Lastest TSA changes

[LeannL]

For those that did not catch it on NPR today, the TSA is experimenting with a new screening method at Boston-Logan airport. They are now interviewing every passenger prior to boarding the plane. I don't know exactly when in the process the interviews will occur but if it is like Europe, the interview occurs at the gate.

The purpose of the interview is to find people who's behavior is "not normal" meaning that a person is nervous about certain questions being asked. An example was sweating when it was cool. Yikes! With all that I have to wear to look feminine, I am sure I am sweating.

Here is a link to the story:
http://www.npr.org/2011/08/16/139643652/next-in-line-for-the-tsa-a-thorough-chat-down

So for those of us who fly pretty, are you willing to have a one-on-one conversation with a TSA agent every time you fly? Would you start the conversation by telling the agent you are transgendered?

Leann

PS As an aside, if you didn't the NPR story, they had a specialist on the phone with the interviewer. He asked her to pick an even number between 50 and 100. He then proceeded to rapidly count from 50 up. When he got to 68 he stopped and told her it was the number she had chosen. He was right. He did it by listening to her breathing and he heard a slight click just prior to his saying 68. It was impressive given it was over the phone!

[Christinedreamer]

Most of the TSA agents I have dealt with are lucky to get their badge on right side up. Hopefully TSA brought in some intelligent and properly trained agents from Israel. THEY know how to handle security.

[Amber_Lynn]

Most of the TSA agents I have dealt with are lucky to get their badge on right side up.
LOL so true! I heard it wasn't interviews for every passenger, but they would look for suspicious behavior then engage the suspects in a dialog. I can't believe it would be every passenger, they can't even get everyone through the check points without creating a bottle neck.

[kimmy p]

Of they start interviewing everyone boarding a plane then those who fly might want to start arriving at the airport 6 hours early. It'll take them that long for the interviews.....

[VioletJourney]

What happened recently to cause them to change their procedure? Was the old method not good enough?

[kellycan27]

That might separate the men from the girls.:heehee:

[Loni]

does this mean if it is 75F in the terminal i would be profiled? i can handle cold but not heat. at 80F i am sitting in front of the air with a cold drink.
but i love getting outside in 50F short sleeves, no jacket, and a short skirt.

[LeannL]

I heard it wasn't interviews for every passenger, but they would look for suspicious behavior then engage the suspects in a dialog. I can't believe it would be every passenger, they can't even get everyone through the check points without creating a bottle neck.

I was led to believe as I listen to the story (admittedly while driving so I might have missed something) that it would be everyone. When I have gone through Amsterdam, they do interview everyone. They had a crew of 6 to 10 interviewers going from gate to gate as boarding time approached. They had small podiums that they would stand behind. After you approached a podium, they would take your ticket and ID. Then they proceeded to ask you a bunch of questions about your trip, computer and whatnot. So the TSA could do it if they doubled the number of agents working.


What happened recently to cause them to change their procedure? Was the old method not good enough?

I think it is all about continuing to escalate the scrutiny to keep the bad guys on edge. The story mentions that, while they haven't found any terrorists, they have caught a bunch of fugitives.


That might separate the men from the girls.:heehee:

LOL!

Leann

PS. I don't think that this will stop me but we will see when/if they institute this everywhere.

[PretzelGirl]

We can probably avoid trashing TSA agents. I know we have at least one here.

I think if I ever fly pretty (my flying days are few and far between these days) then I will do it with the expectation that I will be answering questions from TSA. After having flown regular in the past, I never plan on not talking, being wanded, etc.....

[WendyH]

This is why I never fly anymore; the invasion of personal space just gets more and more egregious, and I for one don't feel any safer for it. I'm waiting for the day when each passenger is anesthetized, stripped naked, and stacked in the cargo hold for the duration of the flight. :P

[Eryn]

I tend to agree with Wendy. Our right to travel unmolested is gone and I will avoid air travel in the future.

The terrorists won as soon as they caused the government to punish its own citizens.

[Chickhe]

Is some nutso terrorrist going to be calm and collected or sweating bullets? ...my guess calm and collected because they -believe- they are doing something good. Like with CDing, if you beleive you are normal, feel and act appropriately you wil not be noticed, but start looking around, feeling nervous and you are going to attract attention. I have my doubts they will catch the correct suspects. Except, in a one-on-one interaction you might notice some bad guy with an attitude or a ticking sound coming from their chest... gee wiz. Anyone who travels dressed is going to need a thick skin, but on the bright side, you will probably learn the interaction is not so bad after doing it once or twice.

[nuwanda]

I think a conversation is better than them feeling you up!

[sandra-leigh]

... and I suppose none of us have ever been nervous because we were either bringing porn back or traveling with the intent to (amongst other things) buy porn? Or because we have a dress hidden it in our luggage because we aren't Out to one of our traveling companions?

\

[Diane Smith]

I'm waiting for the day when each passenger is anesthetized, stripped naked, and stacked in the cargo hold for the duration of the flight. :P

I think that would be a lot easier and more restful for the passengers than putting up with the other hassles of traveling these days -- I'm all for it!

- Diane

[VioletJourney]

I think it is all about continuing to escalate the scrutiny to keep the bad guys on edge. The story mentions that, while they haven't found any terrorists, they have caught a bunch of fugitives.
So basically now they're too lazy to even find a scapegoat when they want to take more of our rights?

[LeannL]

I think a conversation is better than them feeling you up!

I am afraid that the worng conversation will lead to "them feeling you up"!

Leann

[TxKimberly]

It's not about to slow me down any. I had noticed that the TSA everywhere has started asking you to say your name while they are looking at your ID. That's a giggle when you have a boy name but look like a woman.
"What's your name please?"
"Matthew. . . "
:D

[Eryn]

So basically now they're too lazy to even find a scapegoat when they want to take more of our rights?

Remember, it's not about actually doing something, it's about creating the appearance of doing something.

[sandra-leigh]

"The people have always some champion whom they set over them and nurse into greatness. ...This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when he first appears he is a protector."

Plato, 565-C

[kellycan27]

I have a question you people in the " I am not flying anymore" camp. Here you are complaing that the government is taking away your rights, yet they aren't taking away nearly as many as you are willing to give up. Isn't this like "cutting off your nose to spite your face? And for the person who said that the terrorists beat us... They beat you, not me..... because I am going to continue to live my life ..even if it has a minor inconvienience now and then. Maybe.. just maybe there will be a lot of people giving up flying which would make the lines shorter, the planes less crowded, and my interview with the TSA get finished faster so I can get down to the Bahamas and sit on a white sandy beach overlooking azure seas while sipping a tropical drink.:heehee:

[KylieA]

What happened recently to cause them to change their procedure? Was the old method not good enough?

Probably nothing. Just a a continual changing of tactics to keep the terrorists on their feet.

I was just looking at my latest business trip. Boston --> Dayton with a return of Cincinnati --> Boston. Will they count that as two one way trips, and kick us out for extra inspections. I visiting relatives in Cincinnati when my grandfather died. Booked as Cincinnati --> Orlando, with a Orlando --> Boston return. Both counted as one ways. Pulled out for extra inspections both times.


This is why I never fly anymore; the invasion of personal space just gets more and more egregious, and I for one don't feel any safer for it. I'm waiting for the day when each passenger is anesthetized, stripped naked, and stacked in the cargo hold for the duration of the flight. :P

The airlines would love that. Anything to fit more people in the airplane. I remember flying to Ireland on a charter airline(cheap) 747. They placed the seats so close that knees where firmly rammed into the seat ahead of me. I'm only 5'7". I don't how anyone over 6' would fit.

[Schatten Lupus]

And for the person who said that the terrorists beat us... They beat you, not me..... because I am going to continue to live my life ..even if it has a minor inconvienience now and then.
The terrorist did indeed win. They scared the majority of Americans into not giving a second thought when the Patriot Act was passed, and all under the guise of "if you don't have anything to hide, then why worry?" And of course Benjamin Franklin put it best.

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
In all honesty what many in the TSA have done, in the name of "security," would land jail and prison time for anyone else as well as having to register as a sex offender (Anyone else see the video where they reached a few inches inside a little girls pants?). And interviews are just a bad idea because some people get nervous about flying. As someone else pointed out, anyone who is planning an attack will probably seem very calm and collected and get in with no problem, while someone who is terrified of heights will be getting harassed for being shaky and having the sweats.

[Jenny Gurl]

Not a problem for me. I haven't flown since the ridiculous over reaction to 911. Seal the cockpit doors, let the passengers take care of the problem. Other countries don't go through all this, neither should we. I have not flown since. The terrorists won indeed, they convinced us to surrender our freedoms instead of having someone take them by force. Smart group. As far as the new tactic, someone who has decided to die in the crash is not going to get nervous talking to someone at the gate.

[Paula_56]

I'm waiting for the day when each passenger is anesthetized, stripped naked, and stacked in the cargo hold for the duration of the flight. :P

Will they charge extra for that?

[AllieSF]

I agree with what Kellycan said. If you don't want to fly, don't. Stay at home and don't go out in your car. You may be stopped for a sobriety check. Don't take a train because I think that they are starting security checks there too. No if more people had this attitude, there would be less crowds in those places that I do go to by train and plane and car.

[Eryn]

I agree with what Kellycan said. If you don't want to fly, don't. Stay at home and don't go out in your car. You may be stopped for a sobriety check.

Hmm, you're using the "Two Wrongs Make a Right" argument? Most people don't buy that one!

Notice how TSA "inspections" have now become interrogations? You now have to justify your reason to travel to the government? That is tantamount to requiring a travel permit!

Notice how "Sobriety Checkpoints" have now become "Sobreity, driver's license, registration and insurance" checkpoints. There's a lot more money to be made in fining people for administrative violations than in catching a couple of drunks.

American's rights are being eroded every time law enforcement adds another facet to their already egrarious violations of the 4th amendment.

[Schatten Lupus]

American's rights are being eroded every time law enforcement adds another facet to their already egrarious violations of the 4th amendment.
Here in Indiana, the courts decided that we do not have the right to resist unlawful police entry, essentially throwing the entire 4th amendment out the window. It seems more often than not, legislation is aimed at stripping us of our rights and taking us closer to becoming a police state. I've said it once, but people who like to say we have a Socialist, Fascist, or whatever term in office are going to be in for one helluva rude awakening the day America elects a real dictator to power. But then again, I suspect the people who throw those terms out (on both sides) will be the one's welcoming it.

[crystalann]

Back on May 26 we where at this airport, we flew in to get married:kissing:. When we where heading back out it was funny how lax the checkpoints where. The line was long and as we waited our turn the officer looked at us and said just go around the metal detector. At the time it was cool, but it made me think, how many others did he let go by?:confused:

[kellycan27]

I agree with what Kellycan said. If you don't want to fly, don't. Stay at home and don't go out in your car. You may be stopped for a sobriety check. Don't take a train because I think that they are starting security checks there too. No if more people had this attitude, there would be less crowds in those places that I do go to by train and plane and car.

Seems like the sky is always falling around here for one reason or another.

[AllieSF]

I sometimes wonder if there is a conspiracy theory going around, like maybe the Russians, no wait they aren't that bad anymore, maybe the Chinese or Canadians are trying something that we haven't caught on to yet. Anyway, as we all know the public sector is inefficient in almost all areas, make a lot of errors and bad decisions, but in the end they are just trying to do the best that they can. Since this is a new test program, Eryn, how do you know the exact questions that are being asked? We can all assume many things, but until someone goes through this new process and shares their experience it is all conjecture. I will stick with mine that we are doing very well so far, thwarting potential serious terrorist acts here in the USA, while they are happening in other places.

[Eryn]

I agree with what Kellycan said. If you don't want to fly, don't. Stay at home and don't go out in your car. You may be stopped for a sobriety check. Don't take a train because I think that they are starting security checks there too. No if more people had this attitude, there would be less crowds in those places that I do go to by train and plane and car.


Seems like the sky is always falling around here for one reason or another.

Those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it.

[SweetIonis]

I sometimes wonder if there is a conspiracy theory going around, like maybe the Russians, no wait they aren't that bad anymore, maybe the Chinese or Canadians are trying something that we haven't caught on to yet. Anyway, as we all know the public sector is inefficient in almost all areas, make a lot of errors and bad decisions, but in the end they are just trying to do the best that they can. Since this is a new test program, Eryn, how do you know the exact questions that are being asked? We can all assume many things, but until someone goes through this new process and shares their experience it is all conjecture. I will stick with mine that we are doing very well so far, thwarting potential serious terrorist acts here in the USA, while they are happening in other places.

I'm with Eryn on this. The problem is that in the name of fighting terrorism the government has assumed such broad powers until it has infringed on the rights that constitutionally we are supposed to enjoy as US citizens. For example in the name of fighting terrorism the US government has done things like:

1. Held innocent US citizens for indefinite periods without granting them a trial
2. Engaged in the wiretapping of innocent US citizens without a warrant
3. Have kidnapped innocent citizens of countries like Germany and sent them to foreign countries like Afghanistan to be tortured.

The implementation of this unnecessary interrogation is just another instance of unwanted intrusion into the lives of US citizens.

[TxKimberly]

I dunno - it's a no-win situation.
I am sick of the TSA myself BUT . . .
If we weren't making some attempt to screen passengers there WOULD be more hijackings. So if the TSA does their job and discourages people from trying to do that, we yell about the inconvenience, but if they stopped, and we had another hijacking, then everyone will yell "Where was the government? Why didn't they stop this? Who's head is gonna roll for this!?"
So where do you draw the line and make a happy medium between not offending peoples sensibilities and trying to keep them safe?

[SweetIonis]

Kim,

I hear what you are saying. My response is that we haven't had such an intrusive type of questioning since 9/11 and nothing has happened. That would lead me to think that currently we are doing fine without it, so why do we all of a sudden now need such intrusive measures?

[AllieSF]

Ionis, as I understood the article, they are trying this out in only a few airports to see what happens and how it works. They may find it does not work, or that they like it and will expand the program. As to why try it in the first place, as you know just from all of the previous threads on TSA activities, rules, etc. there are a lot of complaints about the current system. A lot of people suggest using the profiling techniques that are used in Israeli airports instead of the random checking, body scanning and pat downs that are currently in use here. They work in Israel, but how to we apply them here where are airports and passenger traffic is so much larger? I don't know all the reasons why, but this may be a way to see if something can be adapted and developed to be used here instead of, or in conjunction with, what we are doing now. Maybe they will reduce the pat downs and scanning, maybe not. I am just encouraged that they are trying something else that may work to avoid terrorist attacks on airplanes and, as I think that I read in the article, they are also finding other potentially dangerous people through use of direct questioning. I know that it is intrusive, but I do not want to die in another terrorist attack and surely do not want anyone else to either. I am willing to sacrifice some freedoms for now.

[SweetIonis]

Allie, you could stop terrorism by putting everyone that makes less than 50 million dollars a year in chains in highly fortified, heavily guarded concentration camps. I know that's extreme, but what I'm trying to point out is that there are limits on what we should be willing to let happen in the name of fighting terrorism. Earlier, I gave some examples of things that have taken place recently that just go way beyond the line. Of particular concern is the stuff where an innocent US citizen can be held in INDEFINITE detention without a trial. That's just way overboard. And I feel that, combined with stuff like this interrogation thing is just going into the unnecessary. And let me tell you about something that happened to me. I went over to Mexico with my girl. Now she is not Hispanic, but she does have long, very pretty black hair, and is sometimes mistaken for someone who is. So this immigration guy, who was quite rude and mean, started asking her all these questions. She is really a sweet, innocent person, and it scared her so, she couldn't even answer some of them. Which lead to more questions. Finally, it became apparent that she was not from Mexico or some other Latin American country and because it was obvious that she was with me, they let her go. And that's just the type of thing I'm talking about. Innocent people being harassed for no reason. And this stuff about they have detained suspicious individuals, I find suspicious. Who have they detained, by this questioning that was getting ready to carry out an attack? Who is a suspicious individual? An Arab person? Me because I'm black and I am speaking out like this? Someone could say, well he must be a terrorist because if he had nothing to hide, he would not mind! SEE???? That crap is endless. Just saying.

[AllieSF]

Ionis, I had traveled across the Canadian border several times going through immigrations/customs in Windsor, Niagara Falls and someplace else. I would have to say that the strongest questioning I ever got was from those Canadian officials, and I have lived and worked for over 15 years in South America and have met a lot of customs/immigration people. The Canadian tactic I think is that with quick hard questions in a very interrogation like tone, they are able to trip up a lot of smugglers and people that needed to be questioned further. They also pissed off a lot of innocent people too. I have heard that the American officials sometimes were pretty rough on the Canadians coming to the USA. All this was years before the 9/11 disaster. So, I do understand your point of view. However, mine is further down the road from yours and I welcome them trying to stop future terrorist attacks. I still feel free in this great country of ours and do not feel like my liberties have been reduced. I do not deny your right to be against what you think is wrong. Everyone's opinion and protests from the far right to the far left, both ends of the spectrum and everywhere in between, help maintain some level of balance in how we live.

[SweetIonis]

Allie, I hear what you are saying loud and clear. And I appreciate that you realize and respect that I have a different point of view than yours. And believe me when I say that I feel the same towards you. Although it has nothing to do with this topic, I have said to you before that I like you very much and think you are a wonderful person. So I wanted to let you know that I very much respect what you have to say, because I have a lot of respect for you.

But with regards to your point that you say you do not feel like your liberties have been reduced, let me ask you something. Let's suppose that you were detained, for months without trail, like one INNOCENT US citizen. You lost your job, if you have kids (I don't think you do, but still the point), their source of support was destroyed, your life would be wrecked as a result. Would you still feel the same way? Imagine, all they have to do is suspect you of being a terrorist, they don't have to offer conclusive proof, and they can do that to you. That's scary, to me. I know that, or nothing remotely similar to that has happened to either one of us. But it could. And for that reason, I feel that my liberty has been reduced. When something like that happens to one of us, it could happen to any of us. Therefore we have to be very careful in just saying, well I will let them do anything they feel that will keep us safe. That's a very slippery slope.

[Schatten Lupus]

I think we should just go back to using only metal detectors. After all, cockpits can be locked, pilots are armed now, and there are Marshals on board. And look at how many failed terrorist attack attempts there have been that no one caught until it could have been too late. There was the underwear bomber who failed. And then what of the guy who tried to bomb Time Square? Or what about this guy who made it on board a flight with his gun that nobody caught?
http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-chicago/tsa-have-both-hands-full-and-both-eyes
I know you can't expect 100% efficiency, but it seems with all the profiling they want to grope and get a nude xray of, luggage theft of trivial items only vaguely fit the description of what's not allowed, and harassment it just really doesn't seem worth it.

[Claire Cook]

Maybe I'm too much of a patsy (Patsy?) here, but I'm willing to put up with whatever hassles I get from TSA, dressed or not. It's easy to make comments about TSA agents, but they are doing what I think is an important job, and if folks who know a lot more about security than I do say this makes flying (and the country) safer, then I'll go along with it.

I have flown pretty and had the usual questions -- which I welcome, since the discussion might help inform people about us (and I think it has; I'm sure that Kimberly has had the same reaction). As to a patdown, I'll ask for a female agent if I have to. Recently I've flown in drab, but wearing female slacks and a bra. The agent asked me about the bulge in my shirt (hey, I wasn't wearing forms!) and I happily said "Oh, I'm wearing a bra". OK, no problem. Dressing for me is still such a rush that I'll gladly put up with whatever hassles are involved. And flying is still a lot safer per mile than long, tiring drives....

[Claire Cook]

Recently I've flown in drab, but wearing female slacks and a bra. The agent asked me about the bulge in my shirt (hey, I wasn't wearing forms!) and I happily said "Oh, I'm wearing a bra". OK, no problem.

Clarifaction here (slight pink moment!) . The agent noticed my bra during a patdown afer a body scan and asked if I was wearing a brace or somethng. The bulges were probably not in the front (much as I might have wished....)