Anyone Travel To/From The Us To Thailand Lately?

[lomatopo]

Maybe the OP is concerned about health risks associated with the use of the full body scanner? For example: does it affect heart pacemakers? Or how safe is the radiation level, especially when one is a frquent traveller?

The NOS ( nud_e - O - Scope ) uses back-scatter X-rays. Some nuclear physicists say that the dosage is 20x the safe limit, and that can cause basal cell carcinoma longer term. Obviously children are more susceptible to X-rays, not too mention some TSA personnel checking out your daughter completely naked. (You can find true images on-line.) Of course if you opt your children out, they will be aggressively (more aggressive pat-downs implemented 1 Nov 2010 in order to discourage opt-outs) patted (some say groped) down by a stranger.

First-hand N O S Opt-Out experiences

My opt-out and pat-down was performed without any theatrics, intimidation, embarrassment, in less than 90 seconds.

Edited November 6, 2010 by lomatopo

[geriatrickid]

Sorry if I missed it.

But was is your problem with going in a body scanner?

What's the big deal?

If it is not based on a specific civil liberties or privacy issue - for which there are some legitimate concerns - but which the OP has not mentioned, usually people are concerned due to some parts sensitive parts of the body either being too small or too big depending on their insecurity.

If it is that much of a concern, just fly to Canada and cross the border by bus.

I suspect in 5-10 years time these scanners will be ubiquitous.

The US TSA plans to deploy 1,000 machines by the end of 2011 and already has 200 units in 52 American airports. All major transit points to BKK have the scanners, e.g. LAX, SFO, SEA, EWR

As of Jan 2010 Canada started using them as a secondary screening device because of its need to harmonize with the USA. (Most Canadians go through US Customs & Immigration in Canada allowing them to use domestic terminals in the US gateways & hubs.) There are now 43 full body scanners currently deployed in 15 Canadian airports.

I hate to break anyone's heart, but there is nothing in the least bit arousing about sitting in front of a monitor looking at fat people's silouettes. If you think someone is going to get excited looking at someone's boobie or peeny, get over it.

Edited November 6, 2010 by geriatrickid

[kpmsprtd]

I saw a movie the other day and it had a great part about airport security. The guy said, if people are so concerned about their privacy and the rights of terrorists, we will have 2 lines in the future. One where we use every possible source of information to help secure our flights. Questioning of terrorists, CIA intelligence, full body scanners, etc. Then, we will have another line where we use nothing, don't scan, don't x-ray, don't check luggage...nothing. Which line will you use? I think the unsecure line will be pretty empty...except for terrorists.

I will be in that line. In fact, if someone were to start a no security bullshit airline, I would be a frequent customer.

JingThing, I'm afraid sheeple is the proper word. Thank you, sheeple, for turning America into a police state. I hope it makes you feel safe. The rectal exam, administered exclusively by big dumb guys with big fingers, begins on January 1st. I hope you don't mind it, and I'm sure you won't because you know we can't be too careful.

Disclaimer: I have never flown into Australia, Canada, or the UK, so I cannot comment on their security personnel or systems. In the U.S., it is staffed by minimum wage workers, and in this case you do indeed get what you pay for. It is all an illusion, pretending to be security while providing little or no security whatsoever. If it were real security, the security workers would be the caliber of people you find working at Google. And if they were in charge of it, there would be a whole lot of useless shit that they would simply stop doing in order to spend their time instead on things useful for security purposes.

[sbk]

A post has been deleted.

OP has a right to his opinions without being attacked for them, something that most Americans should respect given the Constitution. Regardless of that, it also in effect here on Thaivisa so if you can't keep it civil don't post at all.

OP asked a simple question and has received 2 relevant answers and a whole load of judgment.

I suggest we drop the attitudes right now. cheers.

[craigt3365]

Maybe the OP is concerned about health risks associated with the use of the full body scanner? For example: does it affect heart pacemakers? Or how safe is the radiation level, especially when one is a frquent traveller?

Now that you mention it, this concerns me also. I don't know much about these devices. My father had a pacemaker. His new Toyota has that keyless entry system and in the book it warned people with this system to be careful if they have a pacemaker. We called Toyota and they said "don't worry". But ya never know!

The OP is not worried about health risks, he feels it is an invasion of privacy. I understand his argument, but we live in a world where crazies want nothing more than to blow you out of the sky. If these devices help even a little bit, they are worth it. Here is one of the OP's comments:

It's nothing to do with terrorism. It's about conditioning and making everyone submit.

A ridiculous reason....

I saw a movie the other day and it had a great part about airport security. The guy said, if people are so concerned about their privacy and the rights of terrorists, we will have 2 lines in the future. One where we use every possible source of information to help secure our flights. Questioning of terrorists, CIA intelligence, full body scanners, etc. Then, we will have another line where we use nothing, don't scan, don't x-ray, don't check luggage...nothing. Which line will you use? I think the unsecure line will be pretty empty...except for terrorists.

I don't see the big deal. If it helps to keep just one plane from being bombed, then it's a great idea...especially if I am on that plane!

Does this mean when you go in for a prostate exam, you tell the doc you are not interested? They are seeing WAY more of you than that scanner.

I travel back to the US 2 or 3 times a year. I've always been treated with respect. Never had a problem. Sure, they are working hard. Don't smile that much. But I don't think I would either having to deal with all the crazy travelers...most who are stressed out and jet lagged due to their trips.

Hi Craig I will be going back shortly and have not been for some time can you pass on info about carriers and routes you find the best ? I will be going to West coast

I fly to Vegas, so have to take feeder flights to either LAX, SFO, SEA or PDX. They use to have direct flights from Vegas to Narita and Seoul, but not any more. So...I just get the cheapest flight I can find. Connections are usually Narita, but last trip I connected in Beijing! I've also connected in Taiwan and Seoul. Cheapest seems to be Narita.

Take a look at the layover times. Short ones are usually OK. Some, like in Korea, are 8+ hours! Only once, did I get stuck in transit. And they put us up in a hotel for the night.

I fly Delta, Continental, JAL, China Airlines, Korean Air, United, American, etc. IMHO, Unites sucks. The other American airlines are just OK. I love JAL and Korean Air is OK also. China Air is also not bad. Some people rave about EVA, especially the Evergreen class that is a bit of an upgrade. I've not tried Thai Air as it is just too expensive and the connections in LAX require an overnight stay on the way there.

Do lots of searches on various web sites. Prices can vary drastically. Also check some local travel agents...sometimes they have great deals.

Good luck! We're headed back beginning of December for 5 weeks...I got a great deal on Delta this time.

Here are some great articles on how to find cheap fares....this changes all the time!

http://frugaltraveler.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/16/click-it-and-ticket-booking-a-flight-the-frugal-way/?em

http://www.upgradetravelbetter.com/2009/04/07/disaggregating-fare-aggregators-2009-which-airfare-comparison-sites-are-the-best/

[MSingh]

I flew into San Fran 10 days ago & i had the arms up in the air stuff only at my Via Airport ( Manila ), not on arrival in San Fran, & i'm not a US Citizen either if that makes a difference..

[lomatopo]

I flew into San Fran 10 days ago & i had the arms up in the air stuff only at my Via Airport ( Manila ), not on arrival in San Fran, & i'm not a US Citizen either if that makes a difference..

For the most part, this thread is about the full body scanners used to screen some passengers in U.S. airports who are entering air-side, that is to say, departing on a flight. International pax arriving in the U.S. would clear Immigration, pick up any checked luggage then clear Customs, where you might be subject to a secondary search of your belongings. nud_e-O-Scopes are not used on arriving pax, yet. (Hmm, I guess we can't used the word nud_e?)

Edited November 6, 2010 by lomatopo

[zorro1]

I dont think they can see any soft tissue. its hard tissue they are looking for. or am I wrong?

[Blackandwhite]

Hi, If you have a real and genuine concern regards the scanners I suggest you contact the airlines and ask them to assist you in your concerns about having a body scan, I am sure once they understand your concerns they will be able to support you. Perhaps they will provide you with a document to give to officials that explain your predicament. Hope this idea help your awkward situation.

[cdnvic]

I dont think they can see any soft tissue. its hard tissue they are looking for. or am I wrong?

Miami airport screener accused of attack after jeers at genitals

BY DAVID OVALLE

[email protected]

A Miami International Airport federal security screener has been arrested for allegedly using an expandable police baton to beat up a co-worker. The source of their conflict, police say: daily ribbing about the size of the screener's genitalia.

Screener Rolando Negrin's private body parts were observed by his Transportation Security Administration colleagues conducting training on the airport's full-body imaging machines.

Months of joking culminated on Tuesday night, when Negrin attacked co-worker Hugo Osorno in an employee parking lot, according to an arrest report.

Negrin ``stated he could not take the jokes any more and lost his mind,'' said the report, made public Thursday.

The agitated screener forced Osorno to his knees and made him apologize before whacking him on the back and arms with the baton, according to the report.

Negrin, who posted $7,500 bond on Wednesday night, is charged with aggravated battery.

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/05/06/v-print/1617423/miami-airport-screener-beats-co.html#ixzz14UFLuDzt

[thrilled]

I think theres nothing wrong with the new full body machines.The only problem is that I see is that airlines aren't checking the mail packages that airlines deliver.It don't make sense screen the passangere but not the mail.

[gemini81]

they do have them, and for those like me, big smake smuggling is a concern!

what're you planning on bringing through anyhow?

You dont have to strip down if thats what you're worried about. and I don't think the girl staff cant see if you're well endowed or not.....not a concern unless youre not I suppose!

sorry couldnt resist the jokes. BTW: Its not a naked body scanner, its a full body scanner. you have it sounding like a porno or a dead body device out of a sci fi movie.

[WarpSpeed]

@Sarahsbloke

That's not a stupid question. I'm not sure if I can post links here or not but you can google naked body scanners or full body scanners.

They're the big devices that have been implemented in many airports this last year. The TSA makes the passengers go inside of the machine, then put their hands up in the air (like they're about to be arrested) and then the machine uses a kind of x-ray to take a 3D picture of the naked person's body.

Partially true but a little misleading in it's presentation, this implies that the person is naked which they are not. The machine just sees through the persons clothes without removing them to examine whether or not you are carrying explosives a complete violation of privacy and unlike another members willingness to give up their privacy so easily I find this a serious intrusion and that old attempt at putting one on the defensive by asking "what do you have to hide?" does not hold water..

After a year or so of this invasive policy in place I'd like to see some real numbers about how many people they've caught trying to board a plane with explosives...Oh that's right it's more of a deterrent! BS!!! There's always something else just like the thread on them attempting to use explosives in dogs to try to down an airliner. It's a perpetual circle and they're winning with every "security measure" we put in place that further restricts our freedom and privacy, it's playing their game by their rules and plays right into the hands of governments that seek to restrict and monitor us anyway....

None of the supposed "bombers" have been successful they've all been easily restrained by alert passengers and crew and only injured themselves. They've not even had enough explosives to make much more then a small, easily containable fire whether shoes or underwear... Soon we'll all be flying nud_e................. hmmmmm maybe on second thought.......................Nah...... The way my luck goes I'd get stuck next to some lady boy for a 30 hour flight .........

To answer some above they most certainly do see your wares in full detail...

Edited November 6, 2010 by WarpSpeed

[globalhopkinations]

Just flew in and outta Detroit, one line had one the other didn't no hassle for me or the TG, I've gone threw there many times there's always so many people nobody cares what line u go threw. Shut up do you thing and get threw the crappy lines. I've gone threw the body scanners in AMS before can't say it seems any different to me your passing threw the machines so fast that there not paying attentiont o your body anyways, just looking for foreign objects, I've also herd that the nipple region and private region has to be blurred out for privacy (just hear say though). Good luck to you what ever your reason for avoiding them are.

[BuckarooBanzai]

Exceptions To The Fourth Amendment from wiki

The border search exception is a doctrine of United States criminal law that exempts searches of travelers and their property from the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement.

The United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP), ICE-HSI Special Agents, and Coast Guard officers (E4 grade and above) whom are all customs officers (those tasked with enforcing Title 19 of the United States Code) with the United States Department of Homeland Security, are permitted to search travelers and their belongings at the American border without probable cause or a warrant. These searches are therefore exempted from the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement. Pursuant to this authority, customs officers may generally stop and search the property of any traveler entering or exiting the United States at random, or even based largely on ethnic profiles. However, customs may only conduct searches of the traveler's body --- including strip, body cavity, involuntary x-ray, and in some jurisdictions, pat-down searches --- if the Customs officer has reasonable suspicion to believe the traveler is concealing contraband.

The key here is that only customs officers are given this exclusionary right when the traveler is entering or exiting the US. If those conducting a search do not meet these base requirement than it is in violation of the 4th amendment. (Unless the amendment was further diluted with the patriot act or some other new legislation.)

[craigt3365]

@Sarahsbloke

That's not a stupid question. I'm not sure if I can post links here or not but you can google naked body scanners or full body scanners.

They're the big devices that have been implemented in many airports this last year. The TSA makes the passengers go inside of the machine, then put their hands up in the air (like they're about to be arrested) and then the machine uses a kind of x-ray to take a 3D picture of the naked person's body.

Partially true but a little misleading in it's presentation, this implies that the person is naked which they are not. The machine just sees through the persons clothes without removing them to examine whether or not you are carrying explosives a complete violation of privacy and unlike another members willingness to give up their privacy so easily I find this a serious intrusion and that old attempt at putting one on the defensive by asking "what do you have to hide?" does not hold water..

After a year or so of this invasive policy in place I'd like to see some real numbers about how many people they've caught trying to board a plane with explosives...Oh that's right it's more of a deterrent! BS!!! There's always something else just like the thread on them attempting to use explosives in dogs to try to down an airliner. It's a perpetual circle and they're winning with every "security measure" we put in place that further restricts our freedom and privacy, it's playing their game by their rules and plays right into the hands of governments that seek to restrict and monitor us anyway....

None of the supposed "bombers" have been successful they've all been easily restrained by alert passengers and crew and only injured themselves. They've not even had enough explosives to make much more then a small, easily containable fire whether shoes or underwear... Soon we'll all be flying nud_e................. hmmmmm maybe on second thought.......................Nah...... The way my luck goes I'd get stuck next to some lady boy for a 30 hour flight .........

To answer some above they most certainly do see your wares in full detail...

It probably would have caught that guy with explosives in his underwear. And with these, will prevent copycats from trying it again. I'm sure we never hear of all the times people/things have been caught before boarding a plane. I'm sure Israel, UAE, etc. won't publish these items. And like the dogs, we just found out about it years later.

If it is a deterrent, great! I'm more safe. And they are not winning. If they were, there would be more airplanes downed. They are doing the best job they can. Give them a break.

The reports are that both the underwear bomber and the shoe bomber had enough explosives to bring the plane down. If done properly and properly placed. It only takes one window being blown out at altitude to really cause problems. Heck, a fire on a plane is a big deal. Even if small.

Do a google search on full body scanner. Plenty of pics are posted to see what is exposed. Not a big deal if it helps protect me. I'm all for it.

[lomatopo]

Exceptions To The Fourth Amendment from wiki

The border search exception is a doctrine of United States criminal law that exempts searches of travelers and their property from the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement.

The United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP), ICE-HSI Special Agents, and Coast Guard officers (E4 grade and above) whom are all customs officers (those tasked with enforcing Title 19 of the United States Code) with the United States Department of Homeland Security, are permitted to search travelers and their belongings at the American border without probable cause or a warrant. These searches are therefore exempted from the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement. Pursuant to this authority, customs officers may generally stop and search the property of any traveler entering or exiting the United States at random, or even based largely on ethnic profiles. However, customs may only conduct searches of the traveler's body --- including strip, body cavity, involuntary x-ray, and in some jurisdictions, pat-down searches --- if the Customs officer has reasonable suspicion to believe the traveler is concealing contraband.

The key here is that only customs officers are given this exclusionary right when the traveler is entering or exiting the US. If those conducting a search do not meet these base requirement than it is in violation of the 4th amendment. (Unless the amendment was further diluted with the patriot act or some other new legislation.)

My contribution the thread-creep: This applies to CPB and is primarily for int'l arriving pax; they are searching for contraband. (note that you do occasionally see CPB at the jetway looking at departing int'l pax.) In this thread we are talking about TSA. Their ability to conduct potentially unreasonable searches, one could argue that their 100% search ratio is unreasonable, is covered by Patriot Act and Patriot Act-2 (legislation), and remains unchallenged by court decisions although there are many, many cases in progress.

More and more people are opting out of the NOS (full body scanners), and this is creating backlogs at TSA check-points WTMD's (Walk Through Metal Detectors) have been removed so when people opt-out or the machine is down (often) then the lines get longer. Eventually the TSA will probably have to make the NOS mandatory, except for those with medical issues, infants, etc. I'd expect there will be an 'incident' which will strike fear into the traveling public and allow the TSA to make the NOS mandatory.

Private part masking software has not been implemented in the U.S. The TSA has been looking for software but has surprisingly not been able to find a supplier. The images are amazingly detailed. I guess I'm not so concerned about some stranger (note that several TSA employees have been found to be registered sex offenders and/or arrested and charged with sex crimes) looking at my naked body, but I do have concerns about them looking at naked pictures of minors. I also have concerns about the back-scatter machines, and the associated X-ray dosage. The MMW (millimeter wave machines) appear to be safe®.

I think a lot of people understand that this is really "Security Theatre", meant to assuage the traveling public rather than some nefarious plot for the government to take control of our lives, and that if someone really wants to cause an aircraft to crash by explosion then they can do it. Anyone who has seen a prison movie understands there are ways to smuggle contraband by hiding it in body cavities. And that most cargo, checked luggage, mail, meals, soft-drinks boarded are not 100% checked. And that airports are far from secure. And that not all airport employees are fully screened and checked. And...well, you get the picture. Security Theatre.

[OILMAN13]

Sorry if I missed it.

But was is your problem with going in a body scanner?

What's the big deal?

If it is not based on a specific civil liberties or privacy issue - for which there are some legitimate concerns - but which the OP has not mentioned, usually people are concerned due to some parts sensitive parts of the body either being too small or too big depending on their insecurity.

If it is that much of a concern, just fly to Canada and cross the border by bus.

I suspect in 5-10 years time these scanners will be ubiquitous.

The issue people is not just vanity or modesty OR having something to "hide", the issue is that you are being exposed to an extremely high level of xrays. Damage occurs via a cumulative effect. The more xrays you are exposed to the higher chance of getting cancer. If you do a lot of traveling your chances of getting cancer will increase many times over as all 2000 metal detectors at all US airports combined will be changed to the full body scanners within about a year. Approximately 350 are in service at US airports at this moment. Including every domestic US airport.

[Spee]

The issue people is not just vanity or modesty OR having something to "hide", the issue is that you are being exposed to an extremely high level of xrays. Damage occurs via a cumulative effect. The more xrays you are exposed to the higher chance of getting cancer. If you do a lot of traveling your chances of getting cancer will increase many times over

Sorry, methinks your response is a little over the top. I would refer readers to these articles, and in particular the PhD comments on the second article, which suggest (accurately, IMHO) that the radiation exposure at altitude far exceeds anything that a traveler would receive from ground scanners. I also agree with the second comment in the second article, which is that calibration and verification of calibration are very important.

http://hps.org/publicinformation/ate/faqs/effectsandsecurityscreening.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60553920100106

None the less, I don't like the approach of adding more and more intrusive scanning techniques. In a way, it's like trying to fix poverty by throwing more money into welfare. It doesn't work. The goal is to reduce the risk and occurences of air-terrorism. Increased harrassment of law-abiding tourists isn't the way.

[rakman]

Maybe the OP is concerned about health risks associated with the use of the full body scanner? For example: does it affect heart pacemakers? Or how safe is the radiation level, especially when one is a frquent traveller?

The NOS ( nud_e - O - Scope ) uses back-scatter X-rays. Some nuclear physicists say that the dosage is 20x the safe limit, and that can cause basal cell carcinoma longer term. Obviously children are more susceptible to X-rays, not too mention some TSA personnel checking out your daughter completely naked. (You can find true images on-line.) Of course if you opt your children out, they will be aggressively (more aggressive pat-downs implemented 1 Nov 2010 in order to discourage opt-outs) patted (some say groped) down by a stranger.

First-hand N O S Opt-Out experiences

My opt-out and pat-down was performed without any theatrics, intimidation, embarrassment, in less than 90 seconds.

With the limited amount of study, how do we know what the long term effects are? This "safety" assurance on the scanners is from the same Government that promoted Trans-Fats as safe and healthy. Now we know they were even worse than the previously used fats.

[cdnvic]

1 troll post removed. If you wish to make serious allegations, provide some backup for it, not just "I heard".

[Lakegeneve]

Sorry if I missed it.

But was is your problem with going in a body scanner?

What's the big deal?

If it is not based on a specific civil liberties or privacy issue - for which there are some legitimate concerns - but which the OP has not mentioned, usually people are concerned due to some parts sensitive parts of the body either being too small or too big depending on their insecurity.

If it is that much of a concern, just fly to Canada and cross the border by bus.

I suspect in 5-10 years time these scanners will be ubiquitous.

The issue people is not just vanity or modesty OR having something to "hide", the issue is that you are being exposed to an extremely high level of xrays.

I was expressing the modesty issue as a bit of a joke but for some people - for whatever reason - it will be a significant issue. However, the radiation exposure issue is I agree a concern. Then again, constant intercontinental flying exposes you to a similar dosage each flight that you receive from an average x-ray which I am sure most flyers do not even give a consideration.

[Lakegeneve]

This may be of interest to the OP and some;

US pilots propose body-scan boycott, http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2010/s3061687.htm

[Everett]

Thanks for the link Lakegeneve, heres some more:

Singled out by the TSA, Cuffed to a Chair and Ticket Ripped up!

Agency at center of molestation controversy caught in flagrant lie in pathetic effort to counter growing resistance

http://www.prisonplanet.com/tsa-no-fondling-groping-or-squeezing-is-taking-place-at-airports.html

Flight Attendants union upset over new pat-down procedure

http://www.abc15.com/dpp/lifestyle/travel/flight-attendants-union-upset-over-new-pat-down-procedures

TSA gives rapists and illegals the green light while groping children

http://www.infowars.com/tsa-gives-rapists-and-illegals-the-green-light-while-groping-children/

[lomatopo]

The TSA has implemented a Behavior Detection Officer (BDO) program at 160 airports in the U.S. which according to the TSA website, "...utilizes non-intrusive behavior observation and analysis techniques to identify potentially high-risk passengers. BDOs are designed to detect individuals exhibiting behaviors that indicate they may be a threat to aviation and/or transportation security."

To date they have stopped and interrogated 180,000 passengers, and have found zero (0) "threats".

[pmarlin]

As a freqent flyer , 7 times a year US/BKK round trips, All the international gateway airports in the US have them now but I have only been required to go through a body scanner once last spring at the DFW airport. It only took about a minute and and not a big deal.

[Rinrada]

I know that this was aimed at US passengers however just to say we have them over here as well.Saw them at Heathrow but was not asked to use it....

Recent stort from the Times about a couple of passengers at Manchester...NO USE...NO Fly..

FYI....

A Muslim woman was barred from boarding a flight after she refused to undergo a full body scan for religious reasons.

The passenger was passing through security at Manchester Airport when she was selected at random for a full-body scanner.

She was warned that she would be stopped from boarding the plane but she decided to forfeit her ticket to Pakistan rather than submit to the scan.

Her female travelling companion also declined to step into the scanner, citing “medical reasons” for her refusal.

The two women are thought to be the first passengers to refuse to submit to scanning by the machines, which have provoked controversy among human rights groups.

They were introduced on a limited basis last month at Heathrow and Manchester airports in response to the alleged attempt by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to blow up a jet over Detroit on Christmas Day using explosives concealed in his underpants.

The X-ray machines allow security officials to check for concealed weapons but they also afford clear outlines of passengers’ genitals.

They are due to be introduced in all UK airports by the end of the year.

[craigt3365]

As a freqent flyer , 7 times a year US/BKK round trips, All the international gateway airports in the US have them now but I have only been required to go through a body scanner once last spring at the DFW airport. It only took about a minute and and not a big deal.

I do quite a few int'l trips every year also and have yet to encounter one of these. Not sure why? But mostly, I start off in Vegas and take feeders to a major airport. I'm guessing I have already passed security so don't have to go through it again?????

I'm not sure what my reaction will be when I encounter this...but it doesn't sound good to me. For privacy as well as health reasons...

[lomatopo]

Airport 'pat-downs' cause growing passenger backlash

By Derek Kravitz

Washington Post Staff Writer

Friday, November 12, 2010; 10:40 PM

Airport travelers call it groping, prodding or just plain inappropriate - a pat-down that probes places where the sun doesn't shine. The Transportation Security Administration calls it the new reality of airport security.

Following the uncovering of a terrorist plot last month to blow up cargo planes en route to the United States, the TSA has instituted a new type of pat-down of passengers, a move that's part of a general tightening of air security. If a full-body scanning machine shows something strange or a passenger declines to go through the machine - which is now in use in the Washington region's three major airports - an officer will perform a more personal search.

The examinations routinely involve the touching of breasts and genitals, invasive searches designed to find weapons and suspicious items. The searches, performed by TSA security officers of the same sex as the passenger, entail a sliding hand motion on parts of the body where a lighter touch was used before, aviation security analysts say. The areas of the body that are being touched haven't changed.

"There's nothing punitive about it; it just makes good security sense," the TSA said via its blog. "And the weapons and other dangerous and prohibited items we've found during pat-downs speak to this."

But the new pat-downs have prompted a growing backlash among pilots and flight attendants, civil liberties groups and security-weary passengers who say the touching goes too far.

"It's more than just patting you down. It's very intrusive and very insane. I wouldn't let anyone touch my daughter like that," said Marc Moniz of Poway, Calif., who is planning to accompany his daughter's eighth-grade class from San Diego to Washington in April. "We're not common criminals."

In the latest escalation of the debate over the balance between security and passenger rights, privacy advocates have enlisted consumer rights activist and four-time presidential candidate Ralph Nader, who called the screening techniques "extremely voyeuristic and intrusive."

"If anyone is going to try to get through, they're going to [conceal items in body cavities], so this isn't going to stop that," Nader said. "My prediction is that TSA is going to lose all of this."

Brian J. Sodergren of Ashburn, who works in the health-care industry, is organizing an "opt out" day to encourage passengers to say no to advanced imaging technology, known to industry insiders as a "virtual strip search." He's planning the protest for one of the busiest travel days of the year - Nov. 24, the day before Thanksgiving.

"Many people only fly around the holidays and may not be aware of the security changes," Sodergren said. "I think once people are made aware of what is happening, they may have reservations about the new procedures."

Another group launched a Web site, WeWontFly.com, and says it has gotten more than 70,000 hits per day since going online a week ago. The Web site asks passengers to say no to scans and pat-downs and for TSA to remove its "porno-scanners" and "gropers."

"We're opposed to letting TSA treat us like criminals," said James Babb of Eagleville, Pa., an activist who is organizing the We Won't Fly campaign.

But while passengers can opt out of being put through the full-body scanners, if they want to fly, they can't also opt out of the pat-downs.

"It is irresponsible for a group to suggest travelers opt out of the very screening that could prevent an attack using non-metallic explosives," TSA Administrator John S. Pistole said. "This technology is not only safe, it's vital to aviation security and a critical measure to thwart potential terrorist attacks."

Expanding security

Several of the country's leading passenger advocacy organizations, as well as pilots' and flight attendants' unions, have publicly criticized the heightened screening, questioning its effectiveness and asking the Department of Homeland Security to make pat-downs and full-body scans a secondary security measure.

"People just don't have a lot of faith in TSA right now," said Brandon M. Macsata, executive director of the Association for Airline Passenger Rights, a Washington nonprofit group. "Things are done differently at [different] airports, and there doesn't seem to be a consensus that this is making air travel safer."

Kate Hanni, executive director of Flyers Rights, an advocacy group based in Napa, Calif., that says it has 25,000 members, said she was inappropriately touched at a checkpoint as she traveled from San Francisco to New York last week to accept an award from the Huffington Post. The underwire of her bra set off the metal detector, and she was patted down, Hanni said.

"It's absurd - you feel violated and abused, and lots of people, including myself, won't put up with it," said Hanni, who started Flyers Rights in 2006 after a nine-hour delay at a Texas airport.

The Air Line Pilots Association, which represents 53,000 employees with 38 U.S. and Canadian airlines, said it is working with federal agencies to create an exception for pilots who have been subjected, they said, "to a long line of ever-increasing security measures that have frustrated and burdened."

"Screening airline pilots for the possession of threat objects does not enhance security, because pilots have the safety of their passengers and aircraft in their hands on every flight," said Capt. John Prater, the group's president.

A different touch

Security officials say pat-downs are primarily used when a traveler sets off a traditional metal detector; when an anomaly is found during a full-body scan; or during random screening. Those who opt out of the full-body scans or walk-through metal detectors are also subject to the pat-downs.

Aviation security analysts say the chief change is the way TSA agents are touching passengers. Lawyer Charles Slepian, founder of the Oregon-based Foreseeable Risk Analysis Center, a security consultancy, said full-body scanners and frisks are useful for discovering knives or other hand-held weapons but are less effective for detecting terrorist devices, such as chemical explosives.

"It's a better way to frisk, but we're now subjecting the general public to the same frisking that police use with probable cause," Slepian said.

TSA officials have refused to comment on the specific techniques being used, but the best example of how the pat-downs are performed is a TSA video on YouTube.

In response to a report from a Florida radio personality who said she was handcuffed to a chair at Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport during a security screening, TSA posted a link on its blog to the security video, which shows several passengers being frisked after going through a scanning machine. At about the 5:30 mark in the video, a woman wearing a purple sweat shirt can be seen being briskly patted down by a female TSA agent.

Other security experts say the enhanced physical examinations could be helpful in finding dangerous weapons hidden in underwear, such as the plastic explosives discovered on Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian-born man who unsuccessfully tried to blow up a passenger plane to Detroit on Christmas Day.

Billie Vincent, former director of aviation security at the Federal Aviation Administration who now works as a security consultant in Chantilly, said such pat-downs "undoubtedly improve security. It allows TSA to search areas that a metal detector might not get."

As for the effectiveness of all of the new and enhanced airport security methods, the jury is out.

"Most of these security features are for public consumption," said Vahid Motevalli, the co-founder of the Aviation Institute at George Washington University and now a professor at Purdue University. "In many cases, if you don't catch these issues well in advance of the airport, it's too late."

[sbk]

It seems as tho pilots associations are also against this:

Pilots' unions for US Airways and American Airlines are urging their members to avoid full-body scanning at airport security checkpoints, citing health risks and concerns about intrusiveness and security officer behavior.

"Pilots should NOT submit to AIT (Advanced Imaging Technology) screening," wrote Capt. Mike Cleary, president of the U.S. Airline Pilots Association, in a letter to members this week. USAPA represents more than 5,000 US Airways pilots.

additionally;

"We have received hundreds of e-mails and phone calls from travelers vowing to stop flying," Geoff Freeman, an executive vice president of the U.S. Travel Association, told Reuters.

A 2008 survey found that air travelers "avoided" 41 million trips because they believed the air travel system was either "broken" or in need of "moderate correction," the U.S. Travel Association said. The decisions cost airlines $9.4 billion, the survey said.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/11/12/travel.screening/?hpt=T1