Protests Against TSA Screenings
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2010-11-22/protests-against-tsa-screenings
An estimated twenty four million people are flying over the Thanksgiving holiday, but an already tough travel week may be even worse this year. Passengers, lawmakers, and civil rights groups are among those objecting to the Transportation Security Administration‘s new screening procedures which include full body scans and aggressive pat-downs. Some have called for a boycott of full body scans on Wednesday and others have filed lawsuits against the agency. Diane and guests take a look at what this means for the busy travel season.
Guests
John Pistole
Administrator, Transportation Security Administration
Scott McCartney
travel editor and "The Middle Seat" columnist for "The Wall Street Journal"
Marc Rotenberg
executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center and professor of information technology law at Georgetown University Law Center
David Brenner
Higgins Professor of Radiation Biophysics, Director of Center for Radiological Research at Columbia University Medical Center
Frank Cilluffo
director, Homeland Security Policy Institute at George Washington University.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
What about pregnant women, infants, and children? Are they scanned? Based on previous incidents, errorists would certainly use them to acheive their goals.
First, the fact that your panelist knows Chernof means NOTHING - in fact it makes his assessment LESS RELIABLE! Second, why in god´s name would anyone think that someone in America would be motivated by BUSINESS interests? Pulease! Plus, the whole thing is a dog and pony show - we are not ANY safer until they check body cavities! The TSA have NEVER CAUGHT ANYONE!
As I understand it, the body scanners in some European airports depict the body in a more graphic (i.e., "stick figure") form. To me this is a good compromise in the security/privacy debate. Why were these scanners not adopted in this country? This begs the question of radiation, but I believe this to be a minimum risk for all but the most frequent fliers.
A common comment by people who support sexual contact groping and electronic strip search is that "Flying is a right, you can do travel by car or train if you don't like it, and that the purpose of this is to increase our security."
The PROPER framing is that "your fear does not allow you to take away my rights." Police forces cannot perform the groping or perform strip searches without reasonable suspicion as supported by Court decisions on personal privacy rights. The TSA, as our government, cannot arbitrarily suspend rights of citizens.
The previous TSA procedures did not violate rights as defined by the courts and have worked fo 8+ years. So, if YOU are too afraid to fly under the previous procedures, by all means, please walk/bike/drive/take the train. No problem.
I could easily say our government should outlaw all guns, because I will feel safer in big cities and it will make it more difficult for people to kill me. But, that is unconstitutional so in my society, where individual rights still are honored via our constitution, so I live with it.
THE BIGGER RISK is that airport employees (baggage handlers, aviation fuel truck drivers) are not subject to these searches every day so they could easily be paid to plant bombs on planes, etc. or they may sympathize with religious terrorists and be converted jihadists.
The El Al Airlines security model works. It is a people-based, higly sophisticated interview-based model which has been unsurpassed since the 1970's. Why don't we consider that instead of pricey technology?
I agree, I wanted to say, this is another example of false parallel. Whether Soros opposes the scanners or not, he doesn't stand to profit from the "anti-scanner" side winning.
I hear little about application of Bayes theory to analysis of traveling passengers. My sense is that we are exposing travelers to inordinate scrutiny where the pre-test probability of any individual being involved in terrorism is 0 making the likelihood of actually finding a risk also closer to 0. How is any of this making anyone safer?
I was at BWI last week. Mandatory body scan and pat down by ruder than rude agents. It's like TSA pulled these agents off the street, trained them for two hours and unleashed them onto the street. The "security" seemed random and illogically implemented. I don't see how any of this will lessen a real security risk. How about fixing this with 21st century technology and some common sense.
Diane,
You shouldn't be assessing risk (ie. radiation exposure) without representing the risk associated with the experience of air travel. Engine failure, mid air collision. It seems the aggregate risk when considering Locherbie, 9/11 etc. the radiation risk due to low level exposure is acceptable. Besides who wants to fly with a potential terrorists anyway?????
My concern is that TSA already makes exceptions which make the whole point of invasive searches and body scans irrelevant. Traveling out of Nashville two weeks ago, I witnessed two individuals wearing US military fatigues empty their pockets, take off their belts, etc, but were not required to take off their heavy combat boots while everyone else had to remove even the skimpiest of shoes. I asked the TSA official about this and was told they were "pre-cleared." Obviously, they weren't because they had to empty their pockets, etc. I asked if the TSA official was aware of what happened at Fort Hood. Making any exception for any class of people simply provides an opportunity for would-be terrorists to disguise themselves as that class or even kidnap the family of and threaten someone to make them carry through an IED.
I think a big part of the problem is that the TSA operators forget the primary purpose of random scanning. The primary purpose is not to find bombs. Random screening is highly unlikely to choose the person actually carrying a bomb. The primary purpose is to deter people from carrying weapons or a bomb because of the possibility that they might receive this more revealing scan or an "aggressive pat down" and thus not attempt to bring the bomb or weapon onboard.
When a normal weary, harried traveller makes any complaint, they treat that person as if they were a major law breaker or a potential terrorist. That's why we get little girls, old ladies and moms with sippy cup incidents making the news.
If they remembered that this more invasive screening is intended to deter future attempts to sneak something through and that the person they're screening is most probably an ordinary passenger and a customer of the airport, then common sense wouldn't go flying out the window.
What can travelers do if they feel their rights have been violated? What is the appropriate course of action to take?
Vaccinations? Maybe airline security is not so different than other preventive measures we have adopted like inoculating children if they are to attend public schools or when they emigrated into the US. The measures may be controversial but we irradiated awful diseases like small pox and polio. Some people opt out and send children elsewhere, maybe we simply need to allow others to travel differently or on another airline without security?
We are willing to take the chance that 80 year old ladies are Not terrorists since every terrorist in the past decade has been a Muslim male, 18-45 hrs old. No one wants to admit it, profiling is the ONLY answer..
Diane, In a future show about airport screenings, please ask why they can't hire LPN's. We are used to doctors and nurses needing to have physical contact with us. If we knew the TSA was hiring professionals who were trained to be sensitive, and who we know have college training in nursing procedures, we might be less offended by this procedure for scanning.
I think they should do away with the body screening and have dogs enter the plane after everyone is seated to sniff for explosives and keep the pilot's cabin door locked during flight. If people don't like the idea of a dog sniffing them then they can get off the plane. If dogs can smell cancer cells in humans certainly they can smell explosives. This is a simple, effective and economical solution.
Thank you TSA for keeping my family, friends and colleges as safe as possible as more Islamic extremists threaten the safety and well being of air travelers. I think this country needs to get over the real or perceived modesty notions and remember the September 11 attacks on this country. Why are we even discussing the implication of scanning, if you have a problem, come up with a solution to the issue/problem here – The threat is genuine and creditable and we have a real responsibility to one another as flyers, as countrymen to aggregate our efforts and make it as difficult as possible for Islamic extremists and other bad guys. And just in case some idiot gets through all the measures taken, pls maintain the images for possible use during litigation. People, get over it or find another method of travel, I for one appreciate the safety measures our government workers have afforded us. Imagine for a moment the result of air travel without the current measures - how many of you would be willing to fly without them?
I think we are all losing sight of what is important. There are huge weaknesses in our airport and airline security. The changes implemented by TSA since 2001 are a joke and merely cosmetic changes. The 9/11 hijackers could get past TSA today just as easily as they did 9 years ago. They had valid IDs, valid tickets and they legally carried box cutters on the flights....all things that are still allowed today.
We need greater security at our airports. Airline security in other countries is much more serious and strict than this country and many countries do pat downs if the alarm goes off. Just last week my bracelet set off a scanner in Berlin, Germany and I was patted down and wanded.
I do not view this as a threat to my rights - we as Americans need to get over ourselves and understand that there are certain things that we give up to be part of a society.
We need real and effective changes to airport security and not just cosmetic changes. If it takes longer to go through security so be it - and for those who complain - get to the airport earlier.
I don't think NYC or any of its agencies can opt out of following Federal rules pertaining to airport security. Surely the Constitutionally given power to the Fed. Gov't to regulate interstate commerce would prevail. Concerning Israel's decision not to use body scans at Ben Gurion Airport, it's security personnel rely heavily on profiling techniques which are considered to be politically incorrect in the U.S. Of course, thus far those techniques seem to have been effective.
In response to using the interview method of identifying a threat: At over 1.3 million air travelers a day in the US, how long would the lines be once your proposed methodology is used in the US - I think it becomes unfeasible very quickly - My goodness , how many interviewers would you have to hire? Good idea though, as long it is augmented by the other TSA security measure - layer the interview method on those individuals who bubble up as a higher probabilistic threat.
I was disappointed when you allowed the person against the scanners to get away with unqualified statements and miss information.
In response to the low dose used in the process the host allowed the opponent to go unchallenged in dismissing the normal level of radiation people get by saying that unfocused radiation is different from focused.
It is called back-scatter as it is not focused.
The opponent also use another unqualified statement about that it is focused on the skin.
The energy is not focused on the skin. The radiation is a wave of energy that passes through the body and is recorded on by the sensors. The items that reflect/absorb the energy show up darker on the sensor.
As a host I would have expected you to ask the opponent has he reviewed the studies by independent groups and if not is he not at risk of playing "chicken little"?
I would like to know if the level of radiation is so low that I am at more risk of my cell phone causing me harm (if I was an airport employee that must pass through the scanners multiple (4-8) times per day) than the scanners. If the does is high that is important, but I am worried that we only getting FUD and not information.
Here is a university link on radiation
http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/radrus.htm
Here is a link by a university on body scanners
http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/body.htm
Also, remember that the people who have objections to the new scanners and the pat down are not trying to get through without being screened. They are willing to take off their shoes, coats, etc.; go through the regular scanners; be wanded, etc.
The selection of who has to go through the new, advanced procedures is done at random. The likelihood of finding an actual terrorist through random searches is 0 or almost 0. The purpose of these procedures is to deter terrorists from using planes at all because of the possibility of being randomly picked out. (Note that someone willing to blow themselves up may be willing to take the risk of being caught, by random selection, because it's still a small risk.)
We can't make a habit of exempting categories of people - nuns, old ladies, children, people with prostheses, people with metal body parts, etc. - because then terrorists can use somebody in that category to sneak something through.
However, if screenings are done at random, then the TSA person doing the screening must keep in mind that the chances of this particular child, old lady, nun, etc. being a terrorist is 0. They should then use common sense: talk to the person, ask questions, be polite, explain the need for the procedure in a polite way, and even thank them for going through this procedure that you feel is necessary to keep our passengers safe; try to keep the stress of the experience down for the randomly selected passenger being screened.
The overwhelming majority of TSA employees seem to do this, but it is in those rare cases where TSA ends up on the news. Any TSA employee involved in one of these unfortunate incidents should go through additional training and be given a better understanding of what they are supposed to be doing.
Passing through airport security had already become onerous, but this "naked" body scanners and/or groin searches are just too much. Prior to the TSA's new rules, I had planned to take a trip to Miami Florida with my wife. Until my personal privacy has been restored, I plan to skip airline travel. Hopefully enough travelers (domestic and foreign) will truly boycott the American aviation system that airline and tourism industry suffers significant losses, affecting our current politicians' careers. If politicians feel enough pain at the polls, then changes will happen.
When will America become smart about its security? Ben Franklin wrote, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/31/AR200912...
Another former Homeland Security name lobbying is Tom Blank.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/nation/2010/11/naked-scanners-lobbyists-jo...
Enhanced pat downs are useless
Positive predictive value depends on the prevalence
Statistics creeps into everything we do. The odds of a terrorist with a hidden explosive in the underwear is 1 in several million. The TSA agent who is touching the crotches of thousands of travellers is highly likely to miss the different "feel" of a hidden plastic explosive. Further more the next terrorist is likely to hide the explosive in his body cavity.
The result: Our government is violating the personal space of the traveling public with an ineffective and unproven method just because they can do it. Airlines or any private company would not dare to do this to us
It's frustrating to listen to John Pistole --who will never by subjected to the indignity of a pat down or a body scan--try to reassure the rest of us that these procedures are necessary.
Actually, at this point, the TSA presents a "clear and present danger" to our way of life.
As I listen to this controversy, I am reminded of freshman gym class. It was the first time I had to take off my clothes and shower with strangers. When the unsat arrived half way through the semester. My unsympathetic mother said "get over yourself, you all have the same body parts." I didn't flunk gym class because I feared my mother more than I feared my fellow female students. (Who knew that my life's journey would include far greater indignities: vaginal delivery in a teaching hospital, colonoscopy, mammogram just to name a few.)
I fear people that like to blow up things! Terrorists are not of one ideology, race or gender. I am willing to be scanned or patted down. It is comforting to know that every person on the plane with me has been similarly scrutinized.
TSA please continue to do whatever you must to keep all of us, even those screaming the loudest, safe.
The number of American deaths caused by terrorism is miniscule compared to the number of deaths caused by diseases like, for example, cancer. Yet, in order to prevent or identify cancer, we would never take an approach that blindly screens everyone. We would not accept the financial cost; yet, with TSA we take this approach. What about the number of deaths due to drunk drivers? If we decided to have systematic road blocks to check every driver, the public would be in an uproar.
Freedom and autonomy are vulnerable. This silly game about the TSA/911 has to do with the fact that we assumed respect for freedom, we assumed respect for autonomy, and people who don't even understand those things took advantage of that. They still will. So, it seems that the TSA must let us know that our freedom and autonomy must be on hold, because there are forces that will completely obliterate those ideas in the face of their own ideas of domination and religious superiority. They will hurt us this way. I think it might be best to let go of our Prince and Princess views until we communicate the value of autonomy to the cultures we seem to be conflicting with.
At a loss.
Mary
Brian Lupiani and Barry Fay both brought a critical piece of information that I never hear discussed with respect to the body scanning and pat-downs. Anything that I could hide in my underwear I could hide in a body cavity. That would include knives, explosives, and non-metallic projectile weapons.
The surface screening and pat-downs, no matter how invasive, simply will not detect something hidden inside the body and are therefore ineffective. If a security protocol is ineffective, why should it be used at all?