Way to go, TSA

[The Yosemite Bear]

back in the 90s I used to wear a leatherman EVERYWHERE, including a few flights.

[Broomstick]

I used to carry pocketknives all the time - from about 12 years of age onward, including to school. I did it for decades, and only stopped after 9/11 and the increasing security everywhere.

[Jeremy]

Well, shit. . . I might actually be forced to vote Republican in 2012.

*shakes head*

TSA started under Bush and half the bullshit we gripe about are Bush era TSA policies.

This is nothing to do with political parties at the moment.

Seconded.
Zod, don't make your mind up yet. We have two years to see if this crop of newly elected Congress critters will actually do a good job. There isn't even a group of candidates for the 2012 election yet. Right now suspect every politician as guilty until proven innocent--it works for the TSA.

[Keevan_Colton]

<snip>

So this person is making claims based on the word of an unnamed source who describes a document he cannot produce? Did you switch off your bullshit detector this morning?

Oh, and the author of this article is a birther, meaning he's a lying racist fucktard, so unless he can produce the document or this unnamed source, I'm calling bullshit on this one.

A fairly good assessment...

So far no one has bothered looking that hard at some of the stories here, particularly the one about the nail clippers and the US soldiers. Firearms, even for soldiers, have to go in checked baggage. Either crated or in individual hard cases, but they do not get to go in the cabin. So the story is bullshit, has no times or dates or even names...but no one has even blinked at it.

[weemadando]

<snip>

So this person is making claims based on the word of an unnamed source who describes a document he cannot produce? Did you switch off your bullshit detector this morning?

Oh, and the author of this article is a birther, meaning he's a lying racist fucktard, so unless he can produce the document or this unnamed source, I'm calling bullshit on this one.

A fairly good assessment...

So far no one has bothered looking that hard at some of the stories here, particularly the one about the nail clippers and the US soldiers. Firearms, even for soldiers, have to go in checked baggage. Either crated or in individual hard cases, but they do not get to go in the cabin. So the story is bullshit, has no times or dates or even names...but no one has even blinked at it.

Gievn the numbers of soldiers on the flight in the story it may have been a charter.

[Phantasee]

The article stated that it was a military charter plane.

[weemadando]

You see, that's what I get for not re-reading the article.

[Phantasee]

You see, that's what I get for not re-reading the article.

Well, I just wanted to check for myself, since you made me curious. I vaguely recalled that fact, though.

[Alyeska]

TSA learned from the UK. According to the TSA, photography is a suspicious behavior and should be immediately reported for fear of Terrorism

[Broomstick]

That's why when I'm taking airplane pictures at the local airport I check in with the folks running the place first and ask "Do you mind if I take pictures" - so far, not been a problem. Then again, having a pilot's license sort of works in my favor with that, automatically making me less suspicious. On the other hand - we do have experience of terrorist's who are also licensed pilots.

It's all very complicated, isn't it?

[That NOS Guy]

That's why when I'm taking airplane pictures at the local airport I check in with the folks running the place first and ask "Do you mind if I take pictures" - so far, not been a problem. Then again, having a pilot's license sort of works in my favor with that, automatically making me less suspicious. On the other hand - we do have experience of terrorist's who are also licensed pilots.

It's all very complicated, isn't it?

It all depends on the airport. Like when I worked at a private base of operations the owner was a racist asshole who would only suspect brown people when people came to take photos. Meanwhile, anyone who looked white was given a free pass.

The Chasers War on Everything gave a great rundown on photography in the modern day.

[[R_H]]

White House: Terrorists Have Discussed Use of Prosthetics to Conceal Explosives

U.S. intelligence has picked up terrorists discussing the use of prosthetic or medical devices to conceal explosives, sources tell ABC News.

The revelation about the intelligence, which is not new but relevant to debate over new security measures at airports, comes as the White House today acknowledged that the implementation of the security procedures has not gone perfectly.

Americans by a 2-to-1 margin support the use of naked image full-body x-ray scanners in airport security lines, but fewer than half back aggressive new pat-down procedures, according to a new ABC News/Washington Post poll. Opposition to both rises among those who fly with any frequency.

The Transportation Security Administration has come under fire for new body scanners and what some say are highly invasive pat-downs.

Thomas Sawyer, a bladder cancer survivor, said he was humiliated after a pat-down broke his urostomy bag, leaving the 61-year-old covered in his own urine. Sawyer said he warned the TSA officials twice that the pat-down could break the seal.

Cathy Bossi, a long-time flight attendant and breast cancer survivor, said the TSA made her take off her prosthetic breast.

"She put her full hand on my breast and said, 'What is this?' I said 'It's a prosthesis because I've had a breast cancer,'" Bossi said. "And she said, 'You'll need to show me that.'"

In recent days, several passengers have come forward to tell such shocking stories about their experiences with TSA officers.

An ABC News employee said she was subject to a "demeaning" search at Newark Liberty International Airport Sunday morning.

"The woman who checked me reached her hands inside my underwear and felt her way around," she said. "It was basically worse than going to the gynecologist. It was embarrassing. It was demeaning. It was inappropriate."

The head of the Transportation Security Administration John Pistole today said that at least one airport passenger screening went too far when an officer reached inside a traveler's underwear, and said the agency is open to rethinking current protocols.

That search was against protocols and "never" should have happened, TSA administrator Pistole told "Good Morning America" today.

"There should never be a situation where that happens," Pistole said. "The security officers are there to protect the traveling public. There are specific standard operating protocols, which they are to follow."

Pistole, responding to complaints from passengers, has said the TSA would not change its pat-down procedures but today said the agency was "open" to changing security procedures.

"The bottom line is, we are always adapting and adjusting prior protocols in view of the intelligence and in view of the latest information we have on how the terrorists are trying to kill our people on planes," Pistole said. "If that means we need to adjust the procedures, then of course we're open to that."

Only a small number of travelers have been subject to pat-downs, officials say. The White House says roughly 340,000 people -- or 1 percent of all travelers -- have been subjected to more intense searches since the new TSA procedures began Nov. 1.

Pistole said the key to travel security is finding the proper balance between protecting against very real threats -- such as the failed cargo bomb plot and the current search for two suicide bombers believed to be at large in Germany -- and protecting individual privacy, something that some passengers claim invasive pat-down procedures have taken away.

A video of a father taking his young son's shirt off so he can be searched has gone viral online with nearly half a million views in three days. The TSA today released a statement saying that it was the boy's father who chose to remove his shirt "in an effort to expedite the screening" and pointed out that no complaint was filed.

Passengers aren't the only ones calling for a new look at security procedures.

TSA screeners are also fed up with the blame being leveled at them and agree that a better system is needed, according to travel blogger Steven Frischling, who spoke to 20 officers about the new procedures and pat downs.

"The frontline people have significant problems with it," he said. "They feel they are handing suggestions up the chain and they're simply not being listened to."

The screeners told Frischling about their discomfort at touching people's private parts, and getting verbally abused by some passengers.

"I was asked by some guy if I got excited touching scrotums at the airport, and if it gave me a power thrill. I felt like vomiting when he asked that," said one officer. "This is not a turnon for me to touch him -- it is in fact a huge turnoff. There is a big difference between how I pat passengers down and a molester molesting people."

The TSA has attempted to downplay the actual number of people who get pat downs, although Pistole today admitted that he'd dropped the ball when it came to informing the public on what it should expect.

"I wish I could say somebody else was responsible for that, but that was my decision, and it was a risk-based decision," Pistole said at a breakfast with reporters hosted by the Christian Science Monitor. "My concern was because we piloted the new pat downs anyway in two airports, Las Vegas and Boston, that we not publicize that because it would then provide a roadmap or a blueprint to a putative terrorist, who may say OK, I know there's 453 airports around the country."

There's also concern about possible health risks stemming from the new scanners, a fear that the White House today said is unfounded.

"The truth is, you have greater [radiation] exposure sitting in an airplane than you do going through one of those machines," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said today.

The new scanners and pat downs were introduced Nov. 1, but their impact will be felt the most this week, the busiest travel period of the year.

'Opting Out' Protest to Cause Travel Gridlock?
Geoff Freeman with the U.S. Travel Association said the new procedures have prompted an important debate about what passengers would do for the sake of national safety.

"For the first time in a post 9/11 environment, travelers are now saying they're willing to discuss risk, they're willing to discuss tradeoffs; that's the discussion we need to have," he said.

A grassroots Internet campaign to encourage travelers to "opt out" of the full-body scans on Wednesday, the busiest travel day of the year, has officials fretting over a possible travel gridlock.

"I think there is potential there. That would be potentially complicated by a group of people protesting," Pistole said. "If there are no protests, then obviously we'll have just the normal crush of holiday travelers."

Though thousands of Facebook users have said they've vowed to opt out, some say the movement may be overstated and overblown.

"The truth is, most travelers just want to get to their destination as fast as possible," said Genevieve Shaw Brown, senior editor at Travelocity.

Across the nation, there are 385 of the new, full-body scanners at airports, but there are a total of 2,100 security lanes.

That means about 80 percent of security lanes won't have the machines in place.

"Most people will go through business as usual. The metal detector that we've all become used to, taking off the shoes, pouring our liquids in to the tiny little containers, business as usual for the vast majority of people," Brown said.

[Phantasee]

You know, I wonder about that 2-to-1 figure of Americans supporting body scanners. What proportion of Americans flies more than once a year (or two, even)? I would think they are the ones who would have more of an issue.

[Broomstick]

You know, it's understandable that a terrorist MIGHT use a prosthetic to conceal something. Those who use such things can understand that. However, the current system breaks legitimate appliances in some cases, and for others, like my spouse, there is no means to appease the TSA. On top of that, some things MUST be kept sterile and obviously there are no autoclaves near security checkpoints.

What I think they should do is as follows:

1) Figure out how they hell they're going to have their people inspect this sort of thing. Cause some consistency would be a good thing.

2) Communicate to the prosthetic-using public how to present items for inspection. I'm totally serious about that. If you're going to have to check out urostomy or colostomy bags (ew) then have some sort of notice so that people using such things can just state directly "I have a prosthetic/medical device to be inspected" and such people, rather than go through the current hoopla, can simply be taken directly to an area with some privacy where they can be searched with a little dignity. This is important, because in some cases a thorough inspection will require the person being searched to partially disrobe. Also, in the case of something like a urostomy bag, the individual in question might be able to bring a spare if they know in advance of the possibility of problems. It's not that unusual for people using such things to travel with spares in any case, so the inconvenience would be minimal. There should probably also be a sink/hand sanitizer and mirror so people who are searched can make sure they their bits are properly put back prior to rejoining the general public.

3) Figure out a way to inspect sterile devices so as to keep them sterile so you're not endangering anyone's life or health while protecting them from terrorists. If you can't do that I'm afraid we'll all have to just accept some risk.

4) For people like my Other Half, have the TSA say what sort of documentation they need for implanted metal sufficient to set off detectors (don't give us that horseshit about "internal pins won't set off the detector" because we know it can and usually does), and how to get it if you either don't have it or you lost it.

Notification that prosthetic, medical appliances, and sterile items will need to be inspected should be posted both on the TSA website and at the airport, prior to the start of the security line, with instructions for those affected to notify the TSA agents at the start of the process. If done properly, those affected will show up, have everything ready to be seen, and be on their way in a much more efficient and less stressful manner for all concerned. It's analogous to how they told everyone to have liquids packaged and ready to be inspected back awhile ago. Sure, people grumbled, but they complied and it kept the lines moving and the misunderstandings to a minimum.

[Broomstick]

You know, I wonder about that 2-to-1 figure of Americans supporting body scanners. What proportion of Americans flies more than once a year (or two, even)? I would think they are the ones who would have more of an issue.

Sure, the frequent fliers would have more issues, but, assuming the scanner is functioning properly (and even in most modes of failure) what was said was true - you're exposed to more radiation during your flight than during the scan. The big increase in radiation is from frequent flying, not from the scanners.

[Phantasee]

I was referring to the privacy concerns. I don't really care about the radiation exposure. Joe Blow who never goes more than 100 miles (or less!) from home and has never been on a plane doesn't really have a relevant opinion on the TSA and body scanners since he never has to deal with it.

I'm just wondering what the break down would be if we accounted for people like that who never fly.