WTF?

It's standard operating procedure in Washington DC. Is it unethical? Most government procurement looks unethical to me. People still do it, because it's not illegal.

I thought there was something about a confilict of interest of a government official in procurement. Here's an ethics rule booklet that seems to have some relevant provisions in the conflicting financial interest section: http://www.usoge.gov/training/training_ ... hrd_95.txt

http://www.usoge.gov/training/training_ ... klets.aspx

I'm sure there's a loophole for Chertoff, though.

[Coito ergo sum]

The TSA Officers Strike Back!

'It is not comfortable to come to work knowing full well that my hands will be feeling another man’s private parts, their butt, their inner thigh,' one told the BoardingArea blog.
'Even worse is having to try and feel inside the flab rolls of obese passengers and we seem to get a lot of obese passengers!'
Another said he had a huge problem dealing with a 'large number of passengers... daily that have a problem understanding what personal hygieneFur is.'
All the staff said that they had experienced a high level of personal abuse while carrying out the pat-downs.
'Being a TSO means often being verbally abused, you let the comments roll off and check the next person,' one said.
'However, when a woman refuses the scanner then comes to me and tells me that she feels like I am molesting her, that is beyond verbal abuse.
'I asked the woman if she thought I like touching other women all day and she told me that I probably did or I wouldn’t be with the TSA.

I just want to tell these people that I feel disgusted feeling other peoples private parts, but I cannot because I am a professional.'
Angry passengers have subjected TSA officers to verbal abuse and even physical threats.
The American Federation of Government Employee, the union which represents officers, said a TSO was punched by a passenger in Indianapolis.
Union President John Gage called for more information on the searches including leaflets for passengers.
He said: 'TSA must act now — before the Thanksgiving rush — to ensure that TSOs are not being left to fend for themselves.'
Up to two million passengers per day are expected to fly today and tomorrow ahead of Thanksgiving, with huge delays expected.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z167WDD32G

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z167Ebov8b