USA Flag

Official website of the Department of Homeland Security

Transportation Security Administration

CNN Article: Airport security bares all, or does it?

Archived Content

Please note that older content is archived for public record. This page may contain information that is outdated and may not reflect current policy or programs.

If you have questions about policies or procedures, please contact the TSA Contact Center.

Members of the news media may contact TSA Public Affairs.

Comments

Submitted by RB on

Will TSA Strip Search children with the WBI MMW Machine?

I have asked this questions several times over the last weeks yet no response from TSA.

Is it a hard question?

Submitted by Sandra on

It's about time that this was done! Hooray for EPIC!

Submitted by Anonymous on

Good to see someone calling foul on this.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Good to see comments from people who understand this is a plus for security.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Will TSA Strip Search children with the WBI MMW Machine?

I have asked this questions several times over the last weeks yet no response from TSA.

Is it a hard question?

***********************************

TSA isn't "strip searching" anyone. Look at the images on cnn.com...do you seriously think they are revealing? If you get your jollies from those images, you've got bigger problems than TSA!

Submitted by Anonymous on

This is the first time I've seen the front exposure images (those shown on CNN). WOW. I actually think the pat down option would make me feel less violated.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Why does TSA refuse to post prominently images of scans of people in these strip-search machines, at the same size and resolution that the machine's operator sees, at those airports where this invasive technology is being installed?

Why does TSA not inform travelers that they can decline to enter the virtual strip-search machines?

Submitted by Dave Nelson on

Anonymous on May 18, 2009, at 3:14 pm said:

TSA isn't "strip searching" anyone. Look at the images on cnn.com...do you seriously think they are revealing? If you get your jollies from those images, you've got bigger problems than TSA!As I said to Nico, if you have nothing to hide, and, if you believe the images are not "revealing", please post your image as the operator sees it. What are you afraid of?

Submitted by Anonymous on
Anonymous said...

Will TSA Strip Search children with the WBI MMW Machine?

I have asked this questions several times over the last weeks yet no response from TSA.

Is it a hard question?

***********************************

TSA isn't "strip searching" anyone. Look at the images on cnn.com...do you seriously think they are revealing? If you get your jollies from those images, you've got bigger problems than TSA!

May 18, 2009 3:14 PMThe resolution without signal processing is around 1mm. With signal processing the resolution goes way up. TSA does do a virtual strip search when using these machines. Welcome to the world of high tech.
Submitted by NoClu on

I don't want you scanning my children. I'm glad that there is more of a public comment on this topic. Your mini-picture warnings posted in locations where the scanners are being used are inadequate. Your education of the public on these images has been inadequate. Your education of the public on their options has been inadequate. That's why your folks keep citing a 99% acceptance rate for these unnecessary and intrusive machines.

Submitted by RB on

Anonymous said...
Will TSA Strip Search children with the WBI MMW Machine?

I have asked this questions several times over the last weeks yet no response from TSA.

Is it a hard question?

***********************************

TSA isn't "strip searching" anyone. Look at the images on cnn.com...do you seriously think they are revealing? If you get your jollies from those images, you've got bigger problems than TSA!

May 18, 2009 3:14 PM

..........................
It seems that it's TSA who is getting their jollies from the WBI Strip Search Machine, not I.

And yes, it is a Strip Search.

Did you look at the images on CNN?
Look at the frontal images!

Submitted by Irish on

Here's a thought, Bob ...

Why not let the passenger see his/her own image within the booth as it's being generated?

Irish

Submitted by Anonymous on

"Here's a thought, Bob ...

Why not let the passenger see his/her own image within the booth as it's being generated?

Irish"

I think "Irish" here has an excellent suggestion. I mean, the security risk is low, since a terrorist or smuggler already knows what they have on them. It would also allow passengers to make an informed decision.

Me personally, introvert that I am, I'd prefer a whole body scan to a pat down, but to each their own.

Submitted by Anonymous on

TSA is only limited by it's technology...Good Job on this one! I would rather a stranger see my scanned image...than to be blown up! Way to stop the terrorists!

Submitted by George on

What I get from the linked article is that the TSA will go ahead with deploying the machines regardless of what critics, privacy advocates, or anyone else thinks about it. The infallible TSA knows what's best for "security," so what anyone else thinks doesn't matter anyway. They'll follow their usual, well-practiced strategy of ignoring criticism, or spinning it away with warm fuzzy statements from officials skilled at artfully concealing the truth.

The article recites many of the objections raised in comments here, along with much of the same official dismissal and spin. The TSA will very happily cite their own statistics proving that people are very happy with the scanners, so we should welcome them too. But they conveniently omit important information, such as those "99%" were fully aware of what the scanner did, or whether they merely preferred a virtual strip search to the alternative of a friendly grope from Buster the TSO. However you look at it, the TSA is yet again taking the opportunity to show us their complete contempt for the traveling public.

In the end our concerns don't matter. The TSA will deploy the scanners as they see fit, and operate them according to whatever rules they choose (which of course will be SSI, so we can't ever know whether they're doing it properly). When the TSA wields the bludgeon of "Do you want to fly today?", the only realistic option is to grin and bare it.

Submitted by Anonymous on

That's a brilliant thought. Lets let the person see the scan so they can figure out the best place to hide something if their current attempt doesn't work.

Submitted by RB on

Bob, will TSA allow minors to be screened by MMW WBI machines?

Submitted by Anonymous on

Anonymous said...

"TSA is only limited by it's technology...Good Job on this one! I would rather a stranger see my scanned image...than to be blown up! Way to stop the terrorists!"

Deter them, according to TSORon.
43,000 TSA people, and none of you can even keep your own rules straight. Good luck on finding even one terrorist.

Submitted by Tomas on

I'm in a difficult position on this one, Bob.

On the one hand I don't object to the machines on modesty grounds - I've spent enough time in the real world not to be upset by the idea of someone seeing me naked. Big deal.

On the other hand, there is the potential problem with "do I really want a random government agency to just decide that they have some imagined 'right' to do this?"

On the gripping hand, there is the recognition that this is a much better method than many others that have been offered up to protect the traveling public from the 'black hats.'

(Thing is, if I go through one of these machines I WANT A PRINT-OUT - I'll even pay extra for it.)

Submitted by Anonymous on
That's a brilliant thought. Lets let the person see the scan so they can figure out the best place to hide something if their current attempt doesn't work.And where, exactly, could the person hide it that wouldn't be seen in the scanner? The only place I can think of is a body cavity, and presumably a serious smuggler already will use those areas if they know this tech exists - which they do. So your sarcastic response is noted - and dismissed.
Submitted by Adrian on

Interesting, the comments I submitted yesterday afternoon didn't get posted, even though later ones did.

I was pointing out that the CNN image shows a little bit of the user-interface the operator of the machine has available, including controls for contrast and brightness (at least). It makes me wonder if it's possible to adjust these for greater realism and detail.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"Lets let the person see the scan so they can figure out the best place to hide something if their current attempt doesn't work."

So far the only thing these strip-searches has found is 0.6 ounces of lotion, which was completely harmless. Gee, that makes us safer.

Submitted by RB on

RB said...

Will TSA Strip Search children with the WBI MMW Machine?

I have asked this questions several times over the last weeks yet no response from TSA.

Is it a hard question?

May 18, 2009 2:46 PM

............................

Bob, Nico, Lynn, Paul, anyone at TSA HQ, will one of you answer this question?

Does it embarrass you to answer this question. If the answer is yes then it should!

Submitted by Anonymous on

"It makes me wonder if it's possible to adjust these for greater realism and detail."

You should wonder. You should also wonder why TSA refuses to share images at the same size and resolution as the operators of these machines sees. And you should wonder why TSA refuses to answer questions about scanning children in these machines. And you should wonder why no one at TSA is willing to share images of themselves or their children in one of these machines.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Question: Why haven't we seen a full-size, full-resolution (same resolution the TSO will see) *frontal* male and female image produced by the MMW/WBI system?

Answer: It would be classified as pornography and not allowed to be shown on broadcast TV or considered appropriate for a mainstream internet news site.

Check out the CNN images, making sure you look at the frontal images on page 2. Even at this reduced resolution, the man's genitals are perfectly clear.

This thing is a strip search, plain and simple. Modesty, while a legitimate concern, has nothing to do with the main problem; TSA (i.e., the government) has neither the legal nor the moral right to strip search domestic passengers without probable cause that a crime has been or is about to be committed. In spite of TSA's delusions, desire to travel is not probable cause.

Submitted by RB on

Anonymous said...
Question: Why haven't we seen a full-size, full-resolution (same resolution the TSO will see) *frontal* male and female image produced by the MMW/WBI system?

Answer: It would be classified as pornography and not allowed to be shown on broadcast TV or considered appropriate for a mainstream internet news site.

Check out the CNN images, making sure you look at the frontal images on page 2. Even at this reduced resolution, the man's genitals are perfectly clear.

This thing is a strip search, plain and simple. Modesty, while a legitimate concern, has nothing to do with the main problem; TSA (i.e., the government) has neither the legal nor the moral right to strip search domestic passengers without probable cause that a crime has been or is about to be committed. In spite of TSA's delusions, desire to travel is not probable cause.

May 19, 2009 12:08 PM

......................
TSA will apparently scan children with this Strip Search machine.

I hope some organization makes a legal case against all TSO's who participate in screening children.

Being on an offenders list for life will be just rewards.

Clearance gone, job gone and where one can live controlled.

Submitted by George on

@Anonymous, May 19, 2009 12:08 PM: "This thing is a strip search, plain and simple. Modesty, while a legitimate concern, has nothing to do with the main problem; TSA (i.e., the government) has neither the legal nor the moral right to strip search domestic passengers without probable cause that a crime has been or is about to be committed. In spite of TSA's delusions, desire to travel is not probable cause."

I'm actually not very concerned about modesty. My unclothed body is spectacularly uninteresting to look at. So I can be pretty sure that those anonymous, highly professional TSOs who spend each day in their remote hidey-hole scrutinizing thousands of electronically-stripped potential terrorists would find the sight of my bared hide even less exciting than I do.

I am somewhat more concerned about the significantly increased intrusion by an arrogant, unaccountable agency that operates in secret, believes itself to be infallible, places itself above the law, and has a consistently abominable track record of complete contempt for the civil rights, property, privacy, and dignity of passengers. The fact that they're putting so much effort into PR spin suggests that they know the scanners are more intrusive than they're willing to admit, and they know that many people have figured that out. What the TSA's spin-meisters seem incapable of understanding is that their preferred strategy of spin, lies, and condescending dismissal only makes things worse.

That's all very unfortunate, since the electronic strip search can potentially provide the first truly significant improvement in checkpoint screening. The public might accept it if they had confidence that the TSA would protect their privacy, and if the TSA had promoted it truthfully. But the TSA's track record inspires no such confidence, and they seem to regard both the truth and the public as dangerous enemies.

I have already expressed my real concern here several times: Specifically, the need to be separated from my wallet before undergoing the strip search. This seems to me a very serious flaw in the system, since the loss of a wallet and/or its contents during screening carries far more significant consequences than the loss (or "voluntary abandonment") of any other property. The TSA has addressed this concern in its usual fashion. TSOs who posted here have condescendingly dismissed me. And the e-mail I sent to the TSA contact center has gone unacknowledged. Why should I expect anything other than that?

The simplest and most cost-effective way of solving this and most other problems with the strip search scanners is to abandon the plans to make it the primary screening mechanism for all passengers, and relegate it to its current role as a "friendly" alternative to a pat-down in secondary screening. That seems the most appropriate and effective use of a very costly and extremely intrusive device.

Submitted by Anonymous on

The fact that you can keep your clothes on doesn't mean it's not virtually the same as a strip search. I have a hard time reconciling the actual images from the system with the TSA's claim that screeners only see a fuzzy image. If you can clearly see the person's breasts, buttocks and genitals, it's not fuzzy enough.

Submitted by HappyToHelp on

RB said...

“Will TSA Strip Search children with the WBI MMW Machine?”
I have only done this once before but I call foul.

The question “Are children screened in the Whole Body Imagers? (WBI)” was answered March 20, 2009 6:20 PM "Traveling 101 for Diabetics" by Blogger Bob from HQ.

“A: There is no age limit. Anybody who can stand with their legs shoulder width apart and arms raised for 5 seconds while remaining still can be screened in the WBI.”

You were quite active in this blog post comment section but I will assume you missed it.

I brought this answer to your attention April 22, 2009 10:28 AM "TWIC Casts a Security Net Over Ports"

The second foul is with your loaded question“Will TSA Strip Search children with the WBI MMW Machine?”. If a party does not believe the black and white images produced by the MMW Machine is a strip search, your question couldn't not be answered with the response you are trying to fish out because of the language of your question.


-Tim “H2H”

EoS Blog Team

Submitted by HappyToHelp on

Just wanted to add my two cents into the mix.

I think legislation on this matter is a good thing(sets boundaries). I don't think the use of Whole Body Imaging should ever be used without privacy algorithms and this should be on the books(law).( Whole Body Imagers are currently in use with privacy algorithms in US airports)

-Tim “H2H”

EoS Blog Team

Submitted by Winstonsmith on

Wow... I'm impressed guys. When you first introduced the strip search machines, and make no mistake, that's what they are, about a year ago, I joined the loud chorus of voices on this forum protesting them as an unconstitutional violation of privacy. I still hold this position and it'll be a cold day in hell before I allow you to use one on me or on any of my loved ones. I'll give you one for tenacity though -- you tell a lie and you stick to it, hoping that at least some of the excreta you toss at the wall will stick.

I'm lucky enough to have changed jobs and no longer have the luxury of the time to devote to commentary the way I used to, nor the misfortune to have to have my rights violated twice weekly by TSA as I used to, but I do occasionally pop by and take a look to see the overwhelming amount of animosity TSA continues to engender from the traveling public and by those people who still care about their rights in this country. As for me, I can now return to my general policy of avoiding air travel except when absolutely impractical to do otherwise.

Nice to see some familiar faces as well as lots of new ones on the blog. Greetings to Trollkiller, Ann R. Key, Sandra, and Tom (1 of the 5 or 6).

Submitted by Anonymous on

OK folks, we all know that in spite of the chest-beating by the TSA that these machines are NOT going to be deployed at every checkpoint at every airport in the country.

So, what's to stop any terrorist from just choosing another checkpoint at the airport he/she might be transiting through, a checkpoint that does not demand either a strip search or a pat down?

Submitted by Anonymous on

@Anonymous, May 19, 2009 12:08 PM: "This thing is a strip search, plain and simple. Modesty, while a legitimate concern, has nothing to do with the main problem; TSA (i.e., the government) has neither the legal nor the moral right to strip search domestic passengers without probable cause that a crime has been or is about to be committed. In spite of TSA's delusions, desire to travel is not probable cause."
___________________________________

Eww. Okay probable cause has nothing to do with TSA. Police need probable cause to search someone, yes. We are not police. Before you enter into a checkpoint there are postings that state that by going through the checkpoint you are subject to search. Therefor you, by entering into this area, are giving permission to the TSA to search you or your belongings. This new machine, 1 is not a strip search and 2 is a choice. No one has to go through it. But if you choose to go through, once again you are giving permission just like you gave them permission to search your things when you began to send them through the xray machine.
Get over this probable cause garbage. You, the passengers, are giving permission to be searched when you walk through the checkpoint!

Submitted by RB on

HappyToHelp said...
RB said...

“Will TSA Strip Search children with the WBI MMW Machine?”
I have only done this once before but I call foul.

The question “Are children screened in the Whole Body Imagers? (WBI)” was answered March 20, 2009 6:20 PM "Traveling 101 for Diabetics" by Blogger Bob from HQ.

“A: There is no age limit. Anybody who can stand with their legs shoulder width apart and arms raised for 5 seconds while remaining still can be screened in the WBI.”

You were quite active in this blog post comment section but I will assume you missed it.

I brought this answer to your attention April 22, 2009 10:28 AM "TWIC Casts a Security Net Over Ports"

The second foul is with your loaded question “Will TSA Strip Search children with the WBI MMW Machine?”. If a party does not believe the black and white images produced by the MMW Machine is a strip search, your question couldn't not be answered with the response you are trying to fish out because of the language of your question.


-Tim “H2H”

EoS Blog Team

May 19, 2009 2:03 PM
.........................
Tim, the answer you refer to did not address the question directly. It was typical TSA SPIN. That answer said any age could be scanned. It did not answer the question if they would be.

I am asking if children will be scanned. The answer is an easy yes or no. No SPIN required.

The question I am asking is straight forward and deserves an answer.

The MMW machine does look under ones clothing. The frontal images that CNN had in the article demonstrate with clarity that the machine is nothing less than an invasive strip search.

So a direct question to you Tim; will you scan children with the MMW machine if your superiors direct that you do so?

Submitted by Anonymous on
Anonymous wrote:
Therefor you, by entering into this area, are giving permission to the TSA to search you or your belongings. This new machine ... No one has to go through it. But if you choose to go through, once again you are giving permission just like you gave them permission to search your things when you began to send them through the xray machine.
Get over this probable cause garbage. You, the passengers, are giving permission to be searched when you walk through the checkpoint!
The strip search machine is a "choice" for now, but TSA has all but admitted they want it to be mandatory.

And if you (TSA) put up a sign outside my home's driveway saying "all passers by are subject to search," that does not mean I have given you permission to search me by stepping outside my front door. It does mean you have blackmailed/extorted me into "consenting" to the search by making it a requirement of my basic living activities.

All of the "implied consent," "pax give permission," and "voluntary abandonment" brainwashing I suspect TSOs receive in training is hogwash. The only way it would make sense is if TSA's search was limited to weapons, explosives, and incendiaries, and TSA did not report cash, drugs, suspicious writing, and other items not a threat to aviation (unless there was obvious proof of a felony in progress--e.g., severed human head in luggage), and if passengers had the option to back out of the process at any point. That was originally the scope and limitation of the reasonable "consent administrative search" which has grown into the monster that is TSA.

As it is, TSA has required innocent Americans to be subject to a papers-please government checkpoint, government permission request, and intrusive search of their person and belongings well beyond that needed to secure aviation against weapons, explosives, and incendiaries, in order to exercise their fundamental right to domestic travel. (Air travel is the only practical means for traveling from/to many places; claiming we have the choice to walk is silly.)

These machines produce a naked image, plain and simple. If DHS/TSA believes otherwise, I challenge every DHS executive and every TSA FSD and AFSD to post non-anonymous full-sized frontal WBI/MMW images of themselves and all of their children on a public website.

And claiming the machines can't record the images is a total farce. No way TSA is going to use a system that can't produce records for purposes of incident reports, law-enforcement referrals, potential lawsuits, CYA if anything bad happens, passenger fines for trumped-up offenses like non-physical interference, etc. This is the same agency that used to demand pax home address if they were unfortunate enough to get a false positive on the ETD. You expect me to believe you don't have the capability to store these images?

The only credible way to say TSA can't store the images is to subject the machines and their software to an independent audit by an auditor selected by a third party such as the EFF, Identity Project, etc. But of course TSA will never do that because they will hide behind SSI.

10 years ago no court in the USA would have upheld mass government-forced strip searches of individuals not suspected of any crime. Nothing that has happened since then or will happen in the future is worth shredding our dignity, privacy, and liberty to that level. WTMD, ETD/ETP, and property x-ray/CT are completely capable of detecting credible threats to aviation without requiring invasive strip searches, secret government blacklists, and general humiliation.
Submitted by Adrian on

Just to be clear, passengers who want to fly often do NOT have the choice to opt out of the whole body imager.

The CNN specifically says, "When given a choice, 'over 99 percent of passengers choose this technology over other screening options.'" [emphasis added]

In Las Vegas, the whole body imager is used as a primary screening device instead of the metal detector arch, not just as a tool for secondary screenings. Passengers are not notified of what it does or that they have another option. I bet if you polled them, at least 90 percent would not even realize that it's an imaging device. Therefore, most people are not giving informed consent.

I'll be donating to EPIC again.

Submitted by Anonymous on

TSOs are forbidden from taking cameras (and presumably camera phones) into the booth with the WBI display. How is this enforced? Are they subjected to a pat down before they begin their shift in the booth? Do they use the imager to see if the TSO is concealing a camera?

Submitted by Anonymous on

H2H: "I think legislation on this matter is a good thing(sets boundaries). I don't think the use of Whole Body Imaging should ever be used without privacy algorithms and this should be on the books(law)."

Since most of the TSA's operations are shrouded in secrecy and exempt from oversight and accountability by design, how can we be sure that any such law will either be followed or effective? Who will hold you accountable for following the law? If TSOs aren't even held accountable for following the TSA's own rules, how can we have any confidence that they'll follow the law?

H2H: "If a party does not believe the black and white images produced by the MMW Machine is a strip search, your question couldn't not be answered with the response you are trying to fish out because of the language of your question."

If you narrowly define a strip search as an officer physically commanding a criminal or prisoner to remove their clothing so they can inspect the naked body for contraband, then the MMW scanner is not a strip search. But you cannot deny the MMW scanner electronically removes a suspected terrorist's (i.e., an airline passenger) clothes to inspect their naked body for contraband. If that's not a strip search, then what exactly is it?

I guess I shouldn't ask that question of someone who insists that the TSA never ever "confiscates" items that TSOs decide are prohibited, but instead passengers "voluntarily abandon" them after a comprehensive discussion of options. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and leaves messy droppings, it's a duck. Except at TSA checkpoints, where it has an entirely official definition. But that definition is SSI, so we just have to trust you.

And you probably can't understand why so many people hate the TSA.

Submitted by Chris Boyce on

TSA,

If you want to strip search all of us, be professional enough to just say so.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Like all things government, it starts with a fuzzy image, becomes a clear image, and soon you are on full display! Wear us down gradually until we submit. We are only giving up a "small" part of our privacy & rights....before we are not!

What the public needs to understand is that the TSA's job is to make you feel safe from yourself. By annoying you in the process, you are tricked into believing that somewhow the process is working

Reality is far from that because a true terrorist still has a plethorea of tools availabile to them to overpower the flight crew (e.g., knitting needles, 7" screwdriver, soda can, shoe laces, luggage straps, etc.). Interview any Prision Guard and you will quickly learn how a simple weapon can be fashioned from ANYTHING at hand. The terrorist is trained to know this..just like we train law enforcement. The average consumer (us) is not, and that is why this whole process is somewhat silly. Sure, visual deterrence is an important first step, but it only prevents the honest person from doing something (and we had no plans to do so in the first place)!

So, when you read the statistics page, what is glaringly missing is the intent. So, they confiscated a gun....likely, the person they took it from probably had no real intent of using it on board anyway...but it sounds good to report....never mind the pilot is armed!

True security will come from alert passengers....The "shoe bomber" was stopped by passengers...NOT the flight crew or TSA. Yet, a million people a day now take off their shoes...

And, the simple process of securing the cockpit door has done more in terms of real security than anything. The reality is the passengers are collateral damage (and the PA passengers knew that). As long as cockpit entry cannot be made, the aircraft remains in control which gives the passengers time to take action to overpower the trouble makers. THAT is how security needs to work!

Submitted by Ayn R Key on

"Hi" right back at you Winston. You're insightful comments were missed by all but the blog team.

Submitted by RB on

HappyToHelp said...
RB said...

“Will TSA Strip Search children with the WBI MMW Machine?”
I have only done this once before but I call foul.

...................
And I call foul on your foul call Tim.

When TSA responds to questions with straight answers I and others will no longer have to repeat the same question for months on end.

Sadly you work for an agency that has no integrity and thumbs its collective thumb at the public.

TSA continues to discredit itself at every turn and in turn causes great personal damage to its employees.

I have to wonder how anyone of conscience can work for this agency?

It tells me a great deal about the character of TSA employees.

Submitted by Mr Gel-pack on

Let me try it again without any description of the second image on the CNN story and see if this gets through the delete-o-meter.

If you reduce the resolution enough that the MMW image cannot be pornographic, then the image is probably not good enough for a useful screening. If the image is high enough resolution to discover a blasting cap taped behind certain body parts, the resolution of the image is high enough to be pornographic.

TSA is clearly choosing the pornographic option.

Submitted by Philip on

RB...The question has been asked and answered, stop asking the question.

Submitted by Tomas on
Another Anonymous said...TSOs are forbidden from taking cameras (and presumably camera phones) into the booth with the WBI display. How is this enforced? Are they subjected to a pat down before they begin their shift in the booth? Do they use the imager to see if the TSO is concealing a camera?
________________
Keep in mind that the statement says they are forbidden to take cameras in, not that they don't take cameras in. There really is a difference.

It's similar to all of us being forbidden to exceed the speed limit... It doesn't prevent it, it just means there might be a penalty if we do.

Tom
Submitted by Ayn R Key on

I guess my comment that the CNN image was more revealing than the images the TSA shares here on the blog was too graphic and needed to be censored.

Too bad, because the CNN image is more graphic and shows that the TSA isn't being completely honest when they say the images are safe enough to show to school kids.

And that's BEFORE you turn up the resolution.

Submitted by RB on

Philip said...
RB...The question has been asked and answered, stop asking the question.

May 20, 2009 1:53 PM


What question would that be Philip?

Submitted by Anonymous on

"The "shoe bomber" was stopped by passengers...NOT the flight crew "

You be only partially right:

One flight attendant, Hermis Moutardier, walked the aisles of the plane, trying to assess the source. She found Reid, who was sitting alone near a window and attempting to light a match. Moutardier warned him that smoking was not allowed on the airplane; Reid promised to stop. A few minutes later, Moutardier found Reid leaned over in his seat; her attempts to get his attention failed. After asking "What are you doing?" Reid grabbed at her, revealing one shoe in his lap, a fuse which led into the shoe, and a lit match. She tried grabbing Reid twice, but he pushed her to the floor each time, and she screamed for help. When another flight attendant, Cristina Jones, arrived to try to subdue him, he fought her and bit her thumb. PASSENGERS then subdued Reid.
-Wikipedia

But your attempt to belittle TSA was noted...

Submitted by Anonymous on

Anonymous said....

"As long as cockpit entry cannot be made, the aircraft remains in control which gives the passengers time to take action to overpower the trouble makers. THAT is how security needs to work!"

_____________________________

Yeah, right. You are correct, to some extent. The major threat is not that a plane will be hijacked. It is still possible, I would think, but that is not the main concern/worry TSA has. With good reason.

In 2004 terrorist blew up 2 planes flying from Moscow just minutes apart. They did not try to hijack the plane. As you stated there are the security doors. No, they just wanted to get onto the plane, wait till it was on its way, and kill everyone and spread fear. These terrorist were middle aged white women.

Richard Reed only failed because of bad planning. He didn't try to hijack the plane either. His goal was to kill everyone in mid flight, but simply couldn't detonate his bomb because the fuse was wet. I hope you do understand everyone on that flight was lucky...

Specifically you claimed security doors would give "passengers time to take action" to stop suicide bombers. How?

Submitted by HappyToHelp on

Mr. Gel-pack
“If you reduce the resolution enough that the MMW image cannot be pornographic, then the image is probably not good enough for a useful screening.”

This is a myth Mr. Gel-pack. Privacy settings designed by the manufacture do not hinder screening.

George said
“Since most of the TSA's operations are shrouded in secrecy and exempt from oversight and accountability by design, how can we be sure that any such law will either be followed or effective?”

Are you saying you don't want legislation on Whole Body Imaging? Fair enough, but I hope you can at least agree that the issue needs to be debated on capital hill. The airport is not the only place where Whole Body Imaging is used.

George said...
“I guess I shouldn't ask that question of someone who insists that the TSA never ever "confiscates" items that TSOs decide are prohibited, but instead passengers "voluntarily abandon" them after a comprehensive discussion of options.”

I have never said TSA(I think you mean Transportation Security Officers) has never “confiscated” a item from a passenger. You might be confused from previous discussions about TSA Standard Operating Procedures(SOP) concerning alternative options for items that have been prohibited from entering the sterile area such as “checking it in”.

Whats with the attack on character George. How about we attack the argument instead. If your argument is sound, then underhanded posting is not needed.

TO: No one specific

Seems like some of your posts have been pretty heated lately guys. None of my posts are meant to be angry in nature, offensive, filled with personal attacks, or meant to cause readers unneeded stress.

To help you guys out a little bit. Here is a FREE HUG.


-Tim “H2H”

EoS Blog Team

Pages