Pilot to TSA: 'No Groping Me and No Naked Photos'

[Quantum Windbag]

The imagery is either backscatter or millimeter technology (depending on which model scanner is used). It's not a strip search. The images posted on the internet by the media had to be enhanced. The TSA officers doesn't see an image with the quality that is shown by the news media.

It's easier to believe that this is a nude-o-scope than it is to deal with the facts. Less thinking involved, more emotional, better sensationalism.

Really?

Did you know that the main thing that delayed the depolyment of this technology was the fact that it is much to detailed? That the manufacturers actually had to add software to degrade the images, not enhance them? That the images being shown by the media are not enhanced, they are actually views that go through less filtering than is specified in the specs. If something fails on those machines, the image is actually going to be clearer, not blurrier.

I would have a lot less trouble believing people like you if you did not try to feed me a bunch of crap by trying to claim the technology is actually worse than it is.

 

[Toome]

The imagery is either backscatter or millimeter technology (depending on which model scanner is used). It's not a strip search. The images posted on the internet by the media had to be enhanced. The TSA officers doesn't see an image with the quality that is shown by the news media.

It's easier to believe that this is a nude-o-scope than it is to deal with the facts. Less thinking involved, more emotional, better sensationalism.

Really?

Did you know that the main thing that delayed the depolyment of this technology was the fact that it is much to detailed? That the manufacturers actually had to add software to degrade the images, not enhance them? That the images being shown by the media are not enhanced, they are actually views that go through less filtering than is specified in the specs. If something fails on those machines, the image is actually going to be clearer, not blurrier.

I would have a lot less trouble believing people like you if you did not try to feed me a bunch of crap by trying to claim the technology is actually worse than it is.

The L3 Communications model imager and Rapiscan model imager have filters built in. TSA did not deploy them until those filters were built in. The deployment was delayed because of the reconstruction required to accommodate the physical layout requirements for the imaging systems. Depending on the model, some require extensive reconstruction.

If you want to believe that the images will reveal parts of your body that you don't want anyone to see, go right ahead. Your belief does not change the facts one bit.

 

[Sunshine]

It want part of the bargain prior to 9-11.

That is true, and in the 1960s I understand that you didn't even have to show ID to board a plane just a ticket.

Surely you agree that there are valid reasons for things to change.

Yes and no. Im my opinion they need to profile. Why search a baby and let someone who looks shifty pass through? If someone wants to accompany someone to the gate or pick someone up from the gate...so long as they go through the screening process they should be allowed to do that. I have seen far to many women with babies and elderly having to deal alone.

Speaking as someone who fly's quite a bit, I feel that what they do is mostly ineffectual. I have seen the do the DUMBEST SHIT. I know they pick women out to "search" ...and yes i have watched them with heads together ....yeah HER...and low and behold...she is getting patted down...searched....and if available..put through the scanner.

Is that abuse of the system..sure. BUT they do it. Little people with a bit of power to MAKE you comply. You want to fly..sorry hun..your getting grouped.

You want security, how about his.

If Disney can biometricly scan people for entrance to amusement parks...the the TSA should damn well do it too.

What they do is not only ineffectual it creates more chaos. I have never seen so much chaos as I saw in JFK in May of 2009. What a mess!

 

[Toome]

this story is about the PILOT of the AIRPLANE. He has gone through extensive backround checks and security training. Surely there must be a way to get such valuable and highly specialized work group members expedited through the screening process. There is no reason that a TSO should be in a position of authority over a vetted pilot.

1. You're right. TSA clearly hasn't addressed the issue of how pilots ought to be screened or exempted from these imaging technologies. That's not the TSO's fault. That's TSA's fault. The TSO is following procedure.

2. You're wrong. The pilot is expected to conduct himself in a professional manner. He clearly did not. While I don't disagree that pilots ought to be given special consideration, there's a right way to go about it and a wrong way to go about. This pilot essentially threw a temper tantrum at the checkpoint and then threw a cyber tantrum with his little blog. Pretty unprofessional conduct in my book, especially with his unfounded fears about the imaging technology being posted as if they had any credibility at all. In the end, this pilot will have to live with the resultant fear he managed to stir up.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The imagery is either backscatter or millimeter technology (depending on which model scanner is used). It's not a strip search. The images posted on the internet by the media had to be enhanced. The TSA officers doesn't see an image with the quality that is shown by the news media.

It's easier to believe that this is a nude-o-scope than it is to deal with the facts. Less thinking involved, more emotional, better sensationalism.

Really?

Did you know that the main thing that delayed the depolyment of this technology was the fact that it is much to detailed? That the manufacturers actually had to add software to degrade the images, not enhance them? That the images being shown by the media are not enhanced, they are actually views that go through less filtering than is specified in the specs. If something fails on those machines, the image is actually going to be clearer, not blurrier.

I would have a lot less trouble believing people like you if you did not try to feed me a bunch of crap by trying to claim the technology is actually worse than it is.

The L3 Communications model imager and Rapiscan model imager have filters built in. TSA did not deploy them until those filters were built in. The deployment was delayed because of the reconstruction required to accommodate the physical layout requirements for the imaging systems. Depending on the model, some require extensive reconstruction.

If you want to believe that the images will reveal parts of your body that you don't want anyone to see, go right ahead. Your belief does not change the facts one bit.

I thought I said that. My question is, what makes those filters fool proof? We have already seen that the safeguards against storing the images are not all that safe. Then we have seen cell phone pics of screen pics that show more than the government says they show. You expect me to believe that these low resolution of filtered imageas are enhanced, and then degraded again, in order to make the images show more than they actually do. I prefer to apply Occam's Razor and believe the simpler explanation, that people are lying to me. It isn't like the government has never lied to me before.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

2. You're wrong. The pilot is expected to conduct himself in a professional manner. He clearly did not. While I don't disagree that pilots ought to be given special consideration, there's a right way to go about it and a wrong way to go about. This pilot essentially threw a temper tantrum at the checkpoint and then threw a cyber tantrum with his little blog. Pretty unprofessional conduct in my book, especially with his unfounded fears about the imaging technology being posted as if they had any credibility at all. In the end, this pilot will have to live with the resultant fear he managed to stir up.

This is where I get confused. Why is it unprofessional to assert your civil rights? If he insulted the officers you might be able to claim he was unprofessional, but simply refusing to comply with inane directives is not something I would call unprofessional. Maybe that is because I am not brainwashed into thinking the government is always right.

 

[ConHog]

2. You're wrong. The pilot is expected to conduct himself in a professional manner. He clearly did not. While I don't disagree that pilots ought to be given special consideration, there's a right way to go about it and a wrong way to go about. This pilot essentially threw a temper tantrum at the checkpoint and then threw a cyber tantrum with his little blog. Pretty unprofessional conduct in my book, especially with his unfounded fears about the imaging technology being posted as if they had any credibility at all. In the end, this pilot will have to live with the resultant fear he managed to stir up.

This is where I get confused. Why is it unprofessional to assert your civil rights? If he insulted the officers you might be able to claim he was unprofessional, but simply refusing to comply with inane directives is not something I would call unprofessional. Maybe that is because I am not brainwashed into thinking the government is always right.

Posting on a blog moved it into unprofessional conduct IMO.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

If I may ask, what exactly is the point of having the pilots go through security screening? They are about to strap themselves into the controls of a far bigger weapon than they could hide under their clothes.

Wasn't there a pilot for EgyptAir that nosedived his plane into the Atlantic a few years ago? What would have been the point if they prevented him from taking a cigarette lighter aboard in his pocket?

 

[ConHog]

If I may ask, what exactly is the point of having the pilots go through security screening? They are about to strap themselves into the controls of a far bigger weapon than they could hide under their clothes.

Wasn't there a pilot for EgyptAir that nosedived his plane into the Atlantic a few years ago? What would have been the point if they prevented him from taking a cigarette lighter aboard in his pocket?

I would imagine the goal is two fold.

1. Make sure nobody secretly stashed anything on the pilot or in his luggage
2. Make sure the pilot is who he is supposed to be.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

If I may ask, what exactly is the point of having the pilots go through security screening? They are about to strap themselves into the controls of a far bigger weapon than they could hide under their clothes.

Wasn't there a pilot for EgyptAir that nosedived his plane into the Atlantic a few years ago? What would have been the point if they prevented him from taking a cigarette lighter aboard in his pocket?

I would imagine the goal is two fold.

1. Make sure nobody secretly stashed anything on the pilot or in his luggage
2. Make sure the pilot is who he is supposed to be.

Point 1 would be covered by the magnetometer and the x-ray machine.
Point 2 would be covered by his airline ID and his photo ID.

What would the virtual strip search add to keep the pilot from forcing the plane down into the ground or the ocean?

 

[ConHog]

If I may ask, what exactly is the point of having the pilots go through security screening? They are about to strap themselves into the controls of a far bigger weapon than they could hide under their clothes.

Wasn't there a pilot for EgyptAir that nosedived his plane into the Atlantic a few years ago? What would have been the point if they prevented him from taking a cigarette lighter aboard in his pocket?

I would imagine the goal is two fold.

1. Make sure nobody secretly stashed anything on the pilot or in his luggage
2. Make sure the pilot is who he is supposed to be.

Point 1 would be covered by the magnetometer and the x-ray machine.
Point 2 would be covered by his airline ID and his photo ID.

What would the virtual strip search add to keep the pilot from forcing the plane down into the ground or the ocean?

Who knows? I'm no expert on airline security, nor are you. So it's pointless for us to debate it.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

I would imagine the goal is two fold.

1. Make sure nobody secretly stashed anything on the pilot or in his luggage
2. Make sure the pilot is who he is supposed to be.

Point 1 would be covered by the magnetometer and the x-ray machine.
Point 2 would be covered by his airline ID and his photo ID.

What would the virtual strip search add to keep the pilot from forcing the plane down into the ground or the ocean?

Who knows? I'm no expert on airline security, nor are you. So it's pointless for us to debate it.

I may not be an expert, but I know stupidity when I see it.

I have to pick up visiting executives from the airport all the time. When I see a STL police officer walk thru the security machines wearing a sidearm not set off the machines, yet a young, well endowed girl has to submit to a pat-down (with 5 TSA goons watching) because she's wearing a bracelet, then I know it's nothing but a planned circus.

And I see this 3 out of 5 times I am waiting. I tried to get a video of it once, but one of the "Thousands Standing Around" made me delete my camera or he would have had me arrested as a "threat to national security". I only did it because my senior VP does not like taking cabs.

 

[ConHog]

Point 1 would be covered by the magnetometer and the x-ray machine.
Point 2 would be covered by his airline ID and his photo ID.

What would the virtual strip search add to keep the pilot from forcing the plane down into the ground or the ocean?

Who knows? I'm no expert on airline security, nor are you. So it's pointless for us to debate it.

I may not be an expert, but I know stupidity when I see it.

I have to pick up visiting executives from the airport all the time. When I see a STL police officer walk thru the security machines wearing a sidearm not set off the machines, yet a young, well endowed girl has to submit to a pat-down (with 5 TSA goons watching) because she's wearing a bracelet, then I know it's nothing but a planned circus.

And I see this 3 out of 5 times I am waiting. I tried to get a video of it once, but one of the "Thousands Standing Around" made me delete my camera or he would have had me arrested as a "threat to national security". I only did it because my senior VP does not like taking cabs.

I simply don't believe your claims.

1. Side arms absolutely set off the alarms if you walk through them, t hat's why there are corridors for LEO to walk around the X ray Machines.

2. I know it happens but not 3 out of 5 times that you go to the airport do you see that kind of violation.

I spent several months working airport security after 9/11 and know at least that much.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Who knows? I'm no expert on airline security, nor are you. So it's pointless for us to debate it.

I may not be an expert, but I know stupidity when I see it.

I have to pick up visiting executives from the airport all the time. When I see a STL police officer walk thru the security machines wearing a sidearm not set off the machines, yet a young, well endowed girl has to submit to a pat-down (with 5 TSA goons watching) because she's wearing a bracelet, then I know it's nothing but a planned circus.

And I see this 3 out of 5 times I am waiting. I tried to get a video of it once, but one of the "Thousands Standing Around" made me delete my camera or he would have had me arrested as a "threat to national security". I only did it because my senior VP does not like taking cabs.

I simply don't believe your claims.

1. Side arms absolutely set off the alarms if you walk through them, t hat's why there are corridors for LEO to walk around the X ray Machines.

2. I know it happens but not 3 out of 5 times that you go to the airport do you see that kind of violation.

I spent several months working airport security after 9/11 and know at least that much.

Well, you need to spend some time at the East Terminal at Lambert.

The cops definitely walk through the metal detectors, specifically the left most machine. Even though the lights on top of the machine are lit, they never go off. Usually this machine is not manned in the morning.

And I am constantly seeing young girls setting off the magnetometers. One instance specifically comes to mind. The head of our IT dept was coming to town to set up a new scanner system. After I met him, and we were walking out, I saw this really beautiful blond coming up to the machine. I stopped and said, hey **** watch this, she's going to get frisked. Sure enough, she set off the machine, and all eyes were on her. After going over her with the wand, making sure she raised her arms well out to the sides, they found she had a thin chain around her waist. **** asked how I knew it would happen, which my reply was, "did you see her chest?""

On a personal note, on my last business trip, I was almost strip searched over a paper clip that set off the machine. I forgot that I had one in my checkbook, and the Totally Stupid Assmonkey said I would be stripped if they didn't find what was setting the machine off. After he found it, I asked if I could keep it, or if they were afraid I would clip the pilot's flight plans together.

They kept it. Must have been on the prohibited list. They missed the lighter in my pocket, though.

 

[ConHog]

I may not be an expert, but I know stupidity when I see it.

I have to pick up visiting executives from the airport all the time. When I see a STL police officer walk thru the security machines wearing a sidearm not set off the machines, yet a young, well endowed girl has to submit to a pat-down (with 5 TSA goons watching) because she's wearing a bracelet, then I know it's nothing but a planned circus.

And I see this 3 out of 5 times I am waiting. I tried to get a video of it once, but one of the "Thousands Standing Around" made me delete my camera or he would have had me arrested as a "threat to national security". I only did it because my senior VP does not like taking cabs.

I simply don't believe your claims.

1. Side arms absolutely set off the alarms if you walk through them, t hat's why there are corridors for LEO to walk around the X ray Machines.

2. I know it happens but not 3 out of 5 times that you go to the airport do you see that kind of violation.

I spent several months working airport security after 9/11 and know at least that much.

Well, you need to spend some time at the East Terminal at Lambert.

The cops definitely walk through the metal detectors, specifically the left most machine. Even though the lights on top of the machine are lit, they never go off. Usually this machine is not manned in the morning.

And I am constantly seeing young girls setting off the magnetometers. One instance specifically comes to mind. The head of our IT dept was coming to town to set up a new scanner system. After I met him, and we were walking out, I saw this really beautiful blond coming up to the machine. I stopped and said, hey **** watch this, she's going to get frisked. Sure enough, she set off the machine, and all eyes were on her. After going over her with the wand, making sure she raised her arms well out to the sides, they found she had a thin chain around her waist. **** asked how I knew it would happen, which my reply was, "did you see her chest?""

On a personal note, on my last business trip, I was almost strip searched over a paper clip that set off the machine. I forgot that I had one in my checkbook, and the Totally Stupid Assmonkey said I would be stripped if they didn't find what was setting the machine off. After he found it, I asked if I could keep it, or if they were afraid I would clip the pilot's flight plans together.

They kept it. Must have been on the prohibited list. They missed the lighter in my pocket, though.

A paper clip did not set off one the machines. Good grief , no reason to tell crazy lies.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

I simply don't believe your claims.

1. Side arms absolutely set off the alarms if you walk through them, t hat's why there are corridors for LEO to walk around the X ray Machines.

2. I know it happens but not 3 out of 5 times that you go to the airport do you see that kind of violation.

I spent several months working airport security after 9/11 and know at least that much.

Well, you need to spend some time at the East Terminal at Lambert.

The cops definitely walk through the metal detectors, specifically the left most machine. Even though the lights on top of the machine are lit, they never go off. Usually this machine is not manned in the morning.

And I am constantly seeing young girls setting off the magnetometers. One instance specifically comes to mind. The head of our IT dept was coming to town to set up a new scanner system. After I met him, and we were walking out, I saw this really beautiful blond coming up to the machine. I stopped and said, hey **** watch this, she's going to get frisked. Sure enough, she set off the machine, and all eyes were on her. After going over her with the wand, making sure she raised her arms well out to the sides, they found she had a thin chain around her waist. **** asked how I knew it would happen, which my reply was, "did you see her chest?""

On a personal note, on my last business trip, I was almost strip searched over a paper clip that set off the machine. I forgot that I had one in my checkbook, and the Totally Stupid Assmonkey said I would be stripped if they didn't find what was setting the machine off. After he found it, I asked if I could keep it, or if they were afraid I would clip the pilot's flight plans together.

They kept it. Must have been on the prohibited list. They missed the lighter in my pocket, though.

A paper clip did not set off one the machines. Good grief , no reason to tell crazy lies.

Oh yes it did. I will swear on my father's and my brother's graves that it absolutely did happen.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

2. You're wrong. The pilot is expected to conduct himself in a professional manner. He clearly did not. While I don't disagree that pilots ought to be given special consideration, there's a right way to go about it and a wrong way to go about. This pilot essentially threw a temper tantrum at the checkpoint and then threw a cyber tantrum with his little blog. Pretty unprofessional conduct in my book, especially with his unfounded fears about the imaging technology being posted as if they had any credibility at all. In the end, this pilot will have to live with the resultant fear he managed to stir up.

This is where I get confused. Why is it unprofessional to assert your civil rights? If he insulted the officers you might be able to claim he was unprofessional, but simply refusing to comply with inane directives is not something I would call unprofessional. Maybe that is because I am not brainwashed into thinking the government is always right.

Posting on a blog moved it into unprofessional conduct IMO.

Really?

Lawyers post blogs all the time, are they all unprofessional? He also posted on a forum frequented by pilots, does that make him a troll?

Well, today was the day

Does the fact that quite a few pilots agree with him make it more professional, or less?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I would imagine the goal is two fold.

1. Make sure nobody secretly stashed anything on the pilot or in his luggage
2. Make sure the pilot is who he is supposed to be.

Somebody secretly stashed something on the pilot? Maybe they hid explosives in his underwear and he didn't notice?

 

[Rat in the Hat]

I would imagine the goal is two fold.

1. Make sure nobody secretly stashed anything on the pilot or in his luggage
2. Make sure the pilot is who he is supposed to be.

Somebody secretly stashed something on the pilot? Maybe they hid explosives in his underwear and he didn't notice?

Or maybe they hid C-4 in his sneakers, and are planning to force him to light a match.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Point 1 would be covered by the magnetometer and the x-ray machine.
Point 2 would be covered by his airline ID and his photo ID.

What would the virtual strip search add to keep the pilot from forcing the plane down into the ground or the ocean?

Who knows? I'm no expert on airline security, nor are you. So it's pointless for us to debate it.

I may not be an expert, but I know stupidity when I see it.

I have to pick up visiting executives from the airport all the time. When I see a STL police officer walk thru the security machines wearing a sidearm not set off the machines, yet a young, well endowed girl has to submit to a pat-down (with 5 TSA goons watching) because she's wearing a bracelet, then I know it's nothing but a planned circus.

And I see this 3 out of 5 times I am waiting. I tried to get a video of it once, but one of the "Thousands Standing Around" made me delete my camera or he would have had me arrested as a "threat to national security". I only did it because my senior VP does not like taking cabs.

They pull that national security scam a lot. Quite a few photographers are challenging them, and winning.

You Can Photograph That Federal Building: Civil Liberties Union and Homeland Security Reach Agreement - NYTimes.com

Not that I advise you to go to jail on company time, but eventually they will learn that they do not have unlimited power.