# Body scanners and full body pat-downs



## kasteer

Anyone experience this yet?  I read that the new full body pat-downs took effect Oct 30th for anyone not wanting to go through the ody scan machines.

The Body scan machines appear to be very invasive to privacy.  I also read there's radiation concerns.  If we "opt-out" of the body scan, I hear the new TSA pat down procedures are akin to groping...

I for one an rethinking any plans to fly... however, my wife and kids are supposed to go to Argentina this sumer and I don't like the options.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national...he-first-time-the-tsa-meets-resistance/65390/

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-...rt-pat-downs-the-new-tsa-rules-are-a-mistake/

http://jalopnik.com/5675907/tomorrow-the-tsa-can-aggressively-pat-down-your-genitals


----------



## riverdees05

My wife (we are in our 60s) has had double knee replacement and has had both the body scan and a detail full body pat-down and prefers the full body scan.


----------



## mbeach89

Depends who is doing the full body pat-down....just sayin'     :rofl:


----------



## kasteer

riverdees05 said:


> My wife (we are in our 60s) has had double knee replacement and has had both the body scan and a detail full body pat-down and prefers the full body scan.




I heard the pat-down is pretty bad.  However, I have a problem with the full body scan...  I feel it's an illegal search and violates my rights and the constitution (...call me a right wing extremist...).  Then again, I feel the same about the pat-down.  lol.


----------



## kasteer

mbeach89 said:


> Depends who is doing the full body pat-down....just sayin'     :rofl:



For you, or for your significant other?


----------



## Pat H

My mom and sister flew out of Newark yesterday. They didn't have the body scanner or the full pat down.


----------



## x3 skier

We have done both and neither seems any big deal to my wife or I. I guess that is from all those years in locker rooms for Basketball and other sports.

If you don't like the process, I guess you are SOL since I see no reason it will change nor should it IMHO. All I can see is a bunch of lawyers getting semi rich filling suits that will get nowhere.

Cheers


----------



## Phill12

kasteer said:


> Anyone experience this yet?  I read that the new full body pat-downs took effect Oct 30th for anyone not wanting to go through the ody scan machines.
> 
> The Body scan machines appear to be very invasive to privacy.  I also read there's radiation concerns.  If we "opt-out" of the body scan, I hear the new TSA pat down procedures are akin to groping...





 We flew back from Dallas the first day they started {11/30.2010} this after the failed bomb tries. 

 After having one people might stop complaining about the scan which most people complaining never had at this point. I asked about the scan but they don't have it in DFW airport at this time so your options are simple,do it or don't fly!  You still have choices like take a train or bus!  

 They did touch me but the man was very upfront and nice about it and I would rather have this than a bomb on my plane! They didn't do my wife though and while she watched I told them to make her watch because this was close to fore play when we first got married 29 years ago. They did their job wearing rubber gloves and I had no problem with it.

 PHILL12


----------



## kasteer

Phill12 said:


> because this was close to fore play when we first got married 29 years ago.  PHILL12



Did you enjoy it?  just kidding...   

Yeah, I will look for alternatives to flying.  And it's true I haven't experienced it yet.  

Thanks!


----------



## bogey21

No one is forcing us to fly.  Drive a car and you have to have a driver's license.  Travel out of the country and you need a passport.  Fly and you have to go through a body scan.  All these are ok with me.

George


----------



## kasteer

[There is no place on TUG for political posts - it violates the posting rules.  Please take this thread in another direction. - DeniseM Moderator]


----------



## LisaRex

I have no issue with the body scan.  Yes, the scanner provides a fairly graphic image of your body.  

Hey, if the TSA agent is that hard up for a peek at my 44-year old out of shape body, go for it.  I just want to get on the plane so I can start my vacation.


----------



## DeniseM

Exactly, Lisa - it's just like going to the Dr. for your yearly exam.  No one enjoys it, but I'm not much worried that my Dr. is getting a thrill out of it,  either!


----------



## Beaglemom3

I had it done when I departed from Logan on my trip to Florida last week.

I did it willingly, but wondered if nurses or similar (with security training) , would be more appropriate to do the pat-downs ? Yes, there's a nursing shortage, but I would prefer to be patted down by a medical person.

There was a man who was almost enraged at the idea of having this done when I was waiting to be scanned. 

Not a total solution, but an idea that may help to alleviate some of the reaction to being touched in personal areas by non-medical folks.

 I always get pulled out, always.


----------



## regatta333

My husband and I had to go through the body scanners on a recent trip to Albuquerque.  It was not that big a deal to us, but my sister is now rethinking a trip to Hawaii this spring because of them.  In addition to the reasons already listed, she is concerned about the levels of radiation.


----------



## Beaglemom3

It's supposed to be minimal exposure, far less than Xrays, CAT scans, etc., but it still is an exposure.

Capt. Sully Sullenberger is not for repeated scanning of crew members and I agree.

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/national_world&id=7785108


----------



## riverdees05

My wife says full body pat downs vary a lot of airport to airport.  Her last on on Kona was by far the most extensive that she has had to date.  Really detailed!


----------



## linsj

The discussion and links in the Travel and Security forum on FlyerTalk.com on this topic are numerous and enlightening, and I don't have the time to repeat them here. Please check them out.

So far, I've been able to avoid the nude-o-scopes. But I'm sure one of these times I'll be bullied into that line instead of the metal detector. However, I refuse to undergo radiation from machines that have not been independently tested for safety and that radiologists and medical personnel advise against using. Maybe if you fly only once a year, they're not a health problem, only an invasion of privacy. But for those of us who fly frequently, they are likely to cause cancer in a few years. (Of course, nobody knows for sure because they haven't been tested; instead, we're the guinea pigs.) The TSA is using invasive pat downs akin to sexual assault to intimidate people into going through the new machines.

So our choices have become:
(1) Get radiated.
(2) Endure groping that would be sexual assault in other context.
(3) Quit flying.

I can't quit flying totally because it's necessary for my business. But I'm canceling leisure trips and driving when I can. Next year I'll drop from UA 1K to 1P status, and it's likely I won't keep 1P in 2012 if this security theater continues.

I'm not flying the day before Thanksgiving, but I support National Opt-out Day, http://www.optoutday.com.


----------



## CarolF

linsj said:


> ....  However, I refuse to undergo radiation from machines that have not been independently tested for safety and that radiologists and medical personnel advise against using. Maybe if you fly only once a year, they're not a health problem, only an invasion of privacy. But for those of us who fly frequently, they are likely to cause cancer in a few years. (Of course, nobody knows for sure because they haven't been tested; instead, we're the guinea pigs.)



The radiation from the scan concerns me also.  I would much prefer the pat down.



> The TSA is using invasive pat downs akin to sexual assault to intimidate people into going through the new machines.
> 
> So our choices have become:
> (1) Get radiated.
> (2) Endure groping that would be sexual assault in other context.
> (3) Quit flying.



I haven't experienced a 'pat down' but surely they can't be that bad.  I'm imagining that you stand fully clothed and they gently pat your entire body  .  

Personally I feel sorry for the poor workers doing this job, it doesn't sound very enjoyable.




Beaglemom3 said:


> I did it willingly, but wondered if nurses or similar (with security training) , would be more appropriate to do the pat-downs ? Yes, there's a nursing shortage, but I would prefer to be patted down by a medical person.
> 
> There was a man who was almost enraged at the idea of having this done when I was waiting to be scanned.
> 
> Not a total solution, but an idea that may help to alleviate some of the reaction to being touched in personal areas by non-medical folks.



I can understand (well, sort of understand) that some people may prefer to be patted by a nurse or medical person.  Personally, I'd be wondering what sort of nurse would spend 4 years at university then apply for a job patting people at the airport.  I'd really be worried by the pat downs then  .


----------



## Beaglemom3

CarolF said:


> The radiation from the scan concerns me also.  I would much prefer the pat down.
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't experienced a 'pat down' but surely they can't be that bad.  I'm imagining that you stand fully clothed and they gently pat your entire body  .
> 
> Personally I feel sorry for the poor workers doing this job, it doesn't sound very enjoyable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can understand (well, sort of understand) that some people may prefer to be patted by a nurse or medical person.  Personally, I'd be wondering what sort of nurse would spend 4 years at university then apply for a job patting people at the airport.  I'd really be worried by the pat downs then  .





  Not all nurses are from 4 year programs. Not all nurses want to stay in nursing. As a master's prepared (6 yrs) NP with 30 years of nursing (I left to attend law school) , I can say that laid-off, burnt out, retired or fed up nurses may be interested in using their degree(s), diplomas (or even LPNs -8-15 months) to earn salary and benefits. 

  But ,we digress.........................


  There's no choice at Logan, you get both the pat down and the scan.
  Until you've had one, at least a bad one, you may not understand fully. The one at Logan was a bit more than required including upper and lower naughty parts (a medical term  ).  Getting back to the OP, it is intrusive and I am not totally convinced how effective this is. When they start the body cavity searches, I'll just take Amtrak ~ :hysterical:


----------



## Pat H

Beaglemom3 said:


> When they start the body cavity searches, I'll just take Amtrak ~ :hysterical:



Hey Beags, I just heard on the news that they are going to start doing the same thing for Amtrak passengers! :rofl:


----------



## cvmar

They now have them at SeaTac and due to the radiation concerns we will not go through them and I am not looking forward to a pat down either. I am not sure how they handle children and I am very uncomfortable with anyone touching my child.

We have been trying to convince several family members to come to Hawaii with us for several years but they hate the hassle at the airport and now with the scanners they have decided their flying days are over.

Really no other way to get to Hawaii so no real choice there but we have decided to hit the road in the spring and summer and see some of the natural beauty in our own backyard and skip the airport all together.


----------



## Beaglemom3

Pat H said:


> Hey Beags, I just heard on the news that they are going to start doing the same thing for Amtrak passengers! :rofl:



:rofl:   

Then they're going to have to buy me at least dinner and flowers before we move into that stage of our relationship.


----------



## l2trade

linsj said:


> The discussion and links in the Travel and Security forum on FlyerTalk.com on this topic are numerous and enlightening, and I don't have the time to repeat them here. Please check them out.
> 
> So far, I've been able to avoid the nude-o-scopes. But I'm sure one of these times I'll be bullied into that line instead of the metal detector. However, I refuse to undergo radiation from machines that have not been independently tested for safety and that radiologists and medical personnel advise against using. Maybe if you fly only once a year, they're not a health problem, only an invasion of privacy. But for those of us who fly frequently, they are likely to cause cancer in a few years. (Of course, nobody knows for sure because they haven't been tested; instead, we're the guinea pigs.) The TSA is using invasive pat downs akin to sexual assault to intimidate people into going through the new machines.
> 
> So our choices have become:
> (1) Get radiated.
> (2) Endure groping that would be sexual assault in other context.
> (3) Quit flying.
> 
> I can't quit flying totally because it's necessary for my business. But I'm canceling leisure trips and driving when I can. Next year I'll drop from UA 1K to 1P status, and it's likely I won't keep 1P in 2012 if this security theater continues.
> 
> I'm not flying the day before Thanksgiving, but I support National Opt-out Day, http://www.optoutday.com.



Agreed.  I support opting out everyday for my health, privacy and to protect my personal property (you can lose your wallet and more while you are distracted by the nude-o-scopes).  My choice is #3 when it comes to future leisure trips.  I will cancel my 2011 Hawaii and Orlando exchanges before we reach the 60 day mark.  There are plenty of other vacations we can get to by car.  If I must travel, then I reluctantly choose #2 for myself and I leave the wife and kids at home.  IMHO, the NEW enhanced pat down procedure is TSA (total sexual assault).


----------



## x3 skier

If enough people stop flying because of these procedures, I may finally be able to upgrade to first class. 

Cheers


----------



## Fern Modena

How about if you have to have medical equipment with you...a wheelchair, cane, oxygen concentrator, etc.  You'll be hand searched every time because none of those scan or go through the medical detector without setting off an alarm, and often the people with such equipment can't let go of it to be scanned..."Um, excuse me sir, can you stop breathing for a couple minutes so we can search your oxygen concentrator while you go through the metal detector?"  I don't think so...

Fern


----------



## siesta

Check out this article "Image of Genitalia on Full Body Scanner leads to assault", these were airport employees viewing each other and happened to mock the wrong employee.


----------



## Ken555

Had the pat down in Nassau - no problem, quick and easy.


----------



## Phill12

kasteer said:


> Did you enjoy it?  just kidding...
> 
> 
> If I smoked I'm sure I would have joined the others smoking a cigarette after the feel down or feel up! :whoopie:
> 
> It just wasn't that bad and I will take this over having a doctor tell me to turn my head and cough anytime. Sure most of the men will catch my meaning on this!:rofl:
> 
> PHILL12


----------



## linsj

Here's a quick summary of the situation:
http://wewontfly.com/

If you haven't flown since Nov. 1, the pat downs have gotten a LOT more invasive than they used to be.


----------



## hvacrsteve

*Airport body scanners*

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/11/12/travel.screening/index.html?iref=NS1

Are they keeping you from flying this year?

I have decided to forgo flying unless I have an emergency and can't prevent it.

Until we get serious about security it is really not safe to fly in my opinion.

We need to get over it and start profilng, until we do our security is just a joke.
Are you ready for random cavity searches, that is what coming next.

Certainly any one willing to donate their body to a cause is willing to insert a bomb into a body cavity.  Drugs are transported that way everyday, bombs are next.
You herd it here, so don't be surprised when it happens.


----------



## lorenmd

i have been patted down many times as i have bilateral knee replacements so i was so happy to finally go to an airport that had the body scanner.  got through security so much faster.  i always want that and the radiation is insignificant.  i have been exposed to radiation in the OR on a daily basis for 25 years and i am still normal.  enjoy your life, fly.  don't let this little bump cause you to  not do what you want to do.


----------



## Patri

siesta said:


> Check out this article "Image of Genitalia on Full Body Scanner leads to assault", these were airport employees viewing each other and happened to mock the wrong employee.



That's sexual harassment in the workplace and should have been reported. The offenders should have been disciplined.


----------



## Bucky

I have an implanted defibrillator in my chest and have endured pat downs for the last seven years!  It's no big deal folks, trust me.  I've been all over the world and some pat downs are more thorough than others.  I've been lucky enough to go through one of the full body scanners so far and to the best of my knowledge I didn't see or hear anyone making fun of my 60 yr old body.  It is what it is.  If you want to fly, get used to it.  I can understand pilots not wanting to do it because of how many times they would have to go through it over their careers.  In that case, submit to the pat downs and quit complaining.  I want to be safe in the air.  To have pilots try to opt out of any screening whatsoever IMO is not safe!


----------



## MommaBear

*How much radiation? NOT MUCH*

The amount of radiation in the body scanner is equivalent to the exposure you get in 15 minutes of suntanning or 2 minutes flying at altitude. Frankly I am much more at risk on my way to Hawaii or being in Hawaii! I am still going.

Here is the source:

http://casesblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/what-is-radiation-exposure-from-full.html


----------



## learnalot

Bucky said:


> I have an implanted defibrillator in my chest and have endured pat downs for the last seven years!  It's no big deal folks, trust me.  I've been all over the world and some pat downs are more thorough than others.  I've been lucky enough to go through one of the full body scanners so far and to the best of my knowledge I didn't see or hear anyone making fun of my 60 yr old body.  It is what it is.  If you want to fly, get used to it.  I can understand pilots not wanting to do it because of how many times they would have to go through it over their careers.  In that case, submit to the pat downs and quit complaining.  I want to be safe in the air.  To have pilots try to opt out of any screening whatsoever IMO is not safe!



I haven't read where anyone was suggesting that flight crews should not go through ANY screening whatsoever.  The only thing I read is that they are concerned about the cumulative effects of radiation if they were to go through repeated full body scans because of their constant travel schedules.  Where I might pass through security 10 - 12 times a year, they will pass through at least 10 times that often, so the radiation becomes a greater concern.  They can still be screened through metal detectors and/or pat down procedures.


----------



## bogey21

hvacrsteve said:


> I have decided to forgo flying unless I have an emergency and can't prevent it.



Sounds reasonable for those who don't like the idea of scans, pat downs, etc

George


----------



## bankr63

*No radiation in Canada*

The units deployed by CATSA in Canada utilize "millimetre wave technology" (radio waves) so there is no exposure to radiation at all.  The amount of radio wave exposure is less than you would get from a cell phone call.

I understand though that the TSA uses both the MWT and "backscatter" radiation units, but as another poster here pointed out, the level of radiation used is very low, barely above the normal background radiation, and two orders of magnitude lower than a medical chest x-ray.

Note also that (again in Canada) the operator is in a booth away from the actual scan area; they can't see you and you can't see them.  They will simply contact the security personnel at the device if there is an issue.  I am sure that there is no titillation if they are locked in a tiny room looking at lumpy bodies all day long...

So, I'm happier getting a full scan in Canada than in the US, but won't worry about either.


----------



## kanerf

The TSA are starting to become modern day Gestopo.  It is time for this silliness to stop.  The bombers are not putting explosives on U.S. aircraft in this country and these scanners are NOT being used in many places overseas.  The fact that they can get away with it this country shows how much of our freedom has been lost.  The only way these scanners should be used is if a computer scans the images and alerts agents to anomolies.  Then you could just walk through the things as a computer rather than a person can do the scan in milliseconds.  This is also a huge waste of money in when we have trillion dollar debts to deal with.  Show me one case where these devices have caught anyone.


----------



## bankr63

*Ummm, what???*

It seems to me that all of the 9/11 hijackers boarded their planes in the US carrying concealed weapons.  That is what this is trying to stop.  It may also stop the occasional bomb, but these are often planted in cargo and do not go through much screening as we found out this past week.  

Any effort that heightens security without impacting on security clearing time is a bonus; but IMO we need more screening of everything that gets on a plane.

Have they caught anyone yet; we'll probably never know as I doubt that the TSA will ever let us know for "security reasons".  But that doesn't make them ineffective.  Bombers or hijackers don't hit every day, it is thankfully a rare occurrence, and probably much rarer because of the technology in use.



kanerf said:


> The TSA are starting to become modern day Gestopo.  It is time for this silliness to stop.  The bombers are not putting explosives on U.S. aircraft in this country and these scanners are NOT being used in many places overseas.  The fact that they can get away with it this country shows how much of our freedom has been lost.  The only way these scanners should be used is if a computer scans the images and alerts agents to anomolies.  Then you could just walk through the things as a computer rather than a person can do the scan in milliseconds.  This is also a huge waste of money in when we have trillion dollar debts to deal with.  Show me one case where these devices have caught anyone.


----------



## betsy32

*My Take*

I'm not really sure what all the fuss is about.  I've had a hip replacement so I am always subject to a pat down or a body scan if available.  So far as a woman I have *always* had a woman pat me down, they are as polite and non invasive as they can be, it's not the greatest and I do prefer a body scan but they are not yet always available.  I am sixty eight and not really worried that someone will get a thrill out of my body scan image and on the other hand the female TSA personel have been outstanding in their courtesy during a pat down.  I travel monthly, across the country Maine to California and at least three times a year out of the country and have recieved the same courtesy wherever I have been.  The pat downs are not just in the U.S. where we have had 9/11 They are *everywhere*, Italy, Switzerland, Germany, England, Canada, Aruba, Croatia and Spain, and they are all polite.
Get over it folks and keep the line moving!:deadhorse:


----------



## x3 skier

betsy32 said:


> I'm not really sure what all the fuss is about.
> Get over it folks and keep the line moving!:deadhorse:




Absolutely right on target!! 

Cheers


----------



## jl2010

regatta333 said:


> My husband and I had to go through the body scanners on a recent trip to Albuquerque.  It was not that big a deal to us, but my sister is now rethinking a trip to Hawaii this spring because of them.  In addition to the reasons already listed, she is concerned about the levels of radiation.



I think it's far more worrisome that our food system and daily environments are inundated with chemicals and preservatives these days. You eat and drink every day. How often do you fly? I heard a stat that people today have a 40% higher chance of getting cancer than a similar person who lived 100 years ago.  I don't think these high cancer rates aren't due to body scanners at the airport  It's the things you eat, drink and poison ourselves with every day like perfume/cologne, cleaning products, cell phones and deodorant.


----------



## Passepartout

We just got full-body scans this morning in San Juan PR. You do have to remove everything from pockets, belts- even non metal stuff. Sort of a PITA, but flying has become a PITA anyway. Even when you sit in the left front seat.

I'd be more concerned radiation-wise if I flew a lot, but at my age and flying frequency, I'd have to be 200 years old to get a lethal dose. And as to the privacy issue- anyone who'd get excited seeing me or mine in grayscale buff, is one sicko dude or dudette!

Jim Ricks


----------



## CarolF

Passepartout said:


> We just got full-body scans this morning in San Juan PR. Jim Ricks



Let me guess  ....   you wore your kilt to the airport and none of the staff would volunteer to give you a pat down.


----------



## Passepartout

CarolF said:


> Let me guess  ....   you wore your kilt to the airport and none of the staff would volunteer to give you a pat down.



Nope. No cross dressing for me today, but DW wore pants. Still got the scan instead of the pat.    Jim


----------



## AwayWeGo

*Radical Solution.*

Click here for a proposal to do away entirely with TSA. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## linsj

For those of you going through the new X-ray machine, keep in mind that you can't see your wallet/purse, laptop, carry-on bag, etc. while you're in it. And the TSA takes no responsibility for items stolen while you can't keep an eye on them, and anyone can walk away with them.


----------



## AwayWeGo

*This Will Only Take A Minute & It Won't Hurt A Bit.*




linsj said:


> For those of you going through the new X-ray machine, keep in mind that you can't see your wallet/purse, laptop, carry-on bag, etc. while you're in it. And the TSA takes no responsibility for items stolen while you can't keep an eye on them, and anyone can walk away with them.


Last July, before all this TSA body-scan & pat-down fuss heated up, I flew IAD to SAN, via SWA.  It was my 1st airline trip after getting my DePuy Rotating Platform Knee Replacement surgically installed.  When I got to the head of the line, I whipped out the little card the doctor gave me to show to the airport security people when my high-tech knee implant sets off their metal detectors.  

The little card is not a free pass, but at least it shows that there might be a harmless reason for the buzzer to go off.  That way, instead of wrestling me to the ground they take me over to a little booth for closer inspection via electronic wand & pat-down & belt-removal, etc. (while I'm already standing there shoeless in sock feet).  

I have to acknowledge that the TSA people at both ends -- IAD & SAN -- were reasonably courteous.  Not only that, they asked me to point out my shoes & my personal items on the conveyor downstream of the X-ray machine.  Then before giving me the wand & pat-down they brought that stuff over to the little booth where they were administering the 1-on-1 follow-up screening, reducing the chance my stuff would get ripped off during the examination.  

I think airline passengers willingly tolerate some delays & some inconveniences & even some semi-embarrassing invasions of privacy when they feel that doing so adds to the safety & security of airline travel.  

When passengers feel that the security scans & pat-downs, etc., go over the line without any safety & security benefit, _that's_ when they get their backs up & start questioning the whole scheme. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## cindi

Just returned from Orlando yesterday and was the lucky receipient of a body pat down.  I also have a knee replacement so I was already expecting it.

To be honest, it really wasn't that bad. Either that or in my more advanced age not much excites me anymore.   

What was more annoying was that traces of something or other showed up on her gloves so I had to hang around even longer while they searched my stuff.


----------



## Aussiedog

*This is not the body pat of old*

My sister, attractive, 56, has a lot of metal in her back and hip and is used to pat downs.

But the one she received last week AFTER the total body scan was obscene.  Honestly, no one touches her genitals like that except her husband and her gynecologist, and her breasts were "pressed" (their word) until they felt "resistance" (their word).  All done in public.

She was assured by TSA that this is the new normal so get over it.

I suggest that you get names and badge numbers prior to letting any of them touch you.

Ann


----------



## Phill12

AwayWeGo said:
			
		

> When I got to the head of the line, I whipped out the little card the doctor gave me to show to the airport security people when my high-tech knee implant sets off their metal detectors.
> 
> The little card is not a free pass, but at least it shows that there might be a harmless reason for the buzzer to go off.  That way, instead of wrestling me to the ground they take me over to a little booth for closer inspection via electronic wand & pat-down & belt-removal, etc. (while I'm already standing there shoeless in sock feet).
> 
> I think airline passengers willingly tolerate some delays & some inconveniences & even some semi-embarrassing invasions of privacy when they feel that doing so adds to the safety & security of airline travel.





I also have the card and showed it so no problems when I set it off because they already expected it. They walked me over to the side and scan my knee and that was it in Sacramento on Oct 22. 
When returning from Dallas on Oct 30 the security was tighter and the knee check was the same but they did complete pat down and opened the front of my pants and looked. 
 My wife told them there was nothing down there because she has looked for years! 

 PHILL12


----------



## Aussiedog

*Same Airport*

My sister's extreme pat down was also in Sacramento earlier in November.

Ann


----------



## jl2010

Aussiedog said:


> My sister, attractive, 56, has a lot of metal in her back and hip and is used to pat downs.
> 
> But the one she received last week AFTER the total body scan was obscene.  Honestly, no one touches her genitals like that except her husband and her gynecologist, and her breasts were "pressed" (their word) until they felt "resistance" (their word).  All done in public.
> 
> She was assured by TSA that this is the new normal so get over it.
> 
> I suggest that you get names and badge numbers prior to letting any of them touch you.
> 
> Ann



Has anyone heard what very recent threats have caused this extreme patdown change?  I know there is alot the gov doesn't tell the public and I am sure they just aren't doing it to get their jollies..lol.  Honestly, I could use a little excitement..haha.

Secondly, if they just used the most efficient method of discernment developed by FBI many years ago, scanning and patdowns probably wouldn't be neccessary except in extreme situations.  Unfortunately profiling is far to efficient to the point where it raises flags. Perhaps they should call it something else.


----------



## dougp26364

Aussiedog said:


> My sister, attractive, 56, has a lot of metal in her back and hip and is used to pat downs.
> 
> But the one she received last week AFTER the total body scan was obscene.  Honestly, no one touches her genitals like that except her husband and her gynecologist, and her breasts were "pressed" (their word) until they felt "resistance" (their word).  All done in public.
> 
> She was assured by TSA that this is the new normal so get over it.
> 
> I suggest that you get names and badge numbers prior to letting any of them touch you.
> 
> Ann



While I really don't have a problem with the scanners, I do have a problem with the flipant attitude of the TSA agents and, the fact they don't appear to know what they're doing. 

I asked the TSA agent at PBI how much radiation I was being exposed to and was told there was NO radiation (WRONG). Her method of assurance to me was she stood by the machine all day and she wasn't scared. Big deal. There's a difference between being stupid and not being scared. 

It is a minimal amount of radiation so long as the tech running the machine knows what they're doing. IMHO, there in lies the rub. I don't believe the TSA has a clue what they're doing with these machines. I think they press a button and whatever happens, happens. If there's something wrong with the machine or, if the machine isn't working properly, I don't trust them to A). tell me and/or B). shut it down to get it fixed because it will inconvenience them. 

George Carlin said it best as far as I'm concerned. "I'm tired of people with a triple digit income and a double digit IQ rooting around in my luggage looking for bombs."


----------



## Aussiedog

*Check out CBS evening news*

Excellent piece on the new pat-down process.  A guy filmed the process  in San Diego including the TSA agent defending the touching of the genitals as *NOT* a sexual assault.  

Going way too far.

Ann


----------



## mrsstats

Do woman agents do woman passengers or do men also do woman?


----------



## linsj

mrsstats said:


> Do woman agents do woman passengers or do men also do woman?



Theoretically, you're supposed to be patted down by the same gender TSO. But I've read several reports of women being patted down by men due to a lack of female TSOs at an airport.


----------



## dioxide45

siesta said:


> Check out this article "Image of Genitalia on Full Body Scanner leads to assault", these were airport employees viewing each other and happened to mock the wrong employee.





Patri said:


> That's sexual harassment in the workplace and should have been reported. The offenders should have been disciplined.



I agree, the offending employees should have not only been dealt with, they should have been fired. The employee now charged with assault will end up suing the TSA and in the end it will cost us all more.



MommaBear said:


> The amount of radiation in the body scanner is equivalent to the exposure you get in 15 minutes of suntanning or 2 minutes flying at altitude. Frankly I am much more at risk on my way to Hawaii or being in Hawaii! I am still going.
> 
> Here is the source:
> 
> http://casesblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/what-is-radiation-exposure-from-full.html



Sure this is what they say now. But this is new technology with no long term studies. Twenty years from now they will be telling us that the radiation from these things is causing who knows what and it was all for nothing.



kanerf said:


> The only way these scanners should be used is if a computer scans the images and alerts agents to anomalies.  Then you could just walk through the things as a computer rather than a person can do the scan in milliseconds.



I agree. Technology exists to identify typed and even written documents via OCR. Surely these things can be setup so a software program can review the images and kick out ones that are anomalies and perhaps another small percentage to make sure everything is in working order.



jl2010 said:


> Has anyone heard what very recent threats have caused this extreme patdown change?  I know there is alot the gov doesn't tell the public and I am sure they just aren't doing it to get their jollies..lol.  Honestly, I could use a little excitement..haha.



The TSA is trying to say that these new machines are to protect us in the future and to be proactive. However this is all a result of the underwear bomber last year. So once again it is all reactive.


----------



## jlwquilter

This was asked earlier but no one responded.

Does anyone know, perhaps thru first hand observation recently at an airport, what it being done with children?

Not for nothing but I am not thrilled that my DDs first sexual contact might be with some stranger at the airport gropping her. The agent not getting a thrill is not the point. We teach our children to not let strangers touch their privates and now we say it's ok? The agents are not the exception - medical personnel with mom standing right there watching like a hawk is the exception.

Personally I think all this is crap. Profiling is needed, and screening should be done by people who know how to screen. Not Billy Bob, newly minted TSA "Agent". 

My bad but I had no idea of this recent ramp up of security measures. DH flies out in a few days (business), first time simce this Nov. 1st date. I don't hink he's aware of this change either. It'll be interesting for sure to see what happens.


----------



## AwayWeGo

*Airports Are Allowed To Opt Out Of TSA -- Can Switch To Their Own Screenings Instead.*

According to recent internet news reports -- & seeing something on the internet doesn't make it true -- the law that established TSA also provides that after 2 years airports can decide to do their own security screenings instead of sticking with TSA.  

It has been longer than 2 years now.  

I can imagine that public dissatisfaction with the current screening rigmarole might well lead some airport authorities to tell TSA _Thanks But No Thanks_. 

Wouldn't that be something ? 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## Blues

MommaBear said:


> The amount of radiation in the body scanner is equivalent to the exposure you get in 15 minutes of suntanning or 2 minutes flying at altitude. Frankly I am much more at risk on my way to Hawaii or being in Hawaii! I am still going.
> 
> Here is the source:
> 
> http://casesblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/what-is-radiation-exposure-from-full.html



I had read the same thing.  And I was completely in the camp of "the scanners are harmless, and what's the big deal on the pat-downs?".  That is, until hearing reports like AussieDog's, and many similar ones on the internet.  If TSA is taking the position that genital and breast touching is part of the process, then they've gone way too far.

And as far as the above quote, as I said, I was in that camp.  But then I saw a reference to this, from a set of concerned scientists and physicians:

http://www.npr.org/assets/news/2010/05/17/concern.pdf

This now has me concerned.  I don't think that the government really knows how innocuous or dangerous these scans are.

My thinking on this subject has turned around in the last 48 hours.

-Bob


----------



## Beaglemom3

Now, a lot has been said about this topic and it may vary from airport to airport, but until you've had the _lived _experience v. the_ imagined _experience of a combined extensive-intrusive body pat-down and body scan, you cannot get the full effect. 

This is not the once-over pat-down prior to November 1st, trust me.


This may send a confusing message to children about  being touched when & by whom. Not sure and can only wonder about even one child getting the wrong message from this.

I did it willingly as I am/was trying to be a "good citizen" and we, in Boston, are very aware that two of the hijacked planes of 9/11 departed from Logan, so there is some painful history here. 


Pulling no punches, let me be absolutely blunt here....In Boston, on November 1st,  TSA "patted me down"  as follows:

1. Ran the gloved palm sides of her hands on/alongside/under the breasts.

2. Ran the gloved palm sides of her hands _up, alongside and into _the groin and crotch areas.

3. Ran the gloved palm sides of her hands up & inside/outside the thighs.

4. Ran the gloved palm sides of her hands up & down the backside.

5. Other, less personal areas, too.

Edit: She seemed apologetic and uncomfortable, but not as nearly as I did.

Did not check under my armpits, but they were scanned as you have to assume the "diamond" position when scanned.



*Perhaps TSA et al would be more effective in tightening up the "no fly" list for starters . 
How they get actually boarded is beyond belief.*


----------



## Talent312

I'm thinking of wearing a pair of short-shorts, volunteering for a pat-down,
and at certain moments, I'll say, "Yummy. Can you do that some more?"
... and wiggle my fanny.


----------



## mav

Beaglemom3 said:


> Now, a lot has been said about this topic and it may vary from airport to airport, but until you've had the _lived _experience v. the_ imagined _experience of a combined extensive-intrusive body pat-down and body scan, you cannot get the full effect.
> 
> This is not the once-over pat-down prior to November 1st, trust me.
> 
> 
> This may send a confusing message to children about  being touched when & by whom. Not sure and can only wonder about even one child getting the wrong message from this.
> 
> I did it willingly as I am/was trying to be a "good citizen" and we, in Boston, are very aware that two of the hijacked planes of 9/11 departed from Logan, so there is some painful history here.
> 
> 
> Pulling no punches, let me be absolutely blunt here....In Boston, on November 1st,  TSA "patted me down"  as follows:
> 
> 1. Ran the gloved palm sides of her hands on/alongside/under the breasts.
> 
> 2. Ran the gloved palm sides of her hands _up, alongside and into _the groin and crotch areas.
> 
> 3. Ran the gloved palm sides of her hands up & inside/outside the thighs.
> 
> 4. Ran the gloved palm sides of her hands up & down the backside.
> 
> 5. Other, less personal areas, too.
> 
> Edit: She seemed apologetic and uncomfortable, but not as nearly as I did.
> 
> Did not check under my armpits, but they were scanned as you have to assume the "diamond" position when scanned.
> 
> 
> 
> *Perhaps TSA et al would be more effective in tightening up the "no fly" list for starters .
> How they get actually boarded is beyond belief.*



  If that is what the new pat down is I wonder if I can request a twenty something good looking guy to do it? As old as I am, I am sure he would make it quick.  And I might  get a thrill


----------



## geekette

bogey21 said:


> No one is forcing us to fly.  Drive a car and you have to have a driver's license.  Travel out of the country and you need a passport.  Fly and you have to go through a body scan.  All these are ok with me.
> 
> George



exactly.  it's like every other business - if you wish to use their product or service, they get to state the terms.  Has nothing to do with "rights", it's "terms of service."  Don't like it, don't fly.   

I'll take the scan.  

I think that with the quick viewing to see if there is any non-human thing there it's not really an opportunity for ogling.  I like to think the people running the machines are professionals, just doing a job.  It really doesn't bother me and I highly doubt that mine is the one view out of many thousands that day that they talk about over drinks post-shift.  Really, it's just a body.  It's mine, but still, just a body.  They can look, but I'd prefer they not touch.


----------



## geekette

dioxide45 said:


> Technology exists to identify typed and even written documents via OCR. Surely these things can be setup so a software program can review the images and kick out ones that are anomalies and perhaps another small percentage to make sure everything is in working order.



OCR has been around for a long time, but it's just not the same thing to recognize a character out of a set of 26 possibilities (not counting punctuation cuz, I don't want to do the counting!)    The human body varies greatly from person to person.  I think the logic would have to be so fuzzy as to be useless.

But, I do hope someone is working on it as I agree - get em in, get em out, let an electronic brain do the work.


----------



## california-bighorn

jlwquilter said:


> This was asked earlier but no one responded.
> 
> Does anyone know, perhaps thru first hand observation recently at an airport, what it being done with children?
> 
> Not for nothing but I am not thrilled that my DDs first sexual contact might be with some stranger at the airport gropping her. The agent not getting a thrill is not the point. We teach our children to not let strangers touch their privates and now we say it's ok? The agents are not the exception - medical personnel with mom standing right there watching like a hawk is the exception.
> 
> Personally I think all this is crap. Profiling is needed, and screening should be done by people who know how to screen. Not Billy Bob, newly minted TSA "Agent".



The news today had a story about a 3 year old girl becoming very upset after what some observers decribed as "outright fondling" by a TSA agent.  You are right on that profiling is only reasonable and the current policies are as you stated "crap".
I had a small incident when a TSA agent was running his hand down my pants to check behind the pants button.  HE GOT MAD when I made a wise crack while he was performing his pat-down.  The main problem with all this is that they still won't stop anyone determined to commit a terrorist act.
There was another story concerning the danger of the radiation.  An expert stated the danger of anyone receiving dangerous levels of radiation are about the same as being killed in a terrorist attack.  Pick your poison!!!

Edit: Just saw another story on FOX involving a 3 year old girl going thru airport security.  Not sure if it was the same incident as reported earlier in the day.  But just for correctness, my observation was the girl was screaming while the TSA Agent was grabbing the girl while trying to "control" the little girl to conduct a search.  Either way not appropriate in my opinion.


----------



## california-bighorn

*TSA vs Sky Marshalls*

With this latest round of unpopular screening and scanning, I was wondering what the practical and economic results would be if we stopped all this screening and pat-downs and instead used the financial resourses to place a Sky Marshall on each and every plane.  Think of the financial burdon of the small army of bumbling TSA Agents and screening equipment employeed for every flight verses the wages for a professionally trained Sky Marshall.
Then consider the time saved by being able to walk straight to the gate.
I know this won't happen.  Once a federal agency is created it just doesn't go away.  And on a lighter side, it would put too many federal workers out of work.
I'd take the Sky Marshall any day!!


----------



## jl2010

linsj said:


> Theoretically, you're supposed to be patted down by the same gender TSO. But I've read several reports of women being patted down by men due to a lack of female TSOs at an airport.



Just wait until holiday season officially starts.


----------



## geekette

california-bighorn said:


> With this latest round of unpopular screening and scanning, I was wondering what the practical and economic results would be if we stopped all this screening and pat-downs and instead used the financial resourses to place a Sky Marshall on each and every plane.  Think of the financial burdon of the small army of bumbling TSA Agents and screening equipment employeed for every flight verses the wages for a professionally trained Sky Marshall.
> Then consider the time saved by being able to walk straight to the gate.
> I know this won't happen.  Once a federal agency is created it just doesn't go away.  And on a lighter side, it would put too many federal workers out of work.
> I'd take the Sky Marshall any day!!



but it then becomes a matter of knowing there is an air marshall and casing the gate to determine which passenger it is, disabling them first, then going about whatever.

I'm all for air marshals, but if everyone knows that every flight has one, it's not a deterent, it's a target.  If only "the public's right to know" was squelched for some things ...   damned media.


----------



## dioxide45

california-bighorn said:


> With this latest round of unpopular screening and scanning, I was wondering what the practical and economic results would be if we stopped all this screening and pat-downs and instead used the financial resourses to place a Sky Marshall on each and every plane.  Think of the financial burdon of the small army of bumbling TSA Agents and screening equipment employeed for every flight verses the wages for a professionally trained Sky Marshall.
> Then consider the time saved by being able to walk straight to the gate.
> I know this won't happen.  Once a federal agency is created it just doesn't go away.  And on a lighter side, it would put too many federal workers out of work.
> I'd take the Sky Marshall any day!!



Unfortunately a sky marshall can only protect against certain threats, like a hostage takeover. If someone can just walk to the gate with explosives in their carry on baggage unchecked, the sky marshall won't be able to do much to stop them once they are at 30,000 feet. One press of a button and it is all over. Sky marshall's are only one part of a bigger fix.


----------



## Talent312

california-bighorn said:


> I was wondering what the practical and economic results would be if we stopped all this screening and pat-downs and instead used the financial resourses to place a Sky Marshall on each and every plane.



Results probably not good, when the Sky Marshall gets blown up along with the plane
... becuz no one was checking for passengers with explosives in their underwear.


----------



## california-bighorn

Talent312 said:


> Results probably not good, when the Sky Marshall gets blown up along with the plane
> ... becuz no one was checking for passengers with explosives in their underwear.



Good point and not to gross anyone out, but unless we go to body cavity searches the explosives will still be able to "walk onto the plane".  I think this is the very reason for the implementation of scanning devices as they are able to detect  more "hidden" objects.  Ask anyone who works in law enforcement, especially in corrections, and they'll tell you some stories.
No easy answer, but the searches currently being conducted especially on kids and grandmothers seems like a waste of resources.


----------



## jlwquilter

california-bighorn said:


> Good point and not to gross anyone out, but unless we go to body cavity searches the explosives will still be able to "walk onto the plane".  I think this is the very reason for the implementation of scanning devices as they are able to detect  more "hidden" objects.  Ask anyone who works in law enforcement, especially in corrections, and they'll tell you some stories.
> No easy answer, but the searches currently being conducted especially on kids and grandmothers seems like a waste of resources.



I agree. The pat downs are useless for stopping anyone from doing anything. I am a middle aged, middle class woman and even I can think of a dozen ways to get around a pat down, even if they are squeezing my boobs and cramming a hand in my crotch. Come on, get serious or go home TSA. All you're really doing is wasting my time and money and ticking me off.

I think the x-ray machines at least have a chance at catching someone that has secreted something on or more importantly in their body. And I don't mean just cavities. Recent "surgeries" provide access to "cavaties" where things can be stored and accessed. And with chemicals and other items, access isn't even required. As already posted, anyone committed to this type of action is not worried about coming out of it alive themselves or a bit of pain for themselves along the way.

I just don't trust the machines are safe. The govenment and the manufacturer telling me they are means diddly to me. They lie all the time to make money, etc. My life/health means less than zero to them.

We have a few fly trips already well in progress - first in March (Mexico), last in June 2012 (Ireland/England), with Glacier and Banff in between. We need to seriously consider what we are going to do if this useless invasion of our bodies is to be the new norm.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin.  I see this happening here. We are giving up essentials liberities that define us as Americans for not even a real bit of temporary security/safety. We are started on the slippery slope. What will be next demanded of us in order to ensure our safety?

I know I sound like a crazy but honestly this stuff scares me. And I don't mean the terrorist threat from abroad.

And as an aside, I am going to have a tough life ahead of me anyway after my DH is jailed for attacking a TS Agent that has been a little too eager in his pat down of our daughter. And I don't mean to impy that a pat down of a boy is any less tramatic for the child and his parents.


----------



## Kathleen

Hello All,

For now, I'm going to trust that there is a reason for this step up in body checks. I'm in hopes that a better mousetrap can be built to acheive the same result without radiating or frisking people.

Other countries have been dealing with this problem longer than we have. We seem unable to use what is done well elsewhere.

In the meantime, my cousins have no problem just walking through security. No touching and no scans. He wears JUST a Speedo and she wears JUST pasties and a thong.

Kathleen


----------



## Carolinian

What Israel has done succesfully for years involves profiling, but that is a taboo here.

This article has some good info about what TSA is doing and I hope it is not too political (it is from a site that covers both parties):

http://www.carolinapoliticsonline.com/2010/11/16/time-to-stop-tsa-nazis/


----------



## california-bighorn

*Article is right on!!*

Carolinian
Thanks for sharing the article.  Nothing politically incorrect about advocating real security measures over the dog and pony show we're currently getting.
TSA is getting a lot of pressure to overhaul the entire security system and there will be many offering advise on how to do that.  And this is not offered in a political sense, but, Fox News reported last night that Department of Homeland Securities Janet Napolitano is considering exempting Muslim women from these searches and scans since it violates their religious beliefs.  I don't think that would sit well with a lot of folks but it shows they are willing to make changes.


----------



## John Cummings

california-bighorn said:


> And this is not offered in a political sense, but, Fox News reported last night that Department of Homeland Securities Janet Napolitano is considering exempting Muslim women from these searches and scans since it violates their religious beliefs.  I don't think that would sit well with a lot of folks but it shows they are willing to make changes.



That just invalidates the whole issue. This is ridiculous. They won't do any form of profiling yet they are considering exempting one group of people because of their religion. That is totally absurd and unacceptable.

So far we haven't had to go through body scans nor pat downs and we just flew 2 weeks ago from Wichita Falls, TX to Ontario, CA.


----------



## Carolinian

Muslim women have been suicide bombers in Iraq, and indeed on planes in Russia.  Why in the world would they be exempted?  Yet TSA insists on groping nuns and children, who to my knowledge have never yet been suicide bombers.


----------



## Carolinian

mrsstats said:


> Do woman agents do woman passengers or do men also do woman?



In Russia, I have heard from female colleagues that it is men security personnel who tend to pat down female passengers, and that is especially true if they are attractive.  Being attractive also tends to get them a more thorough pat down.  Perhaps the TSA is using Russian advisors.


----------



## Bwolf

I want to see a video of Janet Napolitano and John Pistole undergoing a full-body pat down.


----------



## John Cummings

Carolinian said:


> What Israel has done succesfully for years involves profiling, but that is a taboo here.
> 
> This article has some good info about what TSA is doing and I hope it is not too political (it is from a site that covers both parties):
> 
> http://www.carolinapoliticsonline.com/2010/11/16/time-to-stop-tsa-nazis/



It is a great article.


----------



## jlwquilter

california-bighorn said:


> Carolinian
> Thanks for sharing the article.  Nothing politically incorrect about advocating real security measures over the dog and pony show we're currently getting.
> TSA is getting a lot of pressure to overhaul the entire security system and there will be many offering advise on how to do that.  And this is not offered in a political sense, but, Fox News reported last night that Department of Homeland Securities Janet Napolitano is considering *exempting Muslim women from these searches and scans since it violates their religious beliefs*.  I don't think that would sit well with a lot of folks but it shows they are willing to make changes.



Will I be able to simply dress as one and get a free pass or do I need to show a membership card? 

From the ridiculous to the absurd. Or more like from the absurd to the totally crazy.


----------



## John Cummings

*What about Trains*

Does anybody know what security measures are in effect for train travel? The last time we went by train, there was no security check.

We have all the time in the world so might just start traveling by train instead of flying. Of course that may be a little difficult for our trip to Hawaii next April. However, I will definitely consider it for our June trip to New York City.


----------



## Carolinian

For those who think profiling IS the problem, rather than a tool to address the problem, here is a good video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2X4tqi7d83M


----------



## jlwquilter

Carolinia's link showed me my first look at what the x-rays really show. Everything but the flesh. And if they are not happy with the x-ray they get to feel the flesh too.

I said to friends after 9/11 that it was a miracle we weren't having to have to walk thru airports naked. I guess the miracle has run out. Naked here we come. And for naught.

On a side note I will make some x-ray picture due to multiple (reconstructive) surgeries. I will look like I have trip wires in my jaws leading to a dentonator device in my chin that will explode two normal sized bombs on my chest. Maybe I should just get the feel up, I mean pat down, and avoid the rush. It was bad enough having to go thru all the surgeries (and what triggered the surgeries) to begin with; now I get to relish the further embarrassment/hassle they will cause me at the airport. Oh, joy.


----------



## Stricky

I don't care other than the fact that they don't work. They have already announced it does not check body cavities. Guess where the next terrorist will have their bomb?

I say let the airlines handle their own security. That is who I am doing business with. If I want to fly on their plane and they want me to strip down to my BVDs they have the right. The government should stay out of it but that isn't about to happen.


----------



## AwayWeGo

*Security Screening Alone Can Never Work Totally.*




jlwquilter said:


> I said to friends after 9/11 that it was a miracle we weren't having to have to walk thru airports naked.


If the goal is to stay ahead of terrorist schemes to sneak dangerous people with dangerous things onto airplanes, then screening will never be up to the task.  The bad guys will always be at least 1 jump ahead.

Americans recoil from the practice of profiling because of the chance profiling could be done in a racially or religiously discriminatory way.  Non-discrimination is highly valued here. 

Profiling bad guys, however, should not be objectionable when that kind of strictly race- & religion-neutral profiling is done in a racially & religiously non-discriminatory way.

Let us not be too quick to equate even-handed terrorist profiling (good) with discriminatory racial & religious profiling (bad).  

Otherwise it is only a matter of time before all airline passengers are stripped & herded aboard planes in hospital gowns & Depends before being chained into their seats.  Even then, the naked terrorists will simply swallow or insert or implant something they can detonate at cruising altitude.    

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## Carolinian

Stricky said:


> I don't care other than the fact that they don't work. They have already announced it does not check body cavities. Guess where the next terrorist will have their bomb?
> 
> I say let the airlines handle their own security. That is who I am doing business with. If I want to fly on their plane and they want me to strip down to my BVDs they have the right. The government should stay out of it but that isn't about to happen.



Actually that has already been tried.  Apparently the flesh of the bomb carrier helped shield the intended victim, a Saudi prince, from the rectal bomb.


----------



## Pens_Fan

If you offer the TSA agent a $20 will they give you a "happy ending" when they are done?:whoopie:


----------



## Beaglemom3

Just in:



"TSA boss: New pat-downs are more invasive"


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101117/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_airport_security


----------



## kanerf

Instead of inconveniencing some of the people some of the time, we the government must inconvenience everyone all of the time.  First the airport and next it will be the hocky game and your 8 year olds ballet recital.


----------



## kasteer

Some of you may not "mind" the radiation, nor the new pat-down.  However, these are violations of the 4th ammendement.  I will not fly unless its an emergency, or is international.  That's my choice.

TSA has no right to force us to accept any level of radiation, no matter how small.  They also have no right to pat us down in the manner they are doing now.  Check the internet, more and more people are speaking up in protest to the TSA... and rightfully so.

The fact is that this will not make us any safer.  Terrorists will just change their tactic (as they are doing with the packages recently mailed), or using orifices, which cannot be detected with these scanners or pat-downs.  

I will not trade liberty for security... especially a false sense of security.


----------



## kasteer

Stricky said:


> I don't care other than the fact that they don't work. They have already announced it does not check body cavities. Guess where the next terrorist will have their bomb?
> 
> I say let the airlines handle their own security. That is who I am doing business with. If I want to fly on their plane and they want me to strip down to my BVDs they have the right. The government should stay out of it but that isn't about to happen.



well said.
Profile.  Works for Israel!


----------



## AwayWeGo

*The Airlines Are Content Letting Uncle Sam Take The Heat.*




Stricky said:


> I say let the airlines handle their own security.


No way the airlines want the responsibility. 

Better from their perspective to pass the buck to Uncle Sam. 

That way, when passengers are groused off over screening methods, they're groused off at TSA, not TWA (etc.). 

Likewise, if the bad guys sneak through & do more airborne terrorism, the victims sue TSA rather than TWA (etc.). 

That's why the airlines are conspicuously silent throughout all the current fuss. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## Stricky

AwayWeGo said:


> No way the airlines want the responsibility.
> 
> Better from their perspective to pass the buck to Uncle Sam.
> 
> That way, when passengers are groused off over screening methods, they're groused off at TSA, not TWA (etc.).
> 
> Likewise, if the bad guys sneak through & do more airborne terrorism, the victims sue TSA rather than TWA (etc.).
> 
> That's why the airlines are conspicuously silent throughout all the current fuss.
> 
> -- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​



Of course they don't. A lot of government agencies exist for that exact reason but it does not make it right. That discussion probably could get to political for this board.


----------



## jl2010

Duplicate post - delete


----------



## jl2010

German Airports on major alert today. Military with machine guns placed there until further notice.
I still maintain the Gov. does not tell the public all they know.  This heavy duty patdown has to have something to do with recent threats especially with the holiday season coming up.

We have a much lighter touch (pun intended) than other countries, airport security, wars and modern culture in general. Agree or disagree with it. Strong patdowns are far less then is done elsewhere in the name of security.


----------



## mpizza

Well so much for my 89-year old Mom's advice last week to make sure I wore the right underwear for my next flight.  Doesn't really matter now, does it?

I don't want the radiation, don't want the x-rated pat-down, so now what?

I won't give-up flying.  Is there some pre-screened approval list we can get on?

Maria


----------



## AwayWeGo

*An Airport Screening Idea So Crazy It Just Might Work.*

Click here.

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## John Cummings

AwayWeGo said:


> Click here.
> 
> -- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​



There is nothing crazy about that. It is very reasonable which is probably why the TSA will not do it.


----------



## Carol C

Oh boy...this thread just gave me an idea...and I have a friend who makes all kinds of buttons he sells in DC. This one would say: "TSA...Don't Touch My Junk!"


----------



## Stricky

worth reading about the radiation: http://www.rodale.com/airport-body-scan-radiation


----------



## CarolF

Kathleen said:


> In the meantime, my cousins have no problem just walking through security. No touching and no scans. He wears JUST a Speedo and she wears JUST pasties and a thong.
> 
> Kathleen



:hysterical:

That is hilarious, what a great sense of humour they must have, not to mention the wonderful ability to feel comfortable in their own skin.


----------



## Carolinian

We had a group of expats having a drink after work last evening and this subject came up.  The issue of the pat downs came up, and most of the guys were more creeped out by another guy poking around down there that they would be with a female TSA goon, while the girls tended to be creeped out either way but split on which was worse.


----------



## jlwquilter

Carolinian said:


> We had a group of expats having a drink after work last evening and this subject came up.  The issue of the pat downs came up, and most of the guys were more creeped out by another guy poking around down there that they would be with a female TSA goon, while the girls tended to be creeped out either way but split on which was worse.



My DH said the same thing last night - he'd rather have a female pat him down. He also has a female doctor. I would definitely prefer a female agent and there is no freaking way I'd allow a male to pat down my DD, not to mention her own freak out. But gosh, I may not have a say in that at all. If there are no female agents then I will be examined by whomever they choose. I will be threatened with fines if I say No, I'd rather not fly now.

I read a response (I believe to the article Carolinian linked) that made a parallel reference to being "slaves". I though that was out there but now I am wondering more. In a very real sense the TSA is saying that once I get in the security line my body is not my own. They can radiate it, feel my privates, etc. and I have no right (in their minds) to refuse. And they can do the same thing to my child and I have no right to protest. I can be fined or detained if I protest - they are using fear and intimidation to force compliance. Maybe "slaves" is not that far off after all. When the government resorts to those tatics, if that's not a red flag, then what is??

The TSA IS profiling. Their profile is this: ANYONE that flies on an airline is a potential terrorist. End of story.

Sure they don't tell us everything. I undersatnd that. But expecting, no, demanding, blind compliance to such invasions of our bodies and trampling of our liberties on blind faith is a bit much to ask of Americans. Well, the Americans we used to be that they are trying to get rid of.

I am glad that this is happening before/during the holidays. There are going to be thousands and thousands of people being given a taste of this. It won't be one or two "kooks" complaining. It is going to be Mr. And Mrs. Average American getting radiated and felt up. With their kids and Grandma along for the ride.

I am so glad we cancelled our planned vacation to Mexico over Thanksgiving a few months ago. I was regretting it lately but now I feel it's for the better after all.


----------



## dougp26364

You do have a choice. Just choose not to fly. We've cut back 30% on our vacations that include flying and I'll thinking about cutting back even further.


----------



## scrapngen

dougp26364 said:


> You do have a choice. Just choose not to fly. We've cut back 30% on our vacations that include flying and I'll thinking about cutting back even further.



Hard to get to HI by boat...
Hard for my husband to get to Taiwan any other way - (90% of the world's laptops are built there) or China, or South Korea...
I wouldn't be surprised if the border crossings don't start doing something similar sometime in the near future...


----------



## jlwquilter

Yep, my DH can simply choose not to fly. After all his company will totally understand that he needs a whole week for a 2 day meeting since he chooses not to fly. It's long drive from SE FL to Wichita, not to mention when he has to go to CA or CT. Or Paris or Hong Kong or Germany.

Better yet, he can choose to quit that job and get one that doesn't require flying. Those are littered on the ground these days I hear. Especially in his field. Thanks! Why didn't we think of that??

Absolutely DD and I can choose not to fly. I didn't intend to visit my dying sister in NY anyway. Or my elderly father. I'll simply yank my DD out of school for a week in order to drive there. She's too young to stay home alone while I am gone and DH is working.

I get that being able to fly is not a God given right. However I have a right as an American not to be unlawfully searched (without probable cause). Now just buying an airline ticket seems to be enough to count as probable cause..??!!

Here's a few things to think about while choosing not to fly:
All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing. Edmund Burke ... The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it. Albert Einstein. And of course the Ben Franklin quote.


----------



## Beaglemom3

jlwquilter said:


> Yep, my DH can simply choose not to fly. After all his company will totally understand that he needs a whole week for a 2 day meeting since he chooses not to fly. It's long drive from SE FL to Wichita, not to mention when he has to go to CA or CT. Or Paris or Hong Kong or Germany.
> 
> Better yet, he can choose to quit that job and get one that doesn't require flying. Those are littered on the ground these days I hear. Especially in his field. Thanks! Why didn't we think of that??
> 
> Absolutely DD and I can choose not to fly. I didn't intend to visit my dying sister in NY anyway. Or my elderly father. I'll simply yank my DD out of school for a week in order to drive there. She's too young to stay home alone while I am gone and DH is working.
> 
> I get that being able to fly is not a God given right. However I have a right as an American not to be unlawfully searched (without probable cause). Now just buying an airline ticket seems to be enough to count as probable cause..??!!
> 
> Here's a few things to think about while choosing not to fly:
> All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing. Edmund Burke ... The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it. Albert Einstein. And of course the Ben Franklin quote.




Well put !


----------



## Carolinian

The DEA at least in the past (and maybe still does) used profiling to identify suspected drug couriers.  Why in the heck can't TSA (the Testicular Scrutiny Administration) have the common sense to use it to identify suspected terrorists?  Done properly, it works, as the Israelis have shown.

I know DEA used profiling because I had a former client tell me her ordeal when she unwittingly met it.  BTW, I represented her in a domestic case, not a drug case.  In her situation, a new boyfriend whose family ran a Greek restaurant in town, invited her to Greece.  He was staying 3 or 4 months but she could only stay 1 month.  For whatever reason, he bought her two one way tickets.  When she got off the plane in New York, she was taken to a room and first her luggage was almost disassembled it was looked at in so much detail.  Then they did a pat down of her.  Then they did a strip search (not virtual - the real thing).  Then they did a body cavity search.  Of course they found nothing, and needless to say, she was highly offended and insulted by it all.  After the ordeal was over, they finally answered the question she had been asking about what it was all about.  They told her that she had met the drug courier profile.  While they did not tell her the whole thing, they said some of the things that triggered it were that she was travelling alone on a one way ticket, her ticket had been paid for in cash, her origin in Athens was a city of interest in the drug business, and her age.

Terrorists are a higher level of danger to America than drug couriers.


----------



## John Cummings

Carolinian said:


> The DEA at least in the past (and maybe still does) used profiling to identify suspected drug couriers.  Why in the heck can't TSA (the Testicular Scrutiny Administration) have the common sense to use it to identify suspected terrorists?  Done properly, it works, as the Israelis have shown.
> 
> I know DEA used profiling because I had a former client tell me her ordeal when she unwittingly met it.  BTW, I represented her in a domestic case, not a drug case.  In her situation, a new boyfriend whose family ran a Greek restaurant in town, invited her to Greece.  He was staying 3 or 4 months but she could only stay 1 month.  For whatever reason, he bought her two one way tickets.  When she got off the plane in New York, she was taken to a room and first her luggage was almost disassembled it was looked at in so much detail.  Then they did a pat down of her.  Then they did a strip search (not virtual - the real thing).  Then they did a body cavity search.  Of course they found nothing, and needless to say, she was highly offended and insulted by it all.  After the ordeal was over, they finally answered the question she had been asking about what it was all about.  They told her that she had met the drug courier profile.  While they did not tell her the whole thing, they said some of the things that triggered it were that she was travelling alone on a one way ticket, her ticket had been paid for in cash, her origin in Athens was a city of interest in the drug business, and her age.
> 
> Terrorists are a higher level of danger to America than drug couriers.



The one-way ticket is definitely a huge red flag. I got caught with that by Southwest Airlines. I had purchased a round trip from Ontario, CA to San Jose, CA. It was a business trip in 2005. I had to spend an extra day in San Jose so I had to change the return flight date to the next day. Instead of just changing the return date, SWA canceled the return and issued me a new ticket. When I went to check-in on-line it was refused and said I needed to check-in at the ticket counter. When I did that, they issued me a boarding pass that was marked for security to check me out. I asked why and they said it was because I had a one-way ticket. I explained to them that all I did was change my return date and it was SWA that caused the problem. In any event I spent 20 minutes at security while they went over me with a fine tooth comb. I was a SWA frequent flier at that time. Think what would happen now.

The big problem in the US is that the TSA is looking for bad things rather than bad guys. Of course exempting Muslin women from the invasive searches completely invalidates the whole process. The chances of one of them being a terrorist is far greater than most other people.


----------



## John Cummings

dougp26364 said:


> You do have a choice. Just choose not to fly. We've cut back 30% on our vacations that include flying and I'll thinking about cutting back even further.



We will be doing the same thing. We have 2 confirmed trips next year for Hawaii and New York. We may take the train to NYC. Hopefully something will change with the TSA procedure though I am not very optimistic about it. After those 2 trips, we will not travel anywhere that we can't comfortably drive to.


----------



## Stricky

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qwsdq69AHnw


----------



## startime

I wish I had non-refundable airline tickets purchased before all of this nude radiation scanners versus sexual groping insanity.  I would love the opportunity to fight the airlines for a full refund on the grounds that the terms & conditions of travel have materially changed since the end of October 2010.  

For me, the answer to fight this is simple:  We won't fly!

If you booked non-refundable airline tickets prior to Oct 29th and you no longer want to fly under these new terms & conditions, please contact the airline and demand a full refund.  While it may take a long time or never for the airlines to notice my family stopped flying, I am sure that they will quickly notice a surge of customers demanding refunds for non-refundable tickets.  

If you think the airlines won't refund your ticket, go read the news stories.  For example, AA was quick to refund the non-refundable tickets for the 'Don't Touch My Junk' guy.  You should not have to subject yourself to $11,000 fine threats from the TSA to get a full refund.

As for timeshares, I have awesome Hawaii reservations in the coming year.  I plan to cancel those at the very last minute if our travel / sexual privacy choices don't improve.


----------



## isisdave

> Of course exempting Muslin women from the invasive searches completely invalidates the whole process.



Just checking ... we all DO know this isn't fact, don't we; it's one of those things that "must be true 'cause I saw it on the Internet. "


----------



## John Cummings

isisdave said:


> Just checking ... we all DO know this isn't fact, don't we; it's one of those things that "must be true 'cause I saw it on the Internet. "



It was in an article on ABC.com which is main stream media.


----------



## PigsDad

John Cummings said:


> It was in an article on ABC.com which is main stream media.


The article I read was that there was a group (CAIR) pushing for special treatment of muslim women.  I have not seen any article saying that the TSA has implemented a special policy for them.  In fact, the opposite is true -- the TSA is still confirming that everyone is subject to the same screening, with no exceptions for muslim women or any other group.  TSA is only saying that they are considering an alternate procedure.

Those are the facts.  If you have any proof to the contrary, please post a reference.

Kurt


----------



## Talent312

IMHO, those who protest or find this level of intrusion objectionable are sort'a missing the point...

What you're proposing is that this level of security be lowered, making flying less safe for  the rest of us. Well, I, for one, am willing to suffer this bit of indignity for a better chance of arriving at my destination in one piece.

As for simply not flying... IMHO, that someone would not to take a vacation they would have otherwise, seems a rather hysterical reation to momentary and transitory intrustion. My priority is simply to get to my destination and for that reason, I'm simply not inclined to let it get in my way .


----------



## John Cummings

Talent312 said:


> IMHO, those who protest or find this level of intrusion objectionable are sort'a missing the point...
> 
> What you're proposing is that this level of security be lowered, making flying less safe for  the rest of us. Well, I, for one, am willing to suffer this bit of indignity for a better chance of arriving at my destination in one piece.
> 
> As for simply not flying... IMHO, that someone would not to take a vacation they would have otherwise, seems a rather hysterical reation to momentary and transitory intrustion. My priority is simply to get to my destination and for that reason, I'm simply not inclined to let it get in my way .



I am NOT proposing that the level of security be lowered. I believe that they should be profiling based on data rather than assuming that everybody is a potential terrorist. This is much more effective. Israel has done this quite successfully and they have had to deal with terrorism a lot longer than we have.

I never said I wouldn't take a vacation. I will just vacation where I don't have to fly. No problem as there are plenty of great places to vacation within easy driving distance.


----------



## John Cummings

PigsDad said:


> The article I read was that there was a group (CAIR) pushing for special treatment of muslim women.  I have not seen any article saying that the TSA has implemented a special policy for them.  In fact, the opposite is true -- the TSA is still confirming that everyone is subject to the same screening, with no exceptions for muslim women or any other group.  TSA is only saying that they are considering an alternate procedure.
> 
> Those are the facts.  If you have any proof to the contrary, please post a reference.
> 
> Kurt



There was an interview with a Muslim woman on TV today. She said that TSA rules allow her to inspect herself under the watch of a security agent. she pats herself down and then they check her hands.


----------



## HenryT

isisdave said:


> Just checking ... we all DO know this isn't fact, don't we; it's one of those things that "must be true 'cause I saw it on the Internet. "



Not sure which aspect of the statement you quoted isn't fact, but it certainly is a fact that excluding one group of people severely under-minds the justification for doing the searches. With such a policy the bad guys would actively pursue the excluded group to do the dirty work.

If the argument is that they would use alternate methods on the excluded group then why not use the alternate method on everybody.

The goal of doing the searches is to increase security. How do you increase security by not only excluding a group of people but letting everybody know that particular group is excluded?

We all want to feel secure when we fly but we also want to feel secure when we take the train, go to the shopping center, etc. What's the next step? Will we be subjected to these searches for any event in which a lot of people are attending? You have to be concerned that these type of searches will not stop with flying.

There are more effective ways to make flying safer including relying on intelligence, profiling, random expanded searches, etc.

The type of invasion of privacy the TSA wants to engage in is not justified.


----------



## HenryT

I saw a  news cast where Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano stated that she was considering making a exception for Muslim woman. Below is a link where she summarizes her thoughts which of similar to what I heard her say:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2627489/posts


----------



## e.bram

Great. With less people flying, there will be less congestion at the airport.


----------



## california-bighorn

*TSA Out in Orlando*

The Director of the Orlando's Sanford Airport has made the decision to opt out of TSA Security services.  I didn't hear the effective date, but this may start a trend.  Apparently there are 5(?) other approved security services beside TSA.


----------



## PigsDad

Talent312 said:


> IMHO, those who protest or find this level of intrusion objectionable are sort'a missing the point...
> 
> What you're proposing is that this level of security be lowered, making flying less safe for  the rest of us. Well, I, for one, am willing to suffer this bit of indignity for a better chance of arriving at my destination in one piece.


But the thing is, all of TSA's actions have been totally reactionary.  Someone tries to bring on liquid explosives, so we all have to limit our liquids.  Someone tries to fit a bomb in a shoe, so we all need to take off our shoes.  Someone tries to hide a bomb in their underwear, so we now need to be groped in the groin.

None of TSA's actions has actually increased safety.  It has just been reactions to something that has happened.  If you really think you are safer now because of TSA's actions, I guess the TSA's brainwashing has worked on you.  I, however, am not convinced.

Kurt


----------



## PigsDad

california-bighorn said:


> The Director of the Orlando's Sanford Airport has made the decision to opt out of TSA Security services.  I didn't hear the effective date, but this may start a trend.  Apparently there are 5(?) other approved security services beside TSA.


Good for them!    Slightly trained monkeys could do a better job than the TSA.

Kurt


----------



## cvmar

When we purchase a ticket we have to give our name as stated on our ID our sex and full birth date info. I would guess that any computer savvy teenager could find out more about me than I can even remember about my self so you can't tell me the government isn't able to figure that out for themselves before I even reach the airport.

Not all cargo is checked, the new invasive pat downs or the scanners cannot feel/see inside the body so what is the point?

Every time I hear someone say "if it keeps us safe I am OK with it" or "if you aren't doing anything wrong you have nothing to worry about" It makes me crazy!

Instead of enjoying the anticipation of our upcoming Hawaii trip I am anxious about going through security because I won't go through the scanner and am very uncomfortable about the new pat down procedures especially regarding my son.


----------



## Carolinian

HenryT said:


> I saw a  news cast where Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano stated that she was considering making a exception for Muslim woman. Below is a link where she summarizes her thoughts which of similar to what I heard her say:
> 
> http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2627489/posts



Considering that there is a history of Muslim women blowing up planes in Russia and Muslim women blowing up other things in Iraq, this should be a target group, not one that gets special favors.

Burqas also ought to be banned for air travel.  They make it too easy to hide things.  There is even one case in the UK where a murderer successfully fled the country by putting on his sister's burqa, taking his sister's passport, and getting a ticket in his sister's name.


----------



## keepgoing

*Agreed.  Gov has been abusing us in the name of "keep us safer"*

I absolutely agree that "if it keeps us safe I am Ok with it" is nonsense.  

They found a guy trying to bomb NYC, is it ok they can now conduct search to everyone's home in NYC without a warrant or probable cause?  Afterall, it is just to keeps us safe! and if you have nothing to hide, why not?

How about the argument about "it is just like an annual exam by your physician"?  well, TSA is not my physician and I won't face a fine for not allowing my physician to touch where I don't wan't him/her to touch.

Where is the result of billions and billions of money going into our intelligent agency?  Is it their answer "assume everyone is guilty until proven innoncent" ?

CT



cvmar said:


> When we purchase a ticket we have to give our name as stated on our ID our sex and full birth date info. I would guess that any computer savvy teenager could find out more about me than I can even remember about my self so you can't tell me the government isn't able to figure that out for themselves before I even reach the airport.
> 
> Not all cargo is checked, the new invasive pat downs or the scanners cannot feel/see inside the body so what is the point?
> 
> Every time I hear someone say "if it keeps us safe I am OK with it" or "if you aren't doing anything wrong you have nothing to worry about" It makes me crazy!
> 
> Instead of enjoying the anticipation of our upcoming Hawaii trip I am anxious about going through security because I won't go through the scanner and am very uncomfortable about the new pat down procedures especially regarding my son.


----------



## kasteer

jlwquilter said:


> My DH said the same thing last night - he'd rather have a female pat him down. He also has a female doctor. I would definitely prefer a female agent and there is no freaking way I'd allow a male to pat down my DD, not to mention her own freak out. But gosh, I may not have a say in that at all. If there are no female agents then I will be examined by whomever they choose. I will be threatened with fines if I say No, I'd rather not fly now.
> 
> I read a response (I believe to the article Carolinian linked) that made a parallel reference to being "slaves". I though that was out there but now I am wondering more. In a very real sense the TSA is saying that once I get in the security line my body is not my own. They can radiate it, feel my privates, etc. and I have no right (in their minds) to refuse. And they can do the same thing to my child and I have no right to protest. I can be fined or detained if I protest - they are using fear and intimidation to force compliance. Maybe "slaves" is not that far off after all. When the government resorts to those tatics, if that's not a red flag, then what is??
> 
> The TSA IS profiling. Their profile is this: ANYONE that flies on an airline is a potential terrorist. End of story.
> 
> Sure they don't tell us everything. I undersatnd that. But expecting, no, demanding, blind compliance to such invasions of our bodies and trampling of our liberties on blind faith is a bit much to ask of Americans. Well, the Americans we used to be that they are trying to get rid of.
> 
> I am glad that this is happening before/during the holidays. There are going to be thousands and thousands of people being given a taste of this. It won't be one or two "kooks" complaining. It is going to be Mr. And Mrs. Average American getting radiated and felt up. With their kids and Grandma along for the ride.
> 
> I am so glad we cancelled our planned vacation to Mexico over Thanksgiving a few months ago. I was regretting it lately but now I feel it's for the better after all.



Very well said.  My issue is that both processes (body scanner and enhanced pat-down) violate our 4th ammendement.  We have no recourse to complain, say no, etc... unless we simply don't fly (which is not possible sometimes).  All for a false sense of security.  The problem is that many people don't mind... that's their perogative.  However, submitting to this situation the TSA is putting us into is just going to allow the system to get worse.


----------



## kasteer

Talent312 said:


> IMHO, those who protest or find this level of intrusion objectionable are sort'a missing the point...
> 
> What you're proposing is that this level of security be lowered, making flying less safe for  the rest of us. Well, I, for one, am willing to suffer this bit of indignity for a better chance of arriving at my destination in one piece.
> 
> As for simply not flying... IMHO, that someone would not to take a vacation they would have otherwise, seems a rather hysterical reation to momentary and transitory intrustion. My priority is simply to get to my destination and for that reason, I'm simply not inclined to let it get in my way .



Prove that this level of security  is better than previous level of security... it's not.  Israel has not had an issue in over 40 years and they don't use this.  The terrorists can easily circumvent this security (body cavities or example).  Don't think this TSA stuff makes you any less secure.


----------



## AwayWeGo

*Foolproof Hi-Tech Pre-Flight Security Screening.*

All TSA needs to do is get a bunch of MRI machines like the 1s over at NIH, & use those on the airline passengers going through airport security. 

From my experience 2 years ago, I can offer ironclad assurance that after they got through with me they knew with absolute certainty whether I had anything dangerous anywhere in or around or near my physical person.  

That kind of MRI screening would only add 45 minutes or so to the pre-flight security check process -- for each passenger, that is, so they'd need to install lots of high-tech MRI machines.  Plus, they'd need to hire lots of MRI technicians. 

Maybe they could get HHS & Medicare & Blue Cross to go halfsies on the machines by stationing some radiologists alongside the TSA security specialists.  That way the radiologists could spot incipient tumors & aneurysms, etc., as part of the process, thus saving the cost of separate MRI diagnosis at the hospital while providing a valuable diagnostic benefit as part of the pre-flight screening process that would put the bodily intrusiveness of it into proper perspective. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## california-bighorn

AwayWeGo said:


> All TSA needs to do is get a bunch of MRI machines like the 1s over at NIH, & use those on the airline passengers going through airport security.
> 
> From my experience 2 years ago, I can offer ironclad assurance that after they got through with me they knew with absolute certainty whether I had anything dangerous anywhere in or around or near my physical person.
> 
> That kind of MRI screening would only add 45 minutes or so to the pre-flight security check process -- for each passenger, that is, so they'd need to install lots of high-tech MRI machines.  Plus, they'd need to hire lots of MRI technicians.
> 
> Maybe they could get HHS & Medicare & Blue Cross to go halfsies on the machines by stationing some radiologists alongside the TSA security specialists.  That way the radiologists could spot incipient tumors & aneurysms, etc., as part of the process, thus saving the cost of separate MRI diagnosis at the hospital while providing a valuable diagnostic benefit as part of the pre-flight screening process that would put the bodily intrusiveness of it into proper perspective.
> 
> -- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​



If they'd send the results to my doctor I'd be good with it.  I might even be willing to pay a discounted price.


----------



## Carolinian

AwayWeGo said:


> All TSA needs to do is get a bunch of MRI machines like the 1s over at NIH, & use those on the airline passengers going through airport security.
> 
> From my experience 2 years ago, I can offer ironclad assurance that after they got through with me they knew with absolute certainty whether I had anything dangerous anywhere in or around or near my physical person.
> 
> That kind of MRI screening would only add 45 minutes or so to the pre-flight security check process -- for each passenger, that is, so they'd need to install lots of high-tech MRI machines.  Plus, they'd need to hire lots of MRI technicians.
> 
> Maybe they could get HHS & Medicare & Blue Cross to go halfsies on the machines by stationing some radiologists alongside the TSA security specialists.  That way the radiologists could spot incipient tumors & aneurysms, etc., as part of the process, thus saving the cost of separate MRI diagnosis at the hospital while providing a valuable diagnostic benefit as part of the pre-flight screening process that would put the bodily intrusiveness of it into proper perspective.
> 
> -- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​



IF you had thought of this earlier, it could have been rolled into the so-called Health Care Reform.


----------



## AwayWeGo

*The Story Of My Life.*




Carolinian said:


> IF you had thought of this earlier, it could have been rolled into the so-called Health Care Reform.


24 hours late & $1 short. 

So it goes. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## short

*Media histaria.*

Just went through body scanner and pat down at LAX.  After you have had 2 children and had an annual mammogram, I don 't know what the big deal is. 

Short


----------



## jlwquilter

What my dad wants to know is this:

Will he be forced to remove his Depends in front of everyone if the TSA guy can't get a good enough grab of his privates.

What about sanitary napkins? Not all women use tampons or use them alone.

Seriously, what about this stuff?


----------



## jlwquilter

short said:


> Just went through body scanner and pat down at LAX.  After you have had 2 children and had an annual mammogram, I don 't know what the big deal is.
> 
> Short



Despite my outrage at this trampling of basic American liberites, I do understand what you mean. While I personally would not be thrilled to be touched by a stranger in such a manner, I would not get too upset either unless someone obviously was taking advantage (pinching, tweaking, etc. One knows when it's on purpose and a sexual attack). IF THIS INVASION ACTUALLY DID ANY GOOD WHAT SO EVER. It does not.

But I am not sanguine about exposing my DD to this treatment. She has not given birth. She has not had a mammogram. She hasn't even kissed a boy yet. But some middle aged guy (or similar) is going to run his palms over her chest and between her legs. 

Doesn't this scream WRONG??


----------



## Passepartout

Privacy invasion as security theatre doesn't cut it. To violate senior citizens and children and have prosthesis wearers place their boobs and colostomy bags in the bins for additional scrutiny is going too far.

At the risk of this post being deemed 'political'- which it isn't, I have written my elected representatives urging restraint or disbanding of TSA, following the 'Israeli' model of pre-boarding screening which has been shown to be effective. and offering my vote for any representative or prospective elected official who shares my view.

Jim Ricks


----------



## Talent312

jlwquilter said:


> I am not sanguine about exposing my DD to this treatment. She has not given birth. She has not had a mammogram. She hasn't even kissed a boy yet. But some middle aged guy (or similar) is going to run his palms over her chest and between her legs.



*So, just have her step into the scanner and it won't be an issue.*

All this fuss is about folks who don't want an anonymous picture of the flaps and folds of their ugly, unsightly, or bony bodies to show up on an screen in a nearby room.

I'm just not so hung-up on my self-image that I really think it matters all that much what I look like strip-naked. But perhaps, I should work-out more. 

My DW's self-worth, OTOH, seems to depend entirely what others think about her. I suspect that the very thought of some stranger seeing her bare belly or buttocks would cause a meltdown.


----------



## Guitarmom

"Just" stepping into the scanner may not be a matter of mere vanity. The University of California, San Francisco, and a pilots organization have warned that the scanners pose a radiation risk. This must not be ignored.

One of my daughters was diagnosed with breast cancer on her 27th birthday. We believe it was from a chest X-Ray machine that must have been mis-set, as we know three other people who developed chest or breast cancer after receiving an X-ray at the same center.

Right now, we're faced with letting our children be groped or exposing them to radiation. What kind of a choice is that?


----------



## John Cummings

Passepartout said:


> Privacy invasion as security theatre doesn't cut it. To violate senior citizens and children and have prosthesis wearers place their boobs and colostomy bags in the bins for additional scrutiny is going too far.
> 
> At the risk of this post being deemed 'political'- which it isn't, I have written my elected representatives urging restraint or disbanding of TSA, following the 'Israeli' model of pre-boarding screening which has been shown to be effective. and offering my vote for any representative or prospective elected official who shares my view.
> 
> Jim Ricks



On this we agree completely.


----------



## Talent312

*From thie Cosmic Log...*
The Transportation Security Administration says the amount of radiation from scans amounts to about a thousandth of the amount a person receives from a standard chest X-ray.

Peter Rez, a physics professor at Arizona State University in Tempe, did his own calculations and found the exposure to be about one-fiftieth to one-hundredth the amount of a standard chest X-ray. He calculated the risk of getting cancer from a single scan at about 1 in 30 million, "which puts it somewhat less than being killed by being struck by lightning in any one year," he told me.

A group of scientists at the University of California at San Francisco laid out their concerns in a letter to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, highlighting in particular the potential for the X-ray dose concentrated on the skin to pose a health concern for children and other vulnerable populations, such as people with HIV.

In response, the Food and Drug Administration said the technology has been reviewed at Sandia National Laboratories, the FDA, National Institute for Standards and Technology and Johns Hopkins University.

"In summary, the potential health risks from a full-body screening with a general-use X-ray security system are minuscule. Several groups of recognized experts have been assembled and have analyzed the radiation safety issues associated with this technology. ... As a result of these evidence-based, responsible actions, we are confident that full-body X-ray security products and practices do not pose a significant risk to the public health," the FDA said.
--------------------------
_Of course, this doesn't sit well with "the sky is falling" crowd._


----------



## John Cummings

All of this would end if we would just employ the same security methods as Israel. Their system works very well and they have been the victims of far more terrorism threats for a lot longer than we have.


----------



## teepeeca

What happens if they don't have the "scanners", and want everybody to go through the "pat down"???  If ANY "government flunkies" want to probe my "private parts", I'm going to YELL ---"SEXUAL ASSAULT" !!!  (look up the term of "assault and battery") and "demand" a local police person arrest the person who "violated" me (or my wife).

If everybody took that approach, think of the  "possabilities" !!! (LOL !!!)

Tony


----------



## Passepartout

teepeeca said:


> ...I'm going to YELL ---"SEXUAL ASSAULT" !!!  (look up the term of "assault and battery") and "demand" a local police person arrest the person who "violated" me (or my wife).
> 
> If everybody took that approach, think of the  "possabilities" !!! (LOL !!!)
> 
> Tony



Tony, what you suggest just doesn't work. They will (at the least) harass you, make sure you and yours miss the flights for that day and then fine you up to $15,000. You don't get to participate in the determination of your fine, it's just assessed. Don't pay and don't fly. They have us by the- oh, nevermind.

The ONLY way to make security checks realistic and not just the theatre that they are now is to get all our elected officials on board to take the power from TSA. The Israeli method of pre-boarding checks works and is not invasive. It targets people who are in risk pools and lets non-risk people travel with minimal inconvenience, yet with safety.

TSA= Thousands Standing Around!

Jim Ricks


----------



## Fern Modena

So, if you are in a wheelchair, on crutches, use a cane, etc. and can't let go of them, will they still "wand" you, or what?

Fern


----------



## linsj

Fern Modena said:


> So, if you are in a wheelchair, on crutches, use a cane, etc. and can't let go of them, will they still "wand" you, or what?
> 
> Fern



The wands are gone. These people will get the invasive grope, aka sexual assault.


----------



## Talent312

linsj said:


> The wands are gone. These people will get the invasive group, aka sexual assault.


"group"... they're given a group groping?

At least its less invasive than a prostate or ob/gyn exam.
AFAIK, no one's had to bend over or put their feet in stirrups... yet.


----------



## beejaybeeohio

*Correct me if I'm misinformed...*

It's my understanding that if one refuses the see-thru-all x-ray, then the invasive *exterior* body handling is mandatory.  If this is the case, couldn't terrorists plant explosives in their body cavities, refuse the x-ray, go thru the rub-down and still not be discovered?

I agree with jwquilter's comments re: the older generation and teens and the emotional trauma the body grope may cause. I believe that even if they choose the see-thru-all x-ray as Talent312 suggests, they could still be required to submit to the rub-down if a TSA agent has suspicions.  Yet by exempting certain groups such as the aged or juvenile, the terrorist organizations will be certain to utilize children and the elderly in carrying out their plots....

These new procedures offer no greater peace of mind to me.


----------



## Passepartout

I can't honestly speak to the groping/scanning/feeling up of the handicapped. I just didn't pay attention last week while 'enjoying' our own TSA encounter. What I did notice, though is that all the 'standard' wheelchairs have disappeared. In their place are narrower, taller, smaller-wheeled rolling chairs with space under the seat for a carry-on bag. Perhaps the 'wanding/groping' can be accomplished more easily on the new equipment. The 'pushers' seemed to have to work harder to move people around. These new transfer chairs look to be able to roll on to the aircraft eliminating the need to transfer, but that's just speculation on my part. I saw pushers waiting for their people outside rest rooms, so the public bathrooms must not be accessible to the new chairs.

Ahhh, the adventure of air travel continues.....

Jim Ricks


----------



## MALC9990

dougp26364 said:


> You do have a choice. Just choose not to fly. We've cut back 30% on our vacations that include flying and I'll thinking about cutting back even further.



Those of us who live outside the USA have an easier choice - we just choose not to fly to the USA and spend our vacation money somewhere else in the world where our privacy and bodies will not be invaded or radiated.


----------



## Kay H

Talent312 said:


> *So, just have her step into the scanner and it won't be an issue.*
> 
> All this fuss is about folks who don't want an anonymous picture of the flaps and folds of their ugly, unsightly, or bony bodies to show up on an screen in a nearby room.
> 
> I'm just not so hung-up on my self-image that I really think it matters all that much what I look like strip-naked. But perhaps, I should work-out more.
> 
> My DW's self-worth, OTOH, seems to depend entirely what others think about her. I suspect that the very thought of some stranger seeing her bare belly or buttocks would cause a meltdown.




My concern is not how fat or ugly my body is.  My concern is the amount of radiation exposure I will get when the machine starts to malfunction because of the number of xrays it took and some know-nothing TSA person just ups  the radiation to show clearer pictures.

Whether I'm fat or thin, in shape or not, does not give some stranger the right to run her hands over the intimate parts of my body.  I'm sure they don't wash their hands between passengers or change their gloves (if they even wear them).

From what I've seen on tv, the hand groping is not even done in private. Nothing like being watched while someone else gropes me.


----------



## kanerf

And so possibly dangerous x-ray machines are cared for by poorly trained hourly wage earners.  Government authorized sexual groping is provided by the same persons.  Some of these persons also sit in a booth and watch a parade of naked bodies roll past.  Gee, I feel more secure all ready.


----------



## cvmar

Just read this on flyer talk. It is a very detailed account of this woman's experience. Also the gloves not being changed between passengers is not only gross but unsanitary and dangerous. 

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/newsstand/1150458-tsa-sexual-assault.html

I for one am writing the airlines I have frequent flyer accounts with and letting them know they have just lost a customer due to these invasive searches!


----------



## jlwquilter

Kay H said:


> *My concern is not how fat or ugly my body is.  My concern is the amount of radiation exposure I will get when the machine starts to malfunction because of the number of xrays it took and some know-nothing TSA person just ups  the radiation to show clearer pictures*.
> 
> Whether I'm fat or thin, in shape or not, does not give some stranger the right to run her hands over the intimate parts of my body.  I'm sure they don't wash their hands between passengers or change their gloves (if they even wear them).
> 
> From what I've seen on tv, the hand groping is not even done in private. Nothing like being watched while someone else gropes me.



Exactly my fear. Thre are no safety mechanisms and no ongoing testing. Govt. already said radiation is 1 /1000... another expert said 1/100. A factor of 10. Gee, who am I to believe? There is no way to tell if a machine is malfunctioning. That is SCARY.

And if DD fails the x-ray (maybe she's looking particularly cute that day???!!!), she gets a groping too. Can I demand to see the x-ray to be shown what on that caues her need to be groped? Nope.

I'll say it again. We buy an airline ticket. We now need to prove we are not terrorists. We get in the security line and at that second we lose all rights to our bodies and the bodies of our children. WHAT COUNTRY IS THIS??

We have called our state senator's office. More calls will be made. I urge all of you to make calls too. 

Even those that choose to not fly - they are making you chose that in order to protect your privacy, even if you don't want to think about it that way. Think about what happens when you are too old or ill to drive and the kiddies can't come to visit you because at least one parent refuses to subject the children to TSA tactics and they can't get X number of days off to drive to where ever the heck you live. You might think you are good to go today but what about tomorrow?


----------



## AwayWeGo

*Popular Mechanics.*

Click here for a _Popular Mechanics_ Q&A article about full-body scans & grope-style pat-downs. 

Short version = Those measures won't catch any bad guys. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## l2trade

cvmar said:


> Just read this on flyer talk. It is a very detailed account of this woman's experience. Also the gloves not being changed between passengers is not only gross but unsanitary and dangerous.
> 
> http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/newsstand/1150458-tsa-sexual-assault.html
> 
> I for one am writing the airlines I have frequent flyer accounts with and letting them know they have just lost a customer due to these invasive searches!



This account is disturbing to me, on so many different levels.  I read this FlyerTalk account to my wife and asked for her input, as this account relates to a woman's experience.  In many ways, the pat down described is more sexually invasive than an OBGYN visit.  The OBGYN visit:

1. Occurs in private office
2. Requires trained medical professional
3. Allows woman to choose preferred & trusted medical provider
4. Allows woman to provide informed consent
5. Allows woman to opt-out of appointment at anytime before and during, without fear of unlawful detainment, arrest and/or $11,000 fine
6. Allows woman to file sexual assault and/or malpractice charges against any medical professional who violates the law
7. Requires proper medical sterilization, hygiene and clean gloves
8. Involves no use of photographic equipment
9. Involves no patting or sliding of the hands across sensitive areas of the inner thighs, labia, clitoris, anus, etc.
10. Going to an OBGYN is not a requirement to fly or be a consumer of services in any other sense.  It is an optional, private health care choice for women.

I respect a woman's right to choose to be groped by a TSA agent or any other consenting adult.  I also respect a woman's right to not to be photographed or groped at any time, without fear of unlawful detainment, arrest or fines.  

While a woman may be able to opt-out of the nude scanner for now, she may not opt out of an enhanced 'touching of privates' pat down without avoiding the airport entirely.  Even if she agrees to the x-ray scanner and/or to go through the metal detector, she is not immune from being subjected to this random (or not so random if disabled) & then required enhanced 'touching of privates' pat down by an unqualified, non-medical and non-law enforcement professional.

This is INSANITY and FEAR and LOSS OF CIVIL LIBERTIES, without proper INTELLIGENCE and TRAINING.  I am not for less-security.  I am for more security, which involves more intelligence and less unwanted genital touching and less security theatre.  Bring on the bomb sniffing dogs!  Bring on non-invasive the explosive sniffers!  Bring on training from the Israeli intelligence experts!


----------



## AwayWeGo

*Getting There Is 1/2 The Fun.*

For our after-Christmas Florida timeshare vacation, we will definitely be hitting the highway instead of flying the friendly skies. 

No ticket hassles, no baggage problems, no early arrivals at the airport, no full-body scans, no grope-style pat downs, no airline snacks, no airplane restrooms, no rental car hassles. 

Is this a great country or what ? 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## Fern Modena

That's because the gloves are for the TSA workers, not you.  They don't care about you, except that they don't get your cooties.  If they give them to someone else, oh, well...

Fern



cvmar said:


> Just read this on flyer talk. It is a very detailed account of this woman's experience. Also the gloves not being changed between passengers is not only gross but unsanitary and dangerous.


----------



## linsj

cvmar said:


> Also the gloves not being changed between passengers is not only gross but unsanitary and dangerous.



You have the right to insist on clean gloves before the grope--and do so. If the agent refuses, ask to talk to a supervisor.


----------



## Passepartout

Here, from 251 years ago, complements of Ben Franklin:
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania (1759)

There has to be a better way.... JR


----------



## l2trade

linsj said:


> You have the right to insist on clean gloves before the grope--and do so. If the agent refuses, ask to talk to a supervisor.



Why should one have to notice and ask, let alone insist on clean gloves before a coerced sexual grope?  Do you think arguing and talking to a supervisor will make the experience any more pleasant?  Most victims will be afraid to speak up for fear of extra special attention.


----------



## Carolinian

Here is another article that details what is going on:

http://www.redstate.com/laborunionr...e-why-is-the-tsa-strip-searching-little-boys/

If it were not that my mother is dying, I would cancel my trip back to the states over the holidays.


----------



## CarolF

I'm not sure that I understand the extent of these searches  .  The talk about 'requesting clean gloves' has me wondering if the agents are actually touching the skin of the genitals/breasts with their gloved hand or is the examination done over the top of the clothing (trousers, shirt, underpants, bra)?



MALC9990 said:


> Those of us who live outside the USA have an easier choice - we just choose not to fly to the USA and spend our vacation money somewhere else in the world where our privacy and bodies will not be invaded or radiated.



That crossed my mind also.


----------



## Carolinian

Carol - Read the article I linked to above.

Here is the way it ought to be done: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/forget_the_porn_machines_NQAJ5DOzf187gdRQnLURlO


----------



## l2trade

Carolinian said:


> Carol - Read the article I linked to above.
> 
> Here is the way it ought to be done: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/forget_the_porn_machines_NQAJ5DOzf187gdRQnLURlO



Yes, I agree the above link is how it should be done.  But, instead, this is the way we are being done in the USA: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40291856/ns/travel-news

Does covering a 61-year old cancer survivor in his own urine make us safer?

And, it is interesting to note that even though this passenger agreed to and complied with the x-ray nude scanner, with his belt removed pants falling to his ankles during the scan - he still ended up getting the enhanced pat-down too when TSA agents saw his urostomy bag.  Can we get a trained medical professional onsite?  From the stories I read, it seems the randomness and lack of intelligence being used with one-size-fits-all procedures and poorly trained agents in the name of avoiding profiling is actually resulting in the TSA to profile against disabled people.  Shame!!!


----------



## beejaybeeohio

Carolinian said:


> If it were not that my mother is dying, I would cancel my trip back to the states over the holidays.



I am very sorry to hear about your mother.


----------



## california-bighorn

*President endorses TSA procedures*

I'm not expecting major changes in these TSA policies since they were endorsed by the President of the United States in an interview yesterday or the day before. He said because of the times, it is something we just have to put up with.


----------



## x3 skier

*Thanks to all who decline to fly now*

I just wanted to thank all those who are no longer going to fly since that means I will have more opportunities for FF Award tickets, shorter lines, better chances for upgrades and other benefits from fewer air travelers in the system. 

My only fear is those who plan on the disruption of security lines around thanksgiving day cause me to miss my flight to Berlin where another terror alert is in place that I have no concern over. 

Cheers


----------



## Aussiedog

*We need the calendar ladies!*

Remember those wonderful older women who posed nude for a fund-raising calendar several years ago?

We need a group of elderly women who are flying together to approach the security line in sweats and as they line their stuff up to be X-rayed remove their shoes, then their sweat jackets, then their pants, etc, to their underwear, asking for a pat down, innocently proclaiming that they are simply trying to make it easier for the agents, asking for names and badge numbers in advance, etc..... 

Ann


----------



## John Cummings

x3 skier said:


> I just wanted to thank all those who are no longer going to fly since that means I will have more opportunities for FF Award tickets, shorter lines, better chances for upgrades and other benefits from fewer air travelers in the system.
> 
> My only fear is those who plan on the disruption of security lines around thanksgiving day cause me to miss my flight to Berlin where another terror alert is in place that I have no concern over.
> 
> Cheers



Fewer fliers means the airlines will cut routes so you won't be any better off.


----------



## california-bighorn

John Cummings said:


> Fewer fliers means the airlines will cut routes so you won't be any better off.



And due to the limited availibility of flights they will raise the prices.


----------



## geekette

I consider it all temporary.  Pres O hasn't had "the procedure" yet and I think he will speak out against it after he does experience it.  He will not want these things done to hs wife and daughter   (and OH ICK for relating this to ob/gyn visit!  PLEASE STOP THAT, not the same, doesn't belong in this discussion).     

There will be more debate, more "refining" of policy, etc, and  think it will be history in a few months.  If not, well, thru the scanner for me.  

Even if performed "as directed", I think it's pointless.  Someone smuggling can put it elsewhere, internally.  And I saw a product on SNL last night to correct Camel Toe that might be some extra protection for me from The Grope.  c'mon, who else saw that??    :hysterical:


----------



## Talent312

geekette said:


> I saw a product on SNL last night to correct Camel Toe that might be some extra protection for me from The Grope. :hysterical:



For guys, I suggest an athletic supporter with a sock wrapped inside.
You can say that you've got more to protect than the average fellow.


----------



## PigsDad

I heard a good one today -- what would the TSA guys do if a guy came through the security line in a full traditional Scottish outfit (kilt, etc.)?  Underwear is optional for that outfit.  Makes one wonder how the "enhanced" pat down would go...  

Kurt


----------



## zinger1457

Looking at the typical person traveling through our airports I can't imagine these pat downs are a whole lot of fun for the TSA employees either.


----------



## Tia

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/40312411/ns/travel-news/ 
TSA chief on TODAY SHOW today


----------



## l2trade

geekette said:


> ...(and OH ICK for relating this to ob/gyn visit!  PLEASE STOP THAT, not the same, doesn't belong in this discussion)...



Perhaps, you're not reading the news?  If an ABC News employee feels, from a firsthand account, that the comparison is newsworthy, then, like it or not, it is part of the debate which highlights the complete disgusting insanity (and, IMHO, flagrant unconstitutionality) about the TSA going way too far:

http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/tsa-re...ges-underwear-search-happen/story?id=12208932


----------



## John Cummings

geekette said:


> I consider it all temporary.  Pres O hasn't had "the procedure" yet and I think he will speak out against it after he does experience it.  He will not want these things done to hs wife and daughter   (and OH ICK for relating this to ob/gyn visit!  PLEASE STOP THAT, not the same, doesn't belong in this discussion).
> 
> There will be more debate, more "refining" of policy, etc, and  think it will be history in a few months.  If not, well, thru the scanner for me.
> 
> Even if performed "as directed", I think it's pointless.  Someone smuggling can put it elsewhere, internally.  And I saw a product on SNL last night to correct Camel Toe that might be some extra protection for me from The Grope.  c'mon, who else saw that??    :hysterical:



Obama will not experience it as he does not fly on commericial airlines.


----------



## John Cummings

Am I to assume that you will get the groping automatically if body scanners are not installed at the airport? Two of the airports that we use most frequently do not have body scanners. We flew out of one of them on November 3rd and just had the usual screening as always.


----------



## california-bighorn

*Anyone Cancelling Flights Due to Screening?*

Has anyone cancelled a flight or is anyone considering cancelling due to the new security measures involving the more intensive screening measures?    
Although I doubt it, I was wondering if this would be grounds to cancel reservations without penalty.


----------



## x3 skier

John Cummings said:


> Am I to assume that you will get the groping automatically if body scanners are not installed at the airport? Two of the airports that we use most frequently do not have body scanners. We flew out of one of them on November 3rd and just had the usual screening as always.



AFAIK, it only applies if you refuse the scanner. If no scanner, no refusal, no pat down. (Which sounds dumb but it is what it is, as "they" say.)

Why anyone would rather have the pat down as opposed to the equivalent radiation of three minutes at 30000 feet is beyond me. I am sure people are concerned the machine may malfunction but the likelihood of that vs a pat down is a minuscule risk I am willing to chance. Even if it does go completely haywire, the max radiation is still below what the FDA considers negligible.

BTW, I have longer visual full exposures of my old body every day of the week to strangers in the communal shower area at my health club.  

Cheers


----------



## rickandcindy23

No way!  We are going next week, no matter what.  

If they want to take a picture of me and see my naked body, they deserve what they see.  :rofl: We will be flying out of Denver, and there have been many news reports about how brutal the patdowns are there.  Here we come body scanner.


----------



## Beaglemom3

x3 skier said:


> AFAIK, it only applies if you refuse the scanner. If no scanner, no refusal, no pat down. (Which sounds dumb but it is what it is, as "they" say.)
> 
> Why anyone would rather have the pat down as opposed to the equivalent radiation of three minutes at 30000 feet is beyond me. I am sure people are concerned the machine may malfunction but the likelihood of that vs a pat down is a minuscule risk I am willing to chance. Even if it does go completely haywire, the max radiation is still below what the FDA considers negligible.
> 
> BTW, I have longer visual full exposures of my old body every day of the week to strangers in the communal shower area at my health club.
> 
> Cheers



There doesn't seem to be any consistency in their methods.

I did not refuse either, but got both !

To J. Cummings' point re: one-way ticketing, this might have had something to do with it. As I was headed to Florida to see the shuttle, I did not book a return flight due to the "iffiness" of a shuttle launch. Maybe my one-way booking triggered something ?


Not to hijack this thread, but along these lines, does anyone have opinions on the eye scanner ? I'm not up to speed on this technology as of yet.

I have always gotten pulled out of line as a rule, but these latest pat-downs are _unlike the ones of old_.
_ Let me repeat, unlike those of old._ So, before anyone pooh-poohs the experience, wait until you've had a very thorough going over/up/under and into by an over-zealous TSA agent touching your intimate places.



When I was departing via Heathrow, I was pulled out twice with two Pakistani Nationals (I saw their passports) and they said that they were used to it. We were all patted down, however,  nothing like at Logan/Boston, but the London trip was 3 years ago and they were on high alert due to something happening at JFK.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

Talent312 said:


> For guys, I suggest an athletic supporter with a sock wrapped inside.
> You can say that you've got more to protect than the average fellow.



Maybe that would have worked for Derek Smalls, as long as he didn't use aluminum foil.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRpWnK6Rg3E


----------



## hvacrsteve

PigsDad said:


> I heard a good one today -- what would the TSA guys do if a guy came through the security line in a full traditional Scottish outfit (kilt, etc.)?  Underwear is optional for that outfit.  Makes one wonder how the "enhanced" pat down would go...
> 
> Kurt



If I were going to fly, that is exactly what I would wear!  A kilt!
Bring back my Scottish heritage!


----------



## hvacrsteve

zinger1457 said:


> Looking at the typical person traveling through our airports I can't imagine these pat downs are a whole lot of fun for the TSA employees either.



I would hate that job, people in general smell, some good, some bad some even worse!  I can't imagine tolerating that all day!


----------



## hvacrsteve

Talent312 said:


> *So, just have her step into the scanner and it won't be an issue.*
> 
> All this fuss is about folks who don't want an anonymous picture of the flaps and folds of their ugly, unsightly, or bony bodies to show up on an screen in a nearby room.
> 
> I'm just not so hung-up on my self-image that I really think it matters all that much what I look like strip-naked. But perhaps, I should work-out more.
> 
> My DW's self-worth, OTOH, seems to depend entirely what others think about her. I suspect that the very thought of some stranger seeing her bare belly or buttocks would cause a meltdown.



Some people are being scanned and then searched again!
There is no guarantee that if your scanned you will not be subject to the other!

Ii is not about scanning or whatever, it is about the creation of a security theater that thus far has had zero success!

The average person is not the danger, it is the terrorist, I would be willing to be prescreened, as in before I show up to the airport!  
I can work on Air Force One but still have to go through this every time I want to get on a commercial flight?

I will be flying on a private jet from now on or not flying at all!


----------



## hvacrsteve

http://studiojet.com/fractional.asp

This is it!  A timeshare for jets!  I think this may solve the problem, we can buy trips for our timeshares and fly with our new jetshares!


Problem solved!


----------



## Talent312

Sorry if "making light" of this offends folks, but when you've had a
few near-death experiences in your youth such that just breathing
seems a gift, its just not easy to get worked up over being poked
and prodded, when the purpose ostensibly is to keep me breathing.
--------------
Question: If I pass-wind during a pat-down, could I be arrested for
dispersing a chemical weapon?


----------



## jlwquilter

I just today purchased vacation protection for our Mexico trip in March. I already have bought our tickets (pre-Nov. 1st) and if we cancel will try to demand our airfare back under any excuse that will work.

I cannot put my daughter at risk of the pat down such as it is today. I trust the machines not at all but they would be my choice for both of us. But as previously posted, just becasue you go thru the xray AND HAVE NO ALARMS doesn't mean anything. They can and will give the groping. Of children. Of elderly. Of anyone they want with no reason given at all.

I really hope that this out of control abuse of power stops. We all must call everyone elected to demand a stop to this practice!

I can't wait to read Cindy's reaction if she gets the pat down.


----------



## Carolinian

Another horror story:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/11/22/national/main7078699.shtml


----------



## Carolinian

No, the goal is not to keep us breathing.  It is to find a substitute for a much more effective system of security - PROFILING, like the Israelis do successfully. So for the political objective of avoiding profiling, the Testicular Scrutiny Administration (TSA) goes on this massive groping crusade.

And I suspect every sexual pervert who wants a new job and does not yet have a conviction to show what they are now has an application in at the TSA.




Talent312 said:


> Sorry if "making light" of this offends folks, but when you've had a
> few near-death experiences in your youth such that just breathing
> seems a gift, its just not easy to get worked up over being poked
> and prodded, when the purpose ostensibly is to keep me breathing.
> --------------
> Question: If I pass-wind during a pat-down, could I be arrested for
> dispersing a chemical weapon?


----------



## Carolinian

Here is a great editorial on the subject from the _New York Post_:

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/pat_downs_vs_profiling_zmskpLyrrFEHL8mSXJlpdK


----------



## cotraveller

rickandcindy23 said:


> No way!  We are going next week, no matter what.
> 
> If they want to take a picture of me and see my naked body, they deserve what they see.  :rofl: We will be flying out of Denver, and there have been many news reports about how brutal the patdowns are there.  Here we come body scanner.



We flew out of Denver last Monday. We went through security on the A concourse.  It seems to be the luck of the draw whether or not you go through the full body scanner. The line they routed us through had one of the new scanners but they weren't using it.  We just went through a normal metal detectors that they have been using all along.  A different line did have the full body scanner in use. All lines have the luggage x-ray.

Same deal in Las Vegas yesterday when we flew home.  Our line only had a metal detector.


----------



## Tia

*How the new scanners came to be-*

What about  scare tactics to benefit  financially being a root cause?  So much today is $ driven. 

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-11-22-scanner-lobby_N.htm

Body Scanner Makers Doubled Lobbying Cash Over 5 Years


----------



## hvacrsteve

Tia said:


> What about  scare tactics to benefit  financially being a root cause?  So much today is $ driven.
> 
> http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-11-22-scanner-lobby_N.htm
> 
> Body Scanner Makers Doubled Lobbying Cash Over 5 Years



A a rule of thumb, Follow the Money!

Thanks for the information, it is clear as mud to me now!

I guess when the airlines figure out how much the new security has cost them in revenue they will do something more practical, I will not be holding my breath though.
I just want be spending anymore money with the large carriers.

Looking into private planes and charters at this point.

I refuse to have my rights violated.

I can only imagine that Bin laden is in a cave somewhere laughing his ass off!
If I were him, that is what I would be doing!


----------



## John Cummings

hvacrsteve said:


> I can only imagine that Bin laden is in a cave somewhere laughing his ass off!
> If I were him, that is what I would be doing!



I imagine that is true.


----------



## beejaybeeohio

*Some levity*

This cartoon doesn't reflect my views on the new TSA procedures, but it does reflect my sense of humor!


----------



## Talent312

hvacrsteve said:


> I refuse to have my rights violated.



You certainly have the right to charter or to find a friendly GA pilot willing to share his rental (hopefully in a Citation). But you don't have the right to board my flight w/o being checked-out.

Heard on NPR this morning:
Q: If the TSA agent does a really good job, can I get a second pat-down?
A: No. Only one pat-down per passenger.


----------



## geekette

l2trade said:


> Perhaps, you're not reading the news?  If an ABC News employee feels, from a firsthand account, that the comparison is newsworthy, then, like it or not, it is part of the debate which highlights the complete disgusting insanity (and, IMHO, flagrant unconstitutionality) about the TSA going way too far:
> 
> http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/tsa-re...ges-underwear-search-happen/story?id=12208932



When TSA comes at me with a speculum or anything else with intention of "insertion", I will agree with you.


----------



## l2trade

geekette said:


> When TSA comes at me with a speculum or anything else with intention of "insertion", I will agree with you.



OH ICK! :hysterical:


----------



## donnaval

We're flying Saturday to Mexico.  I've been through the scanner and will choose that again if it's available.

We haven't canceled any travel plans over this but we have changed--instead of flying for our annual winter trip, we're going to drive.  We're not thrilled about the new procedures but the procedures aren't what changed our minds--we're more annoyed with the extra amount of time that will be required to get through security.  We already spend too much time getting to the airport early, waiting in line, etc.  Might as well drive. As for the future, we shall see--there are plenty of places we'd like to go within 12 hours or less of driving. 

Cost to the economy for this one upcoming trip--a couple of grand not spent on airline tickets and rental car.  Plus I can take as much liquid as I want


----------



## CarolF

*It gets crazier*

Passenger strips to avoid 'naked scanner' 

http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/...l&emcmp=Escape&emchn=Newsletter&emlist=Member



> A TRAVELLER has been arrested after shedding his clothes in a desperate bid to avoid being frisked by airport staff or having to go through a "naked scanner".
> 
> Sam Wolanyk was planning to fly to Barbados but declined to go through the full-body scanner, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported.
> 
> His refusal meant he was singled out for a pat-down search instead.
> 
> Mr Wolanyk allegedly decided to strip down to his underwear instead, his lawyer Jason Davis of Orange Country said.
> 
> “It was obvious that my underwear left nothing to the imagination,” Mr Wolanyk said.
> 
> "I was not willing to be molested again.
> 
> "I figured that this way everyone would be happy: I don't get scanned or groped, they can verify that I'm not a danger to anyone and the line would actually move more quickly because those pat-downs take time."
> 
> However a supervisor was called to the scene and asked Mr Wolanyk to put his clothes back on so that he could be properly patted down.
> Mr Wolanyk was handcuffed and escorted from the terminal.
> 
> The incident has been confirmed by local police.
> 
> A woman was also arrested for allegedly illegally filming the x-ray and screening process with a camera.
> 
> Mr Wolanyk will appear in court on January 7 next year.



So I gather it has nothing to do with finding concealed weapons/explosives, it's all about wanting to pat the customers.


----------



## x3 skier

CarolF said:


> Passenger strips to avoid 'naked scanner'
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/...l&emcmp=Escape&emchn=Newsletter&emlist=Member
> 
> 
> 
> So I gather it has nothing to do with finding concealed weapons/explosives, it's all about wanting to pat the customers.



 
I think it was Mr Wolnyak wanting his 15 minutes of fame  :zzz:

Cheers


----------



## Carolinian

This makes you stop and think:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=231733


----------



## jlwquilter

x3 skier said:


> I think it was Mr Wolnyak wanting his 15 minutes of fame  :zzz:
> 
> Cheers



He may or may not have wanted the fame. What he wanted was to stand up in his own way to the illegial searching that it being preformed. He chose to choose his humilation form rather than to have it thrust upon him.

It's the difference between walking into the ring with you head down and already beaten vs. walking in with your head high and determined to go out your way, with dignity.

Hopefully there will be thousands of people getting their 15 minutes of fame this way.

I just read a quote by James Madison that basically says that more freedoms are lost thru slow systematic erosion (good people looking away, oh, it's not a big deal, I want to be "safe" at any price, etc.) than thru any fell swoops.

What the government is doing here is not something they invented. Power hungry people have always been trying to control others thru fear, intimidation, threats, etc. And it seems it always has to get the the absolute worst level before the majority of those being sought to be controlled wake up and finally revolt. History is repeating itself again but this time on our soil. Want a prediction? If this continues un abated/fought/etc. a future generation of ours will be fighting a civil war to free itself from virtual slavery. The good news for all of you that chose to look away or down play this (continued) creep of erosion of basic rights is that you'll probably be dead before it happens and you can go to your graves believing you were right to not "over react". Short sightedness/denial/etc. is a human talent that is unlimited. There is an end game here that had nothing to do with some terrorist blowing up a plane or killing a few thousand citizens.

You** want to be safe. You want Daddy to protect you. Well, Daddy will but Daddy has a price and it's this: you will do what Daddy says without question, recourse, etc. But quess what? Daddy isn't as all powerful a protector as both you and he want to believe and Daddy will fail eventually because there's always a bigger Daddy gunning for him. That's why it pays to be be smart instead. And what the government is doing now is not based on being smart. It's based on brawn.

** I don't mean you personally as I do not know where you personally stand on this. I mean "you" as in the American that is saying that this stuff is a-ok with them.


----------



## MommaBear

:rofl: Thank you for making my day


beejaybeeohio said:


> This cartoon doesn't reflect my views on the new TSA procedures, but it does reflect my sense of humor!


----------



## california-bighorn

donnaval said:


> We're flying Saturday to Mexico.  I've been through the scanner and will choose that again if it's available.
> 
> We haven't canceled any travel plans over this but we have changed--instead of flying for our annual winter trip, we're going to drive.  We're not thrilled about the new procedures but the procedures aren't what changed our minds--we're more annoyed with the extra amount of time that will be required to get through security.  We already spend too much time getting to the airport early, waiting in line, etc.  Might as well drive. As for the future, we shall see--there are plenty of places we'd like to go within 12 hours or less of driving.
> 
> Cost to the economy for this one upcoming trip--a couple of grand not spent on airline tickets and rental car.  Plus I can take as much liquid as I want



Can't disagree with your logic.  Interesting that the TSA seems to have a greater negative impact on travel then the attempted terrorist attacks themselves.


----------



## AwayWeGo

*Some Common Sense On The Subject.*

Click here for that.  

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## PigsDad

[Political post deleted - DeniseM Modertor]


----------



## John Cummings

donnaval said:


> ...We already spend too much time getting to the airport early, waiting in line, etc.  Might as well drive. As for the future, we shall see--there are plenty of places we'd like to go within 12 hours or less of driving...



I agree with you. All the hassles of flying detract from the vacation so we will just choose places within easy driving. We do not feel any need to escape from where we live and there are a lot of very nice places reasonably close.


----------



## John Cummings

california-bighorn said:


> Can't disagree with your logic.  Interesting that the TSA seems to have a greater negative impact on travel then the attempted terrorist attacks themselves.



It is not that strange. Your odds of being on a plane with a terrorist are very minimal whereas you have to deal with the TSA every time you fly.


----------



## hvacrsteve

Talent312 said:


> You certainly have the right to charter or to find a friendly GA pilot willing to share his rental (hopefully in a Citation). But you don't have the right to board my flight w/o being checked-out.



The sad part of the entire thing is that if I chose to, I could defeat the security that exist as of today,I could do so easily and bring on board whatever I decided I wanted to bring on board.
If you believe the security is real, keep thinking that, it is what they wish you to believe.
I can guarantee you that it is not. You are less safe now than you were before the enhanced pat downs.

You can keep living in your Ivory Castle as we were before 9-11, but one day it will be stolen from you again, especially with the current security.
I can't be more blunt than that.


----------



## Talent312

donnaval said:


> Might as well drive. As for the future, we shall see--there are plenty of places we'd like to go within 12 hours or less of driving.



The thing is, I won't drive anywhere that takes more than 6 hours, at most. Sorry, but I value my time too much to spend more than that in a vehcile that rolls on 4-wheels. To me, the time-saving provided by flying is worth the hassle.

OTOH, I did here something amusing on the radio today... The government plans to scrap the color-coded threat level and replace it with a new rating system like the one they use for movies -- G, PG, PG-13, R & X -- for the threat-level from TSA security.


----------



## hvacrsteve

AwayWeGo said:


> Click here for that.
> 
> -- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​



A very good article with a lot of common sense!

Unfortunately, common sense seems uncommon in these days of PC.


----------



## hvacrsteve

Carolinian said:


> This makes you stop and think:
> 
> http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=231733



Just one more thing to think about!


----------



## hvacrsteve

CarolF said:


> Passenger strips to avoid 'naked scanner'
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/...l&emcmp=Escape&emchn=Newsletter&emlist=Member
> 
> 
> 
> So I gather it has nothing to do with finding concealed weapons/explosives, it's all about wanting to pat the customers.



It is all about submission and control!

We Americans have become way to submissive in general, I for one will not be submitting.  

I was waiting for someone to do this, I didn't have to wait long.  Maybe we should all start wearing bikini's and speedos to the airport.  They can't arrest you for those!


----------



## jlwquilter

Let's broaden our view a bit (sorta expanding on Steve's post). The stated goal is to stop a bomb or some such being brought on the plane by someone (aka a terrorist named Bob).

Fortunately for Bob he just started dating Amy that works at the sandwich kiosk several yards from a boarding gate. Amy works behind the "iron curtain". Have we heard word one about how Amy is being searched every day she goes to work? What if she leaves for lunch to run errands (for Bob?) and comes back? Is she searched again? She's going thru the scanner at least once a day and probably more on certain days - what a great health adventure she faces. If she's not searched as thoroughly EVERY TIME as I am, a once in a while passenger, then something is wrong. Who is a terrorist going to target to get to? Me or Amy? Maybe Bob has a roving eye and has also made friends with Larry the janitor that cleans the bathrooms past security and Betty who works maintenance. Are they searched/scanned thoroughly EVERY TIME they come to work?

Oh my. Bob has made friends with Chris who delivers the boxes that contain the sandwiches Amy sells. Is Chris the delivery guy searched? How about those boxes? Every freaking box that comes into the airport and goes behind security?? Do you really think they are? And no shipments every get overlooked or rushed thru due to an urgent need?? BTW, I really don't know if radiating even at low levels food I will eat hours later is good or not but it sure doesn't sound good.

Anyway, Bob decided today is the day. He goes to the airport in his cotton clothes carrying nothing on him but his passport. Sure he checked some luggage and bought a RT ticket. Bob is not stupid (in that way at least). He sails thru the scanner, volunteers for a groping and off he goes. To meet Amy and get that little something he asked her to bring in for him (oooh, she loves him so!). Or maybe Chris and Larry really hate their jobs, their boss, and all those rich people that can fly off on vacation while they struggle to pay the rent. So Bob meets up with them and something they smuggled in (how hard can it be???) changes hands. Now Bob boards the plane and the rest is history. BTW, the stuff he carries can be way bigger (and sharper and everything else) than what I can smuggle in my panties.

How's that scenario sit with all of you being groped or saying it's necessary and the way to catch someone bringing bombs on a plane?

Oh and BTW, how exactly are the TSA agents themselves searched when they come to work????? I am sure not one of 65,000 employees could possibly be bribed, intimidated, etc.. Right? Come on, get real. Swiss cheese has less holes than this "system".


----------



## Barbeque

*Neurosurgeons View on Body Scanners*

Reading this I would opt out and counsel my family and friends to do the same. 

http://www.newsmaxhealth.com/health_stories/blaylock_TSA_scan_safety/2010/11/24/363489.html


----------



## hvacrsteve

Barbeque said:


> Reading this I would opt out and counsel my family and friends to do the same.
> 
> http://www.newsmaxhealth.com/health_stories/blaylock_TSA_scan_safety/2010/11/24/363489.html



Thank you, an article from a real doctor, not someone pushing radiation!

That is almost the entire reason I will not be flying anytime soon unless I have no choice!

The fact is, no one knows for sure, how many drugs have been linked to increased illness after the fact many years later.
My feeling is if it is so safe, then put one around the entire TSA and HSA and let them test it for a few years going through it every time they leave their office or house.  See how long they keep them then, I will say not very long!


----------



## hvacrsteve

jlwquilter said:


> Let's broaden our view a bit (sorta expanding on Steve's post). The stated goal is to stop a bomb or some such being brought on the plane by someone (aka a terrorist named Bob).
> 
> Fortunately for Bob he just started dating Amy that works at the sandwich kiosk several yards from a boarding gate. Amy works behind the "iron curtain". Have we heard word one about how Amy is being searched every day she goes to work? What if she leaves for lunch to run errands (for Bob?) and comes back? Is she searched again? She's going thru the scanner at least once a day and probably more on certain days - what a great health adventure she faces. If she's not searched as thoroughly EVERY TIME as I am, a once in a while passenger, then something is wrong. Who is a terrorist going to target to get to? Me or Amy? Maybe Bob has a roving eye and has also made friends with Larry the janitor that cleans the bathrooms past security and Betty who works maintenance. Are they searched/scanned thoroughly EVERY TIME they come to work?
> 
> Oh my. Bob has made friends with Chris who delivers the boxes that contain the sandwiches Amy sells. Is Chris the delivery guy searched? How about those boxes? Every freaking box that comes into the airport and goes behind security?? Do you really think they are? And no shipments every get overlooked or rushed thru due to an urgent need?? BTW, I really don't know if radiating even at low levels food I will eat hours later is good or not but it sure doesn't sound good.
> 
> Anyway, Bob decided today is the day. He goes to the airport in his cotton clothes carrying nothing on him but his passport. Sure he checked some luggage and bought a RT ticket. Bob is not stupid (in that way at least). He sails thru the scanner, volunteers for a groping and off he goes. To meet Amy and get that little something he asked her to bring in for him (oooh, she loves him so!). Or maybe Chris and Larry really hate their jobs, their boss, and all those rich people that can fly off on vacation while they struggle to pay the rent. So Bob meets up with them and something they smuggled in (how hard can it be???) changes hands. Now Bob boards the plane and the rest is history. BTW, the stuff he carries can be way bigger (and sharper and everything else) than what I can smuggle in my panties.
> 
> How's that scenario sit with all of you being groped or saying it's necessary and the way to catch someone bringing bombs on a plane?
> 
> Oh and BTW, how exactly are the TSA agents themselves searched when they come to work????? I am sure not one of 65,000 employees could possibly be bribed, intimidated, etc.. Right? Come on, get real. Swiss cheese has less holes than this "system".



Well said, that is only one way, if your in law enforcement you can also take on your loaded weapon, how hard is it really to become a policeman, PI or other entity exempt from the rules?

They even take the guns of law enforcement in court rooms, why are they exempt on an air plane.  I know more corrupt policemen than I would ever share here.  Unfortunately, the truth hurts!  Feel safer now?


----------



## Rose Pink

I managed to plow through all ten pages (so far) of this thread and I'm not sure where I stand.  I can see both sides of the argument.

Is there a way to keep air travel completely safe from terrorists and others bent on doing harm?  No.  Does that mean we should do nothing?  No.  Where is the optimal compromise?  I don't know.  That depends on if I or my loved ones are on the plane.

The planned protests didn't happen yesterday (day before Thanksgiving).  The vast majority of passengers just accepted it and went on to their destinations.  I don't think most people care all that much.  DH was traveling yesterday.  He didn't think there was any difference and he said people who complain are just "babies."  He flies nearly every week and he just wants to get where he is going with the less drama the better.  Then, again, this is a man who has no qualms walking nude inside our home with the curtains open. ("If the neighbors don't want to see, they shouldn't be looking in my windows" attitude.)

A society where people wear low pants to show their butt cracks and navels, and low tops to show their cleavage and short tops/low pants to show their midriffs probably doesn't care that a body scan shows more.  

A society that considers sexual intercourse to be a sport as well as a spectator sport (tv and movies as well as books and magazines) probably doesn't care much about being felt up at the airport.  Hence, the attitude  "can I have a second one."

The TSA is probably just waiting for this latest outrage to die down and for us to move on to the next thing.  We do love to feel outraged about something and we'll certainly find something to vent about elsewhere thus leaving TSA to do whatever it deems necessary.

Do I relish the idea of a body scan or a pat down?  No, but I'll put up with it.  Do I like the idea of my little grandchildren being felt up by a pedophile?  _That one makes me quite queasy_.  Will terrorists plant bombs on little children?  You betcha, they have no qualms at all.

Does our legal system permit the Israeli model?  Is it legal here?  If not, what would it take to make it legal?  An act of Congess?


----------



## Talent312

Rose Pink said:


> ... Then, again, this is a man who has no qualms walking nude inside our home with the curtains open. ("If the neighbors don't want to see, they shouldn't be looking in my windows" attitude.)...



As my DW once said to me, "Hon, maybe if you were in better shape and somewhat younger, I wouldn't mind so much. But let's face it, these days, if you left a little more to the imagination, we both could at least pretend a little more."


----------



## Rose Pink

Just sayin' that a society which tweets its every move and every thought and feeling doesn't value privacy.  

A society that wears revealing clothes doesn't value modesty.

A society that does not value privacy does not recognize when it is taken away.  

A society that does not value modesty does not recognize when it is violated.

Hence, no uproar yesterday at the airports, no support for the boycott.


----------



## Barbeque

The government and the TSA should listen to the Israeli airline on how they have protected their passengers for years.  They interview each passenger to find out where they stand and where they are going.  Do they profile yes but it works.  I saw an ex head of security for El Al talk on Fox News and it really makes sense if our true goal is being safe not being politically correct or hurting someones feelings.  
I consider the body scans totally unsafe and as I stated previously will opt out due to health reasons and will encourage my family to due the same. I would also request the TSA change their disposable gloves before they put their hands on me.


----------



## winger

This thread is so fun to watch.  I think the press controls so much in this country. At this time, they want the public to be outraged because this sort of juicy stuff sells ads and news.  The TSA is playing along with it, like a dumb pawn.  TSA is trying to do its best, but since it is government-run, it is inherently, inefficient and stupid plus sometimes comical.  We need this TSA-function to be run by a private firm with true vested interests in keeping the terrorists at bay.  I am not exactly sure how this 'vested interest' can look like, but the *first step* is r*emoving the Fed's hands off of this function*.

Also, profiling MUST BE PART OF THE SOLUTION.  Aggressively patting down a six year old boy or a 70 year old lady where the sun doesn't shine is not the answer.


----------



## jlwquilter

winger said:


> This thread is so fun to watch.  I think the press controls so much in this country. At this time, they want the public to be outraged because this sort of juicy stuff sells ads and news.  The TSA is playing along with it, like a dumb pawn.  TSA is trying to do its best, but since it is government-run, it is inherently, inefficient and stupid plus sometimes comical.  We need this TSA-function to be run by a private firm with true vested interests in keeping the terrorists at bay.  I am not exactly sure how this 'vested interest' can look like, but the *first step* is r*emoving the Fed's hands off of this function*.
> 
> Also, profiling MUST BE PART OF THE SOLUTION.  Aggressively patting down a six year old boy or a 70 year old lady where the sun doesn't shine is not the answer.



I agree with you completely. But I have to say I was very surprise at the amount of NON press coverage. I expected way lots more coverage but haven't seen much at all. Maybe I am not looking in the right places.


----------



## l2trade

I've also been surprised by the type of press coverage.  Personally, I feel this is a non-partisan, non-political issue.  I see commonality with people on this subject across the full political spectrum.  Unfortunately, as the TSA is government run, and the government is controlled by politicians - it seems we are seeing politics and spin where I wish we would see none.  This topic should be politics free, especially here on TUG, so I will be careful to say no more about that.

Suffice to say, thank goodness for the internet!  If I want to be well informed nowadays, it is helpful to get my information from many different perspectives and not just from the ones I am predisposed to agreeing with.


----------



## Carolinian

I have to travel back to the states for the holidays and I am dreading it.  I will be fine until I get to the US gateway, and then I will likely have to choose between the Melanoma machine scanner and a sexual assault.  Great choice, but I guess I would have to go with the one that is highly unpleasant rather than the one that can kill you.  At least I will insist on fresh gloves taken out of the package and put on where I can see them.


----------



## winger

Carolinian said:


> I have to travel back to the states for the holidays and I am dreading it.  I will be fine until I get to the US gateway, and then I will likely have to choose between the Melanoma machine scanner and a sexual assault.  Great choice, but I guess I would have to go with the one that is highly unpleasant rather than the one that can kill you.  At least I will insist on fresh gloves taken out of the package and put on where I can see them.



Am I missing something? You are subjected to the nude ray machine or sexual assault only if you trigger the metal detector or chosen randomly, is that correct? If this were true, just don't set off the metal detector and you have a very low chance of getting checked again. Also, just bring your own gloves (different sized recomended) and LOL maybe some vasaline, just in case : )


----------



## Talent312

Carolinian said:


> At least I will insist on fresh gloves taken out of the package and put on where I can see them.



Lest they get kooties on your pants' legs, no doubt.
BTW... Do you know where your fingers have been?


----------



## Carolinian

winger said:


> Am I missing something? You are subjected to the nude ray machine or sexual assault only if you trigger the metal detector or chosen randomly, is that correct? If this were true, just don't set off the metal detector and you have a very low chance of getting checked again. Also, just bring your own gloves (different sized recomended) and LOL maybe some vasaline, just in case : )



I guess I will see when I get to my first US gateway, but my impression is that they are moving toward putting everyone through the Melanoma machine, with the option of a sexual assault if you refuse.


----------



## Carolinian

Talent312 said:


> Lest they get kooties on your pants' legs, no doubt.
> BTW... Do you know where your fingers have been?



Apparently you did not read the linked article on the medical dangers of their practices.  If you want to be up to speed on those issues, I suggest you read it.

As to my own fingers, I can and do wash my hands when I need to.  We have no control over what the Testicular Scrutiny Administration thugs do or don't do.


----------



## jlwquilter

Carolinian said:


> I guess I will see when I get to my first US gateway, but my impression is that they are moving toward putting everyone through the Melanoma machine, with the option of a sexual assault if you refuse.



I don't have an article link but perhaps you can find one. My DH said he read this online.

A USA citizen business traveler came home from an oversees trip. He was not boarding a plan at all - he had gotten off the plane and was heading out to his car to drive home. He came across a TSA check point he had to cross.  He was told he had to go thru the machines (x-ray, metal, potential pat down, etc.). He said no. He was, again, not even getting on a plane. They said it didn't matter, he had to go thru their security. After over 2 hours of back and forth and alot of verbal sparring - the man was very careful not to raise his voise or act in any threatening way (not to give them an excuse to say he was a threat) and to not move one inch on his position to not go thru ANY security AT ALL - TSA finally relented. TSA insisted however that it be understood that they were "escorting " him from the airport and he was not leaving under his own free will. Man said fine, as long as he was leaving with no repercussions at all and he wasn't being subjected to any search at all.

While I can not vouche for this as I haven't searched for the article (and therefore may be repeating a made up story) I am not at all surprised if this report is indeed true. The end game here is not about airplane safety but about controlling Americans.


----------



## rickandcindy23

cotraveller said:


> We flew out of Denver last Monday. We went through security on the A concourse.  It seems to be the luck of the draw whether or not you go through the full body scanner. The line they routed us through had one of the new scanners but they weren't using it.  We just went through a normal metal detectors that they have been using all along.  A different line did have the full body scanner in use. All lines have the luggage x-ray.
> 
> Same deal in Las Vegas yesterday when we flew home.  Our line only had a metal detector.



We are walking over to the A concourse, flying Frontier.  I don't care what they do to me.  

My son is glad he no longer works for TSA.  I have to tell all you folks that a few years after 9/11, the TSA REDUCED the pay of the starting salary to $10 per hour from $12 per hour.  That really hurt our son, who was working there part time while going to school.  His roommate (just a friend) was also trying to pay for school by working there part time, and she had to quit when they reduced the pay by that much.  This was a scandal that never made the news.  

When does a company ever reduce the pay, and why did they feel it necessary, when airport charges are UP?  

Those underpaid people now have to pat down people by the hundreds every day....I feel sorry for them.  They don't want to touch you, take my word for it.  These people are worried about making a living from day to day.


----------



## Rose Pink

rickandcindy23 said:


> When does a company ever reduce the pay.....


Lots of companies reduced pay these past few recession years.  DH had to take a pay cut for several months.  Supposedly, it wasn't a pay cut but a cut in  hours but the effect was the same.  He worked and didn't get as much salary.  His 401K is no longer matched and retirees no longer get medical benefits.  

So, it isn't just TSA employees who have been subjected to this.  Many Americans have lost wages--and many have lost jobs altogether.

Everyone is a bit cranky these days.


----------



## vacationhopeful

Rose Pink said:


> Lots of companies reduced pay these past few recession years.  ...401K is no longer matched and retirees no longer get medical benefits.
> 
> So, it isn't just TSA employees who have been subjected to this.  Many Americans have lost wages--and many have lost jobs altogether.



And it trickles down to many other people who own small businesses or work for them. Union trades people feel it with corporate work not being done for $$$ anywhere close to what was commanded 3 years ago. It is truly a form a de-flation  of income, but inflational on the cost side.


----------



## John Cummings

jlwquilter said:


> I don't have an article link but perhaps you can find one. My DH said he read this online.
> 
> A USA citizen business traveler came home from an oversees trip. He was not boarding a plan at all - he had gotten off the plane and was heading out to his car to drive home. He came across a TSA check point he had to cross.  He was told he had to go thru the machines (x-ray, metal, potential pat down, etc.). He said no. He was, again, not even getting on a plane. They said it didn't matter, he had to go thru their security. After over 2 hours of back and forth and alot of verbal sparring - the man was very careful not to raise his voise or act in any threatening way (not to give them an excuse to say he was a threat) and to not move one inch on his position to not go thru ANY security AT ALL - TSA finally relented. TSA insisted however that it be understood that they were "escorting " him from the airport and he was not leaving under his own free will. Man said fine, as long as he was leaving with no repercussions at all and he wasn't being subjected to any search at all.
> 
> While I can not vouche for this as I haven't searched for the article (and therefore may be repeating a made up story) I am not at all surprised if this report is indeed true. The end game here is not about airplane safety but about controlling Americans.



I am certainly opposed to the TSA's theatrical security measures but I find this story hard to believe. I have been through many airports and have never seen where one has to go through security when deplaning and leaving the airport. All I can think is that he must have entered the security area by mistake when passing by it.


----------



## John Cummings

rickandcindy23 said:


> When does a company ever reduce the pay, and why did they feel it necessary, when airport charges are UP?



This is not uncommon. They probably feel that the job is not worth more than $10 /hr


----------



## Carolinian

Here is a good video from national opt out day:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZvo4Lbw_is&feature=player_embedded


----------



## x3 skier

John Cummings said:


> I am certainly opposed to the TSA's theatrical security measures but I find this story hard to believe. I have been through many airports and have never seen where one has to go through security when deplaning and leaving the airport. All I can think is that he must have entered the security area by mistake when passing by it.



Happened to me once in CVG. The way the airport was set up, you went through Customs and Immigration but then had to enter the Terminal Boarding Area to get to the outside world. Because of that, you had to be rescreened. Almost lost some good Scotch.  

I don't know if CVG is still way or not but back then I had to send my bag through "checked baggage" and pick it up at baggage claim to save the booze even though I just was just "traveling" to the parking lot. 

Cheers


----------



## John Cummings

x3 skier said:


> Happened to me once in CVG. The way the airport was set up, you went through Customs and Immigration but then had to enter the Terminal Boarding Area to get to the outside world. Because of that, you had to be rescreened. Almost lost some good Scotch.
> 
> I don't know if CVG is still way or not but back then I had to send my bag through "checked baggage" and pick it up at baggage claim to save the booze even though I just was just "traveling" to the parking lot.
> 
> Cheers



I stand corrected. I have never been to CVG.


----------



## Carolinian

Here is a good TSA video parody that hits the nail on the head:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Key-27CXHBA


----------



## kasteer

Just a couple pionts...  

I figure if Airline travel goes down, and revenue goes down, the Gov will just subsidize the airlines for the loss... which will come out of our taxes.  Unless we the people stand up to this, and don't stop, it will not go away.  I think they're just waiting for this revolsion to die down and they'll continue the violations.

All they need are some well trained bomb sniffing dogs!  Then they can do away with the scanners and pat downs... Then again there's a few politicians that are tied to the company making those machines, so I doubt they'll ever disapear.

Regardless of how small the radiation is from the scanners, our gov has no right to force that "tiny amount" of radiation on us.

I refuse to fly until these procedures are done away with.  Its time to start profiling... Granny and baby don't deserve this stuff.


----------



## x3 skier

Isn't this horse dead yet?:deadhorse: 

BTW, I got the close encounter today in Berlin Germany flying to Amsterdam except with wand.:hysterical: 

Cheers


----------



## Talent312

x3 skier said:


> Isn't this horse dead yet?:deadhorse:



Stole my line.
Noise in the system notwithstanding, TSA will not be deterred from formulating new bonehead ways of annoying the flying public. Meanwhile, air passenger traffic will continue to increase. Southwest, for one, has reported a significant increase in its air passenger traffic (of course, that may have something to do with its "bags fly free" policy).


----------



## jlwquilter

Well, if the great American public rolls over on this, because, let's face it, it just takes too much time, effort and brains for most of them to do anything but roll over, then they get what they deserve. Unfortunately they take everyone with them.

I look back on the war that is closest to me... WWII. And I can't help but think, "Geez, didn't everyone see what track Germany was on way before the progroms started? How dumb were they!" It started with small liberties being taken away for a few and most just shrugged and said "It's not me so it's ok". Then eventually it became big liberites and life itself and it did became them. Oops! Surprise! But a surprise only for the willfully blind and self-centered. Which was/is the masses.

Same thing happening here. In X years, future generations will look back and say "How stupid they were! Didn't anyone see the writing on the wall in zillion feet high letters??".

Those that refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. I guess that means humans.


----------



## Pat H

On my Thanksgiving trip I went thru security in Savannah, Dayton and Newark. None of them had body scanners or did pat downs. I didn't expect them in Sav or Day but was surprised there was nothing in Newark.


----------



## Chrisky

*San Diego Airport*

We flew (2 couples) from San Diego to Toronto,Canada on Nov. 24th.  My husband & I were in one line, our friends in another.  Woman in front of us went through the scanner. We were not scanned or patted down.  Our friends had already told us that if they were selected, they would opt for the pat down.  Well, they were both selected.  The TSA employees were very professional and our friends said that as the pat down started they were told what to do, how to stand and what was coming next. This was all done where everyone can see the pat down.  When it came to their private areas, the pat down was done with the back of the hand.  They didn't mind it, but I think I'd rather go through the scanner.


----------



## Talent312

I went to a courthouse today and was "wanded" by the bailiff at the security desk.
I asked if I couldn't get a full-body cavity search. He smiled. "We're not there, yet."


----------



## Amy

Blues said:


> And as far as the above quote, as I said, I was in that camp.  But then I saw a reference to this, from a set of concerned scientists and physicians:
> 
> http://www.npr.org/assets/news/2010/05/17/concern.pdf
> 
> This now has me concerned.  I don't think that the government really knows how innocuous or dangerous these scans are.
> 
> My thinking on this subject has turned around in the last 48 hours.
> 
> -Bob



I am irritated when I keep hearing the government mention Johns Hopkins  has determined the scanners are safe when JH has contradicted that  statement.  According to this article, "Johns Hopkins University's Applied Physics Laboratory did  independent tests — but only to determine how much radiation the devices  emit, not to examine safety, said Helen Worth, a lab spokeswoman." In another report: "a representative for Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics  Laboratory said the group did not evaluate the advanced imaging machines  for passenger safety. 'That was not our role,' spokeswoman Helen Worth  said. 'We measured the level of radiation, which was then evaluated by  TSA.'

I read the same letter from the University of California SF scientists (posted via link by Bob) a week ago and was alarmed at the points raised.  The concerns sound extremely reasonable, and I don't understand why the government is not going forward with true independent testing on the effect on the skin by this particular type of technology.   And I want to know if the machine operators are trained to detect and handle malfunctions so folks won't needlessly get zapped with super concentrated harmful radiation.

I have decided that there is no way I'm allowing my kids to go through the full body scanner until further independent testing demonstrates it is safe.  I also don't want to go through it right now, and my mother, who has a weakened immune system, is planning to pass on the scanner as well.  So we'll just have to deal with the joy of experiencing the extended pat downs.    I've rerouted the return flights for our winter vacation to avoid an airport with the full body scanner.  The full body scanner is coming to my home airport sometime in 2011; if there are no new developments, we are planning driving trips thereafter and spending our vacation dollars only as far as we are willing to drive.


----------



## CarolF

Talent312 said:


> I asked if I couldn't get a full-body cavity search. He smiled. "We're not there, yet."



  :hysterical:


----------



## ronandjoan

Talent312 said:


> Stole my line.
> Southwest, for one, has reported a significant increase in its air passenger traffic (of course, that may have something to do with its "bags fly free" policy).



USA Today this week reported two other airlines, too, have had increased ridership and are adding more flights.


----------



## ronandjoan

Pat H said:


> On my Thanksgiving trip I went thru security in Savannah, Dayton and Newark. None of them had body scanners or did pat downs. I didn't expect them in Sav or Day but was surprised there was nothing in Newark.



hmmm, surprising since two weeks ago, a lady from Dayton had been terribly patted down since they had no scanner there, not an option.  

However, my husband just flew out of Seattle this afternoon and said the scanner lines were entirely closed off, everything was as before and wands were being used randomly like before.


----------



## Carolinian

I had a pre-cancerous patch of skin removed last year, so there is no way in hell I am going through the Melanoma Machine.

It is curious to me that the Testicular Scrutiny Administration (TSA) responded to National Opt Out Day by themselves opting out of using either of their objectionable techniques that day so that nobody had anything to opt out from.  

When will these morons get politics out of the process and do what the Israelis do successfully - profile.




Amy said:


> I am irritated when I keep hearing the government mention Johns Hopkins  has determined the scanners are safe when JH has contradicted that  statement.  According to this article, "Johns Hopkins University's Applied Physics Laboratory did  independent tests — but only to determine how much radiation the devices  emit, not to examine safety, said Helen Worth, a lab spokeswoman." In another report: "a representative for Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics  Laboratory said the group did not evaluate the advanced imaging machines  for passenger safety. 'That was not our role,' spokeswoman Helen Worth  said. 'We measured the level of radiation, which was then evaluated by  TSA.'
> 
> I read the same letter from the University of California SF scientists (posted via link by Bob) a week ago and was alarmed at the points raised.  The concerns sound extremely reasonable, and I don't understand why the government is not going forward with true independent testing on the effect on the skin by this particular type of technology.   And I want to know if the machine operators are trained to detect and handle malfunctions so folks won't needlessly get zapped with super concentrated harmful radiation.
> 
> I have decided that there is no way I'm allowing my kids to go through the full body scanner until further independent testing demonstrates it is safe.  I also don't want to go through it right now, and my mother, who has a weakened immune system, is planning to pass on the scanner as well.  So we'll just have to deal with the joy of experiencing the extended pat downs.    I've rerouted the return flights for our winter vacation to avoid an airport with the full body scanner.  The full body scanner is coming to my home airport sometime in 2011; if there are no new developments, we are planning driving trips thereafter and spending our vacation dollars only as far as we are willing to drive.


----------



## jlwquilter

Carolinian said:


> I had a pre-cancerous patch of skin removed last year, so there is no way in hell I am going through the Melanoma Machine.
> 
> *It is curious to me that the Testicular Scrutiny Administration (TSA) responded to National Opt Out Day by themselves opting out of using either of their objectionable techniques that day so that nobody had anything to opt out from. *
> 
> When will these morons get politics out of the process and do what the Israelis do successfully - profile.



It is my guess that the TSA didn't want to potentially have thousands of outraged citizens screaming for the halt of the invasive searches after being groped. So they decided to forego critical (ha!) security measures in order to avoid being shut down by a landslide of potential lawsuits. The ACLU is going to have a tough time finding cases from Thanksgiving - and isn't TSA going to cry over that. NOT. Then when they start this crap up in full swing again, they can claim that it's the same thing they were doing "all along" and that thousands of travels "experienced this" during Thanksgiving and no one complained, had issues, etc. the whole thing was/is very political and all about money and power. Once again they clearly showed that "our safety" is NOT what they are about.

Not so very curious at all. The people in charge might be power hungry, insane, etc. but they are very very smart at manipulating the game to win in the end. As are most true psychopaths.


----------



## rickandcindy23

John Cummings said:


> This is not uncommon. They probably feel that the job is not worth more than $10 /hr



If someone is going to give me a physical examination, including a breast check, she deserves more money than $10 per hour.  I would feel better if they hired nurses to do it! 

The reduction in wages was about 2005, so way before the economic turndown.  I think this is a scandal, because if our security was so important after 9/11 to pay TSA people $12 an hour (with increased airport fees on all of our tickets to PAY the TSA for it), then why did they feel it was such an unimportant service that they reduced the pay to TSA employees?  They make more money in fees with increases all the time at airports, yet the TSA, a private enterprise, is allowed to decrease pay to the workers.  Not right!

Why doesn't anyone get that we have people making $10 an hour touching us where we don't want to be touched by anyone but our significant others.

Now y'all have me worried about those scanners and the effects of constant use.  I have had my own health issues and have already been subjected to more radiation than the normal person.  CRAP!  This is going to be like asbestos.  We are going to discover in ten years that this radiation was significant and we can join a lawsuit against the manufacture of these machines, if we just call this lawyer....


----------



## rickandcindy23

How much time do we have to allow for a flight now?  I know DIA/Denver has the scanners and the full-body patdowns.   Is this adding an hour to the time?  I won't go three hours before the flight, so if they need us there that early, they are not going to get cooperation from me.


----------



## Amy

rickandcindy23 said:


> How much time do we have to allow for a flight now?  I know DIA/Denver has the scanners and the full-body patdowns.   Is this adding an hour to the time?  I won't go three hours before the flight, so if they need us there that early, they are not going to get cooperation from me.



I didn't experience any noticeably longer lines when I went through SJC, though that was before the recent awareness about the extent of the extended pat downs.  From what I have read online, the vast majority of travelers are fine with the new scanners because they accept TSA's claims that they are safe, that Johns Hopkins have deemed it safe, the amount of radiation emitted is equivalent to x/1000 of an X-ray emission, etc. *without having any awareness* about the fact that some prominent University of California scientists have voiced detailed concerns about the efficacy claims and the lack of independent scientific data to back up the purported "safety" claim or even the fact that Johns Hopkins have denied the characterization that it evaluated the safety of the scanners' use on people.  I have spoken to many friends and family members who travel frequently and try to keep up with the daily news but were surprised and dismayed when they learn about the concerns raised in that UCSF letter.


----------



## PigsDad

rickandcindy23 said:


> How much time do we have to allow for a flight now?  I know DIA/Denver has the scanners and the full-body patdowns.


I flew out of DIA on Thanksgiving, and honestly, I didn't see any difference to previous trips.  There were only a couple of the body scanner machines, and I didn't get into a line close to them. I went through the normal metal detector and the process was the same as it has been for the last several years.  I flew back from Phoenix, and didn't notice any difference there as well.

Kurt


----------



## Kathleen

FYI

For our friends and family who are opting to drive......

I have installed a large refrigerator carton in the garage. Guests will be required to enter the house by walking through the carton. Their photo will be taken while standing on an old microwave and under a strobe light.

I have discontinued the "Pat Down". It's too time consuming. Two lady friends ended up with bruises. Their husbands pushed them aside to be first. Also, one senior lady insisted on a glass of wine and cigarette!

Happy Holidays to All.

Kathleen


----------



## Kay H

Kathleen,
Do the ladies have to remove their underwire bra first?  I also hope that the microwave oven is turned off. 

 It sounds like you haven't changed a bit. Would love to vacation with you again.  Tell hubby I said hi.


----------



## x3 skier

*OOOHHHHH NOOOOOO Mr Bill!!!!!!*

I just remembered having lived through many years having my feet x-rayed with the old Fluoroscopes used to fit kids shoes back in the dark ages. EGAD!!!!!

OTOH, since I suffered nothing more than athletes foot, I will take my chances with the scanners.

OTOH, maybe 16 years of basketball and other sports may have something more to do with the athletes foot.

Cheers


----------



## Chrisky

rickandcindy23 said:


> If someone is going to give me a physical examination, including a breast check,



As far as I know, and from what I saw in San diego, they do not touch anyone's breasts, but go around them with the back of the hand.


----------



## Chrisky

rickandcindy23 said:


> How much time do we have to allow for a flight now?  I know DIA/Denver has the scanners and the full-body patdowns.   Is this adding an hour to the time?  I won't go three hours before the flight, so if they need us there that early, they are not going to get cooperation from me.



Well, if they are not going to get your cooperation, then you'll probably miss your flight.  When we flew out of Toronto to San Diego, we were supposed to allow 1 1/2 hours to check in and clear US customs.  We had already checked in on-line, but because of numerous flights leaving for several US cities, we made it to our gate with just 15 minutes to spare.  I guess it's a choice you'll have to make when the time comes.


----------



## Kathleen

Hi Kay H,

The microwave is an old dial knob thing. The knob broke years ago and we've gotten used to the hum. We use it like a night light anyway. And with the strobe light,the barefooted cousins are dancing fools!

Bra??? Only on Sundays.

Sam says "Hi".  We'll miss you on the Danube in August. It's Sam, the gnomes and me!

Kathleen


----------



## LynnW

Kathleen you're so funny  :hysterical: 

A little off to topic but I'm so happy you're going on your river cruise. I wish you could join us for the Australia/ New Zealand one in Jan 2012. Say hi to Sam.

Lynn


----------



## capjak

The solution is simple everyone should have to go "au natural".

No radiation, and those pat downs would be so much more fun


----------



## rickandcindy23

Chrisky said:


> Well, if they are not going to get your cooperation, then you'll probably miss your flight.  When we flew out of Toronto to San Diego, we were supposed to allow 1 1/2 hours to check in and clear US customs.  We had already checked in on-line, but because of numerous flights leaving for several US cities, we made it to our gate with just 15 minutes to spare.  I guess it's a choice you'll have to make when the time comes.



I am not going to cooperate with arriving three hours ahead of our flight.  That is what I meant.  We always arrive two hours ahead.


----------



## jlwquilter

What is the point of having scanners and pat downs at all if metal detectors are obviously still "good enough"?? If one person can get in the line fartherst away and avoid the intrusive search, why can't the real terrorist? They all board the same plane (so to speak).

Geez Louise.


----------



## Phoenix

*America benefits*

I want to thank the TSA for causing so much discomfort in the flying proccess. Americans who choose to drive to their destinations will be spending their money at small business's and helping the economy. We found several great small cafes when we recently drove from Phoenix to Hilton Head for our week of golf. It was a wonderful road trip and it will be our way to travel until this nonsense stops which may be never. The United States of America has alot to offer when it comes to vacation destinations. Travel safe and say hello to real America this summer!


----------



## Carolinian

Phoenix said:


> I want to thank the TSA for causing so much discomfort in the flying proccess. Americans who choose to drive to their destinations will be spending their money at small business's and helping the economy. We found several great small cafes when we recently drove from Phoenix to Hilton Head for our week of golf. It was a wonderful road trip and it will be our way to travel until this nonsense stops which may be never. The United States of America has alot to offer when it comes to vacation destinations. Travel safe and say hello to real America this summer!



I have several trips back to the states during the year, in which I will have no choice but to fly.  Otherwise, for travel around Europe, on this side of the pond we do not have either the Melanoma Machine or the groping at airports here, so flying is not a problem.


----------



## hvacrsteve

Phoenix said:


> I want to thank the TSA for causing so much discomfort in the flying proccess. Americans who choose to drive to their destinations will be spending their money at small business's and helping the economy. We found several great small cafes when we recently drove from Phoenix to Hilton Head for our week of golf. It was a wonderful road trip and it will be our way to travel until this nonsense stops which may be never. The United States of America has alot to offer when it comes to vacation destinations. Travel safe and say hello to real America this summer!



Yes, although I had planned on going to CA in 2011, now it will have to wait until I have time to drive 6000 miles, there and back!

This year we will be enjoying the east coast and keeping all those people employed.  We just returned from NYC, it was a great place and a wonderful time.  I experienced no radiation and no fondling from the Testicle Search Association!


----------



## Timeshare Von

I just flew this past weekend, Milwaukee to San Diego.  No full body scans or pat downs out of either city.


----------



## John Cummings

*TSA workers, experts worry about radiation exposure*

This is pretty scary.

http://www.usatoday.com/yourlife/he...ies+(News+-+Top+Stories)&utm_content=My+Yahoo


----------



## Tia

Maybe they need to start using  the little badges that radiology persons wear at work to monitor the issue.


----------



## PigsDad

Tia said:


> Maybe they need to start using  the little badges that radiology persons wear at work to monitor the issue.


It sounds like the flying public need those badges!  

Kurt


----------



## Talent312

I understand that its kind'a cool to go all "chicken-little" on this subject. Perhaps those who think these scanners present a radiation risk should not be flying anyway, since it appears that flying itself presents a far greater source of radiation...
---------------------
The Statement:
John Pistole, head of the TSA, offered the agency perspective on Nov. 16, in an interview on CNN: The "radiation coming from those machines are equivalent to about three minutes' worth of air travel by anybody, say, at 30,000 feet," he said.

Are those claims credible?

The Ruling:
Scientists at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory found that the effective dose per screening was 1.58 microrems of radiation. And a researcher at the National Institute of Standards and Technology said an adult would be exposed to 2.4 microrems of radiation per scan.

Pistole was referring to exposure to naturally occurring radiation during airplane travel. The radiation level varies, and a key component is altitude. People on an airplane receive more radiation than people on the ground. 

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration says a person flying at 30,000 feet will be exposed to 285 to 406 microrems of radiation an hour, or between 4.75 and 6.77 microrems per minute of flight....

This fact check isn't declaring TSA's new scanners safe. We're just looking at Pistole's claim that their radiation is "equivalent to about three minutes' worth of air travel by anybody, say, at 30,000 feet." The numbers back that up. So we rate his statement True. -- _St. Petersburg Times_
-----------------
_And some thought this thread was dead._


----------



## Amy

Talent312 said:


> I understand that its kind'a cool to go all "chicken-little" on this subject. Perhaps those who think these scanners present a radiation risk should not be flying anyway, since it appears that flying itself presents a far greater source of radiation..._._



Just curious, did you read the concerns raised by UCSF scientists, outlined in the letter posted online, the link to which is posted above in this thread?

Edited to add:  Here is the link


----------



## Carolinian

Amy said:


> Just curious, did you read the concerns raised by UCSF scientists, outlined in the letter posted online, the link to which is posted above in this thread?
> 
> Edited to add:  Here is the link



Apparently not.  He just seems to be parroting the TSA's pablum.

If he wants to go through the Melanoma Machine, he is welcome to it!


----------



## beejaybeeohio

*Yet another instance..*

How many times have we endured the serious consequences of products/pharmaceuticals being released to the public before adequate safety research has been conducted?

Think Thalidomide, DES, Avandia, tanning booths, Deet, Agent Orange, etc., etc. and now the body scanners.  I found the paper authored by the UCSF doctors to be eye-opening, starting with point #1 concerning folks 65+.  We just won't know the potential for serious side effects until it's too late.  

As a casual traveler, I wasn't too worried about the reportedly limited dosage these machines emit, until I read this article.  I am personally alarmed about the whole skin exposure issue since melanoma and squamous cell cancer has affected my immediate family.

I believe that those of us individual citizens who are concerned about the scanners (and body "pat"-downs) have to speak out.  Yes, I want to feel safe in the air, but I also want to feel safe from the procedures in place to get me to the plane.


----------



## winger

We have already decide not to do any air travel until at least 2013 (maybe late 2012?) - hopefuly this gives the TSA/feds some time to evaluate the in-effectiveness of this latest circus act and pull it. 

I wonder if Profiling is so unpoliticle, maybe they should just increase the radiation levels of these machines so they can see INSIDE a person...the alternative being a FULL strip down search including inside cavities!?! The gov is just doing a halfas5ed job with this latest attempt - it is all show, no results.


----------



## jlwquilter

I have been outspoken on this thread regarding my position. Those in favor of the changes aren't going to change their minds until proof of the danger of the machines is shown or a loved one of theirs is digitally raped at the security check point. Just remember that if the reports of safety were all that the TSA were reporting them to be, they'd be printing those reports on the front page of newpapers or on the web. But instead they are refusing to share those reports and those that have leaked out are full of balckout lines. In additon, they are reporting results out of context or partially to show them in a positive fashion. And they have said that several planned tests were not even conducted at all for this reason or that. Yep, makes me feel they are on the up and up. Not.

For our situation we have just cancelled our trip to Cancun this coming March. So we have voted with our feet as well. We have exchanges planned for July that require flying. I am holding off buying plane fares in the hope that this joke of pretending to make me safe by exposing me to unsafe conditions (both the machines and to strangers groping me) stops.


----------



## kasteer

Talent312 said:


> I understand that its kind'a cool to go all "chicken-little" on this subject. Perhaps those who think these scanners present a radiation risk should not be flying anyway, since it appears that flying itself presents a far greater source of radiation...
> ---------------------
> The Statement:
> John Pistole, head of the TSA, offered the agency perspective on Nov. 16, in an interview on CNN: The "radiation coming from those machines are equivalent to about three minutes' worth of air travel by anybody, say, at 30,000 feet," he said.
> 
> Are those claims credible?
> 
> The Ruling:
> Scientists at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory found that the effective dose per screening was 1.58 microrems of radiation. And a researcher at the National Institute of Standards and Technology said an adult would be exposed to 2.4 microrems of radiation per scan.
> 
> Pistole was referring to exposure to naturally occurring radiation during airplane travel. The radiation level varies, and a key component is altitude. People on an airplane receive more radiation than people on the ground.
> 
> The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration says a person flying at 30,000 feet will be exposed to 285 to 406 microrems of radiation an hour, or between 4.75 and 6.77 microrems per minute of flight....
> 
> This fact check isn't declaring TSA's new scanners safe. We're just looking at Pistole's claim that their radiation is "equivalent to about three minutes' worth of air travel by anybody, say, at 30,000 feet." The numbers back that up. So we rate his statement True. -- _St. Petersburg Times_
> -----------------
> _And some thought this thread was dead._



Regardless of the levels...  There is a difference between forcing radiation on us by the TSA, versus voluntarily flying on our own free will.  Also, given the fact that we get radiation when flying, now the total dose for a flight is even HIGHER thanks to the TSA's machines.  If one alone wasn't alarming, now you get even more... and if you refuse, you get the feel-up.


----------



## Beaglemom3

Don't forget...........you can get *both* even if you don't decline either one.


----------



## SDKfam08

mbeach89 said:


> Depends who is doing the full body pat-down....just sayin'     :rofl:



haha good point, very good point.  I bet this wouldn't be harldy an issue if they just hired hot TSA girls for all the checkpoints!


----------



## Bwolf

SDKfam08 said:


> haha good point, very good point.  I bet this wouldn't be harldy an issue if they just hired hot TSA girls for all the checkpoints!




Only if there is equal opportunity groping and feeling.


----------



## Blues

Auditors question TSA's use of and spending on technology


----------



## Carolinian

Here is another example of how the TSA has its head up - well, you know the place they want to feel you!

http://www.salon.com/news/transport...ech/col/smith/2010/12/27/pilot_youtube_videos


----------



## AwayWeGo

*Is That Your iPod Or Are You Just Happy To See Me ?*




Bwolf said:


> Only if there is equal opportunity groping and feeling.


I don't know. 

Have you seen anybody in a TSA uniform that you'd like to grope back ? 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## Talent312

AwayWeGo said:


> Have you seen anybody in a TSA uniform that you'd like to grope back?



I hate doing anything to keep this thread alive, but I have a proposal...
If we can't return the favor to TSA agents, how about our fellow passengers?

Once a passenger is patted-down and determined not to be a terrorist, he or she should then be allowed to select another passenger in line to pat-down themselves. Thus, we'd be doing each other, and TSA could supervise.


----------



## UWSurfer

I know a TSA agent.  They had to learn how to perform the pat down, in a class, on each other.   Not exactly a fun time for them either!  Really.



Talent312 said:


> I hate doing anything to keep this thread alive, but I have a proposal...
> If we can't return the favor to TSA agents, how about our fellow passengers?
> 
> Once a passenger is patted-down and determined not to be a terrorist, he or she should then be allowed to select another passenger in line to pat-down themselves. Thus, we'd be doing each other, and TSA could supervise.


----------



## Bwolf

AwayWeGo said:


> I don't know.
> 
> Have you seen anybody in a TSA uniform that you'd like to grope back ?
> 
> -- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​



Comprehension is fundamental.  Here is the post and my response, together again.

 	Quote:
 	 	 		 			 				 					Originally Posted by *SDKfam08* 

 
_haha good point, very good point.  I  bet this wouldn't be harldy an issue if they just hired hot TSA girls  for all the checkpoints!_


Only if there is equal opportunity groping and feeling.


----------

