USA Flag

Official website of the Department of Homeland Security

Transportation Security Administration

New Imaging Technology at Cleveland Hopkins Airport

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 This page may contain information that is outdated and may not reflect current policy or programs.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 Anonymous on

Bob, what steps is TSA taking to ensure that every passenger TSA wants to strip-search with these machines knows they can decline?

Why is TSA implementing a screening technique that mandates people be separated from their possessions?

Why is TSA moving forward with this, after the House voted overwhelmingly against allowing TSA to use these strip-search machines as primary screening devices?

When will you post, on this blog and at each of these machines, an example of the images these machines generate at the same size and resolution the operator sees?

Submitted by Anonymous on

Bob,

Is there procedures in place to safeguard the person's carryons?

Does EVERYTHING (including wallets) have to come out of the pockets?

The scanner takes up to 30 seconds to get a picture. And then the person has to wait for the OK from the TSO in the back room to radio the scanner TSO. Add on the time in line waiting to enter the scanner. The carryons are left for quote a while.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I would like to see the signage for these devices placed immediately in front of the devices not along with all the other signage cluttering the cattle lane before the document check.

I would also like the TSOs to be required to point out the signage and inform the passenger that they are free to decline and what that would entail. That would be more like informed consent than what is currently in place today.

Do I expect this to happen, nope.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Was the concept for this hardware written by TSA or by pick-pockets?

Somebody needs to give the TSO manning the right-hand ID checker position at 0900 Aug 3 of SEA's northern checkpoint some kind of kudos for knowing that a brown US passport is legit. It was rather nice to not be accused of having a forged passport... this time.

Submitted by Marshall's SO on

Is it not discriminatory that passengers transiting certain checkpoints must submit to either a virtual strip search or a pat down, while passengers transiting other checkpoints within the same airport are not faced with such a choice?

Submitted by Sandra on

Ya' know, Bob, if the TSA were comfortable with instituting this technology, you and the powers that be would not be posting threads about it and asking newspapers to do stories about it whenever it arrives at another airport.

Says an awful lot when you do that.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Bob, I think you are caught in a lie here. The Cleveland newspaper columnist writes: “In addition, the Cleveland, Rochester, N.Y., and Burbank, Calif., airports are trying out a newer model called a backscatter, which uses low-dose X-rays.”

I am thinking back to your April 15 blog post. Remember, that post when you wrote, “Millimeter wave will allow our TSOs to view a noninvasive image of a passenger revealing any items that were not divested. These images are friendly enough to post in a preschool. Heck, it could even make the cover of Reader’s Digest and not offend anybody.”

Then ANONYMOUS came on and commented: “TSA's own Susan Hallowell went through this device as a test (see link). You'd really post that in a pre-school (coming from the administration that freaked out about part Janet Jackson's nipple)?? Here's the photo and link:
http://scienceblogs.com/strangerfruit/2006/11/airport_porn.php”

AND YOU RESPONDED, BOB:

“Nice try. That image is what the Backscatter is capable of. The TSA adjusted the image to look like this. The millimeter wave is the machine we are deploying which is a different machine than the Backscatter. (signed) Bob, TSA EoS Blog Team, April 19, 2008 3:35 PM”

So Bob, when this Cleveland newspaper columnist writes that Cleveland, Rochester and Burbank have BACKSCATTER machines, doesn’t that mean you were wrong when you said TSA is not deploying BACKSCATTER, only MILLIMETER WAVE machine?

Bob, we can’t trust anything you write. In fact, back on April 19, 2008, that’s EXACTLY what winstonsmith wrote: “I'm sure you're a nice guy and all and wear spiffy ties and such, but why should I or anyone else believe you or anyone else from the TSA?”

Winstonsmith was right then, and I am right now. When you said TSA was sticking with “pre-school-friendly” millimeter-wave machines, and would never deploy those nasty “nice try” backscatter machines, you were not telling the truth. Why should I or anyone else believe you?

Submitted by Anonymous on

TSA claims that only the operator of the strip-search machines will be able to see the image, yet allowed a reporter in to watch TSA use the machines? What's the procedure for getting an invitation to hang out and watch TSA take naked pictures of people traveling by air?

Submitted by Anonymous on

Well, so much for the sanctity of the virtual strip search image viewing booth.

We now know that the reporter for the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Connie Schultz, was allowed into the booth to view the images.

Bob, when passengers give "informed consent" to being virtually strip searched they DO NOT give consent to being viewed by every Tom, Dick and Harry that the TSA is trying to impress.

All the individuals who allowed this reporter into the booth should be fired forthwith and the program must be stopped because we now know (as if we did not already) that the TSA CANNOT be trusted.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Bob, you already linked to this article. It's pretty lame journalism. Connie talks about being able to see every wrinkle and fold of a person's body, but then goes on to say the images are not porn. Her given reason? Because we are all ugly. Basically, she is confirming what we have been saying all along, that your agents who are locked away in a hidden room have access to images of our naked bodies, and the only assurance we have that these images won't leave that room is yours, and your assurances aren't worth much around here.

As anonymous 3:08 says, you need to share full resolution, unmodified images generated by the scanner machines. Preferably of some of the blog team. Put your money where your mouth is. Show us EXACTLY what the operator sees, not some tiny thumbnail image. As it is, the only information we've got is what you've chosen to share, and that's just not good enough.

Submitted by Trollkiller on

Blogger Bob, I want to see the signage for the backscatter. I would also like to see photos of the signage on location.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Bob,

In the referenced article, Connie herself states: "After seeing images of real humans on the scanner screens, I've modified my response:

Ew. Ew. "


Please tell us who besides the TSO is allowed in the viewing booth? I wasn't aware that reporters and the general public were allowed to observe passengers being virtually disrobed.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Anonymous said...
I would like to see the signage for these devices placed immediately in front of the devices not along with all the other signage cluttering the cattle lane before the document check.

I would also like the TSOs to be required to point out the signage and inform the passenger that they are free to decline and what that would entail. That would be more like informed consent than what is currently in place today.

Do I expect this to happen, nope.
___________________________________

Good, I am glad that you do not expect this to happen!
There are signs placed directly in front of the machines.
And TSA does not have to hold the persons hand and say, "lets read this sign, now do you want to do this?" The sign is there and that is all of the resposibility that TSA has to take. Now if you chose to read it or not is not TSA's problem.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Does EVERYTHING (including wallets) have to come out of the pockets?


Unfortunatelly everything does have to come out of the pockets. Now although it takes a few seconds for the picture to be cleared, the passenger only stands in the machine while the picture is taken. They are then directed to stand off to the side where their property is in their site. And usually that is only for a couple of seconds. So you can see it coming out of the machine and you can go grab it soon after. It is no different than someone who has to go through the pat down process or hand wand because of a medical implant.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Somebody needs to give the TSO manning the right-hand ID checker position at 0900 Aug 3 of SEA's northern checkpoint some kind of kudos for knowing that a brown US passport is legit. It was rather nice to not be accused of having a forged passport... this time.
___________________________________
Wow, congratulations! You must feel like such a victim every other time that you fly.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Is it not discriminatory that passengers transiting certain checkpoints must submit to either a virtual strip search or a pat down, while passengers transiting other checkpoints within the same airport are not faced with such a choice?
___________________________________

Nah, I don't think so, but nice try!

Submitted by Anonymous on

Ya' know, Bob, if the TSA were comfortable with instituting this technology, you and the powers that be would not be posting threads about it and asking newspapers to do stories about it whenever it arrives at another airport.

Says an awful lot when you do that.
___________________________________

Seriously!! All you people do is wine and complain about how you are left out and you want all of the information in the world handed to you. So TSA has newspapers write articles and the news does stories so that the public can be informed. And you complain about that. Figures!!

Submitted by Anonymous on

TSA claims that only the operator of the strip-search machines will be able to see the image, yet allowed a reporter in to watch TSA use the machines? What's the procedure for getting an invitation to hang out and watch TSA take naked pictures of people traveling by air?
___________________________________

That is correct only the operator will see the image. The only way that the news papers were allowed behind the scene is if there was an anonymous volunteer having their picture taken.

Submitted by Anonymous on

All the individuals who allowed this reporter into the booth should be fired forthwith and the program must be stopped because we now know (as if we did not already) that the TSA CANNOT be trusted.
___________________________________

You people should write childrens books! You have such wild imaginations.

Submitted by RB on

Bob, when will TSA provide the public with exactly the same quality of images produced by the Strip Search Machines that a screener sees?

Remember one of your TSO's posted on this blog that the image is the same as seeing a person in the nude. Hardly suitable for a child.

Will TSA continue to insist on using Strip Search Machines on children and young teens? How can TSA justify taking nude pictures of children.

When will Nico prove that these Strip Search Machine images are safe for viewing young children. It was his claim, why would he hide after making a claim like that?

The House of Representatives has legislation in works that will limit the use of Strip Search Machines to secondary screening. Why is TSA pushing the issue by using Strip Search Machines as a means of primary screening?

If the Congress does mandate that Strip Search Machines can only be used as a means of secondary screening should not purchasers of these machines be held liable for the cost of buying equipement that has not been authorized for use?

Since there is legislative action moving through the congress should TSA suspend any further deployment of the Strip Search Machines until the matter is settled?

Since you didn't see fit to post my first query that did comply with posting all guidelines I will continue the same line of questioning until you do post.

Is this government operated blog operating outside of the Constitution? Are you afraid of the First Admendment Bob?

Would suppression of speech not violate your oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States?

I think the answer is clear that yours and the TSA's goals here are anything but open, free discussion.

Submitted by Anonymous on

It never says she viewed "Passengers" images. Maybe she watched a TSO give a demonstration?
Some need to stop jumping to conclussions and slamming TSA just because they say they are concerned about the rights of others and hate all things government.

Submitted by Bob on

Wow. Some sure are quick to make up their minds on what they think they and others know. (Some)

Before you grab all of your farming implements and storm the gates asking for the heads of the officers involved, you might want to know this:

The images that Connie viewed were TSA employees who volunteered. No passengers were viewed. In fact, no passengers were even allowed to be screened by the Imaging Technology until Connie had left the viewing room.

Thanks,

Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team

Submitted by Anonymous on

Bob scores!

TSA Blog: 1
FlierSquawk: 0

Bob is right that some of you really, really think you have it all figured out. This is just proof that you want to stick it to the TSA and that you have no desire to be productive.

Submitted by Bubbaloop on

How are the images are transmitted to the "remote location"? This creates an opportunity for hacking.

Why are the images viewed by TSA officers in a remote location and not in front of the scanned passenger, but in an area secluded from the general public, as is done in Heathrow?

And more importantly, why use technology that generates an image (unacceptable to many of us), does not scan the whole body (body cavities are not viewed), and is therefore useless?

Remember the tampon paradox: if you can see a tampon using this technology, it is too invasive and should not be used. If you cannot see a tampon, it cannot detect necessary threats and should not be used. No technology that generates images of persons should be employed in the name of airport security.

Submitted by RB on

"So TSA has newspapers write articles"
August 6, 2009 1:20 PM
.......................

So how much did TSA pay for this article?

Submitted by Chris Boyce on

A couple of hours earlier, Bob posted:
The images that Connie viewed were TSA employees who volunteered. No passengers were viewed. In fact, no passengers were even allowed to be screened by the Imaging Technology until Connie had left the viewing room.


Bob,

I tried really hard to reconcile what you (TSA) did in your desire to roll out the red carpet for the reporter with your own Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) for
TSA Whole Body Imaging, dated Oct 17, 2008, as amended.

Regretfully, I can't resolve the actions you took to allow the reporter into the booth while the screener was viewing images. The specific paragraph I'm having a hard time with is Paragraph 5 on Page 8. I quote for your convenience:

Principle: DHS should use PII solely for the purpose(s) specified in the notice. Sharing PII outside the Department should be for a purpose compatible with the purpose for which the PII was collected.

TSOs sitting in the remote viewing room are the only persons to see the WBI images that appear on the screen transiently for the purpose of identifying any potential threat items. The TSOs at the screening location and the supervisory TSO overseeing their actions are prohibited from entering the remote room and viewing the images on the screen. Once any anomaly is resolved, the image is deleted, and therefore cannot be used for any other purpose or shared with anyone. The images will not be used in any other context inside DHS and will not be shared outside of the Department.

I would like you to task the appropriate individuals to clarify these apparent inconsistencies in the PIA and what happened:

1. How is the decision to allow a reporter in the room with the screener viewing images compatible with:

"Sharing PII outside the Department should be for a purpose compatible with the purpose for which the PII was collected." and,

"The images will not be used in any other context inside DHS and will not be shared outside of the Department."?

2. Who authorized a deviation from this policy stated in the same paragraph: "TSOs sitting in the remote viewing room are the only persons to see the WBI images that appear on the screen transiently for the purpose of identifying any potential threat items."? Under what authority or regulation did this individual authorize the deviation? I did not read anything in the PIA allowing for waivers or deviation.

3. How does a member of the citizenry request a privilege similar to that granted to the reporter?

Thank you in advance.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Bob sez: The images that Connie viewed were TSA employees who volunteered. No passengers were viewed. In fact, no passengers were even allowed to be screened by the Imaging Technology until Connie had left the viewing room.

That's what you say, Bob. That's not at all what Connie the Reporter sez:
I looked at the images that were on the screens, in the private rooms. I also walked through the back-scatter screener and observed others walking through the millimeter-wave scanner.
Connie Schultz
Columnist

No mention of TSA volunteers there. Why should we believe you, Bob. You are the guy who said in April 2008 that the backscatter screener would NOT be deployed, and now, yup, here it is.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"Bob scores!

TSA Blog: 1
FlierSquawk: 0

Bob is right that some of you really, really think you have it all figured out. This is just proof that you want to stick it to the TSA and that you have no desire to be productive."

Scores by...what criteria, exactly? He stated something that absolutely NONE of us can verify as a fact.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"The images that Connie viewed were TSA employees who volunteered. No passengers were viewed. In fact, no passengers were even allowed to be screened by the Imaging Technology until Connie had left the viewing room."

Bob, assuming this is true -- and given your and TSA's track record, that is a pretty big assumption -- why was Ms. Schultz allowed to see the images generated by this machine at the same size and resolution its operators see, when you refuse to do so on this blog, and ignore all requests to do so?

Submitted by Anonymous on

Bob, since you've allowed Connie Schultz to see the images these machines generate at the same size and resolution the operator sees, why won't you do so on this blog?

Submitted by Anonymous on

Quoted:
" Anonymous said...
Bob sez: The images that Connie viewed were TSA employees who volunteered. No passengers were viewed. In fact, no passengers were even allowed to be screened by the Imaging Technology until Connie had left the viewing room.

That's what you say, Bob. That's not at all what Connie the Reporter sez:
I looked at the images that were on the screens, in the private rooms. I also walked through the back-scatter screener and observed others walking through the millimeter-wave scanner.
Connie Schultz
Columnist

No mention of TSA volunteers there. Why should we believe you, Bob. You are the guy who said in April 2008 that the backscatter screener would NOT be deployed, and now, yup, here it is.

August 6, 2009 4:51 PM"
------------------
I read the interview linked to. No where did I see this statement at all:

"I also walked through the back-scatter screener and observed others walking through the millimeter-wave scanner."

Did you read a different interview then I did?

Submitted by Trollkiller on
Chris Boyce said...

3. How does a member of the citizenry request a privilege similar to that granted to the reporter?

Start a blog or website and become a reporter like me.

Blogger Bob, as a reporter I would like to request access to the private room so I can see first hand the resolution the WBIs are capable of producing. I will bring my own model with a full model release.

Let me know when you will be in Jax, Tampa or Miami.
Submitted by Anonymous on

Trollkiller said...
Blogger Bob, I want to see the signage for the backscatter. I would also like to see photos of the signage on location.

I see this every time I fly, signs informing passengers of what to do, what to pack, what electronics to remove out of their bags, and they still stand with a plasible look wondering why are their bags beign checked.the signs are their, just READ,

Submitted by Trollkiller on
Anonymous said...

Trollkiller said...
Blogger Bob, I want to see the signage for the backscatter. I would also like to see photos of the signage on location.
---------------

I see this every time I fly, signs informing passengers of what to do, what to pack, what electronics to remove out of their bags, and they still stand with a plasible look wondering why are their bags beign checked.the signs are their, just READ,

What airports and can you do me a favor the next time you fly, take a picture of the signage. Please use a wide enough field to show the placement.

Are you flying out of airports that use the backscatter, if so I would appreciate a close up picture of that signage.

Email your pics to mmw@rebelmodel.com please include airport, date and time.

Thanks.
Submitted by TSOWilliamReed on

I have a feeling no matter what happens this machine will never be your only option for screening checkpoints. Just like currently you can opt out of the WTMD for a HHMD search you will probably always be able to opt out of the body scanner for a WTMD, HHMD, or full body pat down (incase they junk the other tech to make space). But this is all just speculation because I have no idea where they are going with this machine. All I know is that even if I wasn't a TSO, I still wouldn't have any problem using the machine. Also I am not sure if they have already thought of this or not but TSA does already do this with some machines. They will probably set up the scanner to only bring up an image when the scanner alarms on an item on the passenger. But the truth is, you can ALWAYS not go through the scanner that will never change, we will always have other methods to screen YOU just don't ruin it for the other 500,000 people who would rather not be touched, have metal implants, or would just like to get through faster.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"why was Ms. Schultz allowed to see the images generated by this machine at the same size and resolution its operators see, when you refuse to do so on this blog, and ignore all requests to do so?"

Could it be that the images you requested cannot be produced as TSA has said that they cannot save the images and they go away once the passenger has left the machine? Or do you think TSA is lying again, thereby making ANY answer they (TSA) give suspect?

Submitted by Anonymous on

"I looked at the images that were on the screens, in the private rooms. I also walked through the back-scatter screener and observed others walking through the millimeter-wave scanner."

As these two areas, the private room and the millimeter scatter machine, are seperate areas and not within sight range and, in fact, seperated by walls, why do you think she did both at the same time?

Submitted by Anonymous on

"signs informing passengers of what to do, what to pack, what electronics to remove out of their bags, and they still stand with a plasible look wondering why are their bags beign checked.the signs are their, just READ,"

Nobody is denying there is signage at the airports. What most of the questions here concern is the PLACEMENT OF THE WBI signs and the readability of the signs. For instance, we have heard that at BWI they are at the beginning of the "papers please" line and NOT in close proximity to the WBI.

However, we also know that TSA signage reads that one can't have more than 3 oz. of liquid in a container when, in fact, the limit is 3.4 oz.

So even if the signs are available and are read by the flying public, they are often misleading.

And PS, what good does a sign about what to pack do when you're already at the security checkpoint?

PPS: what does plasible mean?

Submitted by Anonymous on

TSOWilliamReed said...
I have a feeling no matter what happens this machine will never be your only option for screening checkpoints. Just like currently you can opt out of the WTMD for a HHMD search you will probably always be able to opt out of the body scanner for a WTMD, HHMD, or full body pat down (incase they junk the other tech to make space). But this is all just speculation because I have no idea where they are going with this machine. All I know is that even if I wasn't a TSO, I still wouldn't have any problem using the machine. Also I am not sure if they have already thought of this or not but TSA does already do this with some machines. They will probably set up the scanner to only bring up an image when the scanner alarms on an item on the passenger. But the truth is, you can ALWAYS not go through the scanner that will never change, we will always have other methods to screen YOU just don't ruin it for the other 500,000 people who would rather not be touched, have metal implants, or would just like to get through faster.

August 7, 2009 1:04 PM

..........................
I don't trust TSA to maintain other means to screen.

The Strip Search Machines should be outlawed.

If not outlawed outright then only used for secondary screening.

When TSA starts being truthful with the public then perhaps some degree of faith in what is said by TSA and their spokespeople will be accepted.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"Could it be that the images you requested cannot be produced as TSA has said that they cannot save the images and they go away once the passenger has left the machine?"

I don't know what it could be, since Bob refuses to answer this question. It's like TSA has something to hide.

Submitted by Jim Huggins on

See, the question I can't seem to get an answer to is this:

WBIs are being promoted as a better alternative to patdowns. I can understand that. For passengers who are regularly subjected to patdowns because of implants, wheelchair usage, etc., this makes a lot of sense.

But most of the time, when I transit a checkpoint, I'm not subject to a patdown. I walk through the WTMD without alerting, pick up my carry-ons, and head out. (Well, I'm usually shuffling out because my pants are falling down without my belt and getting tangled in my stocking feet because I'm still carrying my shoes, but you get the idea.)

In these pilot studies, like here at Cleveland, it appears that all passengers are being required to submit to either WBI or a patdown (their choice). Since I'm not usually subject to either, this seems like a loss of privacy to me. Sure, I can choose which way I lose my privacy, but I wouldn't have been subject to either procedure at other airports.

Is TSA's eventual plan to make WBI/patdowns mandatory for all passengers?

Submitted by TSORon on

Jim Huggins said...
WBIs are being promoted as a better alternative to patdowns.
-----------------------

I cant address the rest of the post Jim, but as far as this one sentence is concerned I think I can.

WBI's are a better alternative, in the security sense. They allow us to see the things that a person is concealing that metal detectors cannot detect. Metal detectors have their limitations, as do the WBI’s, but metal detectors have more of them. They are an increase in the ability of the TSA to detect prohibited items and prevent them from boarding an aircraft.

Submitted by Anonymous on

An anonymous poster gave the following applause to a particular TSO:

"Somebody needs to give the TSO manning the right-hand ID checker position at 0900 Aug 3 of SEA's northern checkpoint some kind of kudos for knowing that a brown US passport is legit. It was rather nice to not be accused of having a forged passport... this time."

To which an anonymous poster snarked:

" Wow, congratulations! You must feel like such a victim every other time that you fly.

I think the original poster was pointing out an improvement in the quality of training received by TSO's at the Seattle International Airport. This is a "good" thing.

Submitted by TSOWilliamReed on

Jim Huggins said...
See, the question I can't seem to get an answer to is this:

WBIs are being promoted as a better alternative to patdowns. I can understand that. For passengers who are regularly subjected to patdowns because of implants, wheelchair usage, etc., this makes a lot of sense.

But most of the time, when I transit a checkpoint, I'm not subject to a patdown. I walk through the WTMD without alerting, pick up my carry-ons, and head out. (Well, I'm usually shuffling out because my pants are falling down without my belt and getting tangled in my stocking feet because I'm still carrying my shoes, but you get the idea.)
--------------

I understand how you feel Jim. I have always flown right through security no problem even before I worked for TSA. Truth is I never really carry anything onto the airplane with me except for a book and a psp. So now when I fly I also have to be subject to this search. However, it doesn't bother me at all. There are also thousands of other passengers that feel the same way. Lots of people would rather be scanned then touched any day. People with metallic implants love it. But as a TSO I have a question for Bob. With these machines will passengers with Pacemakers be able to be scanned since its a different type of technology from the metal detectors? I am sure there are alot of passengers out there tired of full body pat downs because of their pacemaker.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"Lots of people would rather be scanned then touched any day."

And many, many more than that would rather not be groped by a TSO nor have the government take naked pictures of them or their children. And TSA has completely failed to provide any actual need to do either for the vast majority of passengers. Remember: The only "success story" these strip-search machines have had is keeping 0.6 ounces of lotion off of an airplane.

Submitted by Sandra on

The following appeared on FlyerTalk this morning. Although it is not about the subject at hand, WBI in CLE, it is about the duplicity of the TSA, the way it either ignores or twists law and fails to address questions asked of it:

I just read a 4.14.09 posting by Francine Kerner, TSA Chief Counsel, appearing under the TSA blog entitled "Traveling With Large Amounts of Cash." I am concerned and somewhat offended by the failure of TSA's Chief Legal Counsel to actually answer the simple question posted, ". . . why such a question is posed and whether a passenger is required to answer." Her posting incorrectly and misleadingly implies that citizens are required to answer such questions by the TSA. Ms. Kerner was under no obligation to answer a legal question from the public, but once she has chosen to publish a response in her capacity as an Attorney for a governmental entity, she is ethically bound to not mislead the questioner, be it affirmatively or through omission. There is no reason to assume that Ms. Kerner is not competent, however, as any lawyer with any experience in this area knows the correct answer to the question she claims to address, it is difficult to view Ms. Kerner's response as other than intentionally misleading and thus a violation of professional ethics.

Submitted by Anonymous on

If a person declines the Strip Search Machine at Cleveland Hopkins will they get a retalitory secondary screening like at SFO that are being reported?

Thought this Strip Search was voluntary? Or is this TSA's way of making it the lessor choice of two evils?

Submitted by Anonymous on

The stripsearch machines need to be made mandatory for every passenger at every checkpoint. How else would we REALLY know what every pax is carrying?

I want to see what I look like on the screen. With my 8-pack abs, I bet I look hot :-)

Submitted by Anonymous on

"Remember the tampon paradox: if you can see a tampon using this technology, it is too invasive and should not be used. If you cannot see a tampon, it cannot detect necessary threats and should not be used. No technology that generates images of persons should be employed in the name of airport security.Instead of posting this every on every topic, why dont you think of ways to help TSA, like as in the whole point of this blog?
Come up with some ideas and help them out :P

Submitted by Bubbaloop on

Dear Anonymous who asked for ways to help,

We have posted repeatedly many suggestions - look around. Related to the subject at hand, I have no objection to metal detectors and traces scanners, which do not generate images and can detect threats even within body cavities or folds.

Pages