TSA: Trying To Fool Scanners With Clever Clothes Will Just Lead To A Pat-Down

You might remember our story from July on Flying Pasties, the stickers that purported to hide your private bits from airport scanners. Those are just one of many products released in recent months attempting to cash in on travelers’ anti-scanner attitudes. However, the TSA has made it pretty clear that all you’re really doing when you walk through security carrying or wearing one of these products is asking for a pat-down.

In a post on the TSA blog, the agency writes:

[P]assengers should be aware that the use of these types of products will likely result in a pat-down. Some might think this is TSA’s way of getting back at clever passengers. That’s not the case at all. It’s just security.

We’re certainly not going to tell you what you should or shouldn’t buy or wear, but I feel it’s only fair to give you a heads up on your choice of attire.

so before you slip into those aluminum foil undies, be warned that you’re going to end up with a real hands-on experience on your way to the gate.

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. TuxedoCartman says:

    I cry shenanigans on the TSA for that one!

    You mean to tell me that they SERIOUSLY believe that those tiny pasties (and… what do you call that… a crotch pasty?) could be concealing something dangerous? Bull. It IS nothing more than an attempt to exact revenge on uppity flyers who have the nerve to criticize TSA regulations.

    • Mr. Stupid says:

      “crotch pasty”?

      Better than a pasty crotch, I says.

    • jbandsma says:

      It’s called a g-string

    • Cosmo_Kramer says:

      Think logically. If you wanted to bring something dangerous onto a plane, and you knew that you could block the X-ray from seeing certain areas of your body, where would you hide that dangerous object or substance?

      • RadarOReally has got the Post-Vacation Blues says:

        It would have to be a flat, tiny dangerous object.

        • TuxedoCartman says:

          Exactly.

        • TheRedSeven says:

          Like a razor blade?

          • Humward says:

            Razor blades aren’t going to be picked up in the patdown, either, unless they’re directly placing their palms onto the genitals and grabbing very hard. Otherwise, it would just feel like a shirt tail.

            Of course, why stick it down your pants anyways? Razor blades can be brought on board by the simple expedient of carrying a razor in your luggage…which is permitted. And even if it weren’t, you could easily conceal it in the metal parts of your rolling carry-on. If it’s razors we’re after…good luck with that.

        • Cosmo_Kramer says:

          It wouldn’t have to be flat if there was no patdown, which is why they do the patdown when you block the X-rays.

          The size of the object would depend on the size of the x-ray blocker. A… large woman with an x-ray blocking sports bra could easily smuggle a gun onto a plane without a patdown.

          • sonneillon says:

            she could do that anyways if shes been around the block a few times, and then a patdown wouldn’t matter.

      • Pax says:

        INSIDE my body, where the TSO couldn’t see it on their screen anyway. And I would then be the most cooperative, cheerful, COMPLIANT passenger you ever did see.

        Security Theater. That’s all the scanners and grope-downs are.

    • Cheap Sniveler: Sponsored by JustAnswer.comâ„¢ says:

      My “Crotch Pasty” could be concealing something dangerous.

    • macoan says:

      Tiny pasties…. TSA probable will not.

      But full foil underware that can’t be viewed, yes.

      Why? Because if they don’t, people who do want to smuggle things through will just do that and then there is no point at scanning anything.

      • Kitten Mittens says:

        That’s currently the case anyway – since I can hide anything in my butt or stomach and the scanners won’t pick it up.

        Security theater and all that jazz…

      • Pax says:

        I could smuggle a kilogram of plastic explosives through any TWENTY AIT imaging scanners, and any FIFTY “enhanced” pat-downs.

        Wanna know how?

        By shoving it up my anus. Neither scanners nor hands will feel things concealed inside a human body.

        • dangermike says:

          You’re overthinking things. Or over-something things… A pancake of it pressed against your belly won’t show up either.

          • Pax says:

            If you have someone ELSE do the inserting, you could have your entire body be 100% free of residues that would show up if you were swabbed.

            There might not even be anything for a bomb-sniffing dog to detect, either.

            ^_^

    • jesusofcool says:

      I agree whole-heartedly with the revenge comment. In fact, I think it’s darn near insulting that they chose to make this statement on their blog. It’s an FING blog – as a corporation/organization, if you’re using it to thumb your nose at consumers you’re doing it wrong! They’re taking to a public online forum to say, “we hear that a lot of you are pissed off about our policies that companies have made products to capitalize on your anger – and they’re not going to work haha.” Even if you forget for a second that the actual policies of the TSA are so astronomically out of whack, their business practices will remind you.

    • AustinDan says:

      You’re missing the point. ANY attempt to not be fully scanned results in a pat-down. The pat-downs were intentionally designed to be uncomfortable and invasive to encourage the public to use the privacy invading, potentially dangerous scanners.

      The entire idea is to punish passengers that don’t want to be irradiated and have their nude picture looked at (and potentially photographed by) the screener.

    • Jean Naimard says:

      Yes, those pasties hide something very dangerous: nipples and a vulva, two horrible things that are only useful for sex, and sex is an abhorrent idea for americans.

    • spamtasticus says:

      Turns out the real reason the TSA is doing the things it does is not just for Security Theatre. Apparently it seems like they are using the fear of terrorists to do an end run around illegal anti “general” crime checkpoints. Just in case you don’t know. It has been deemed unconstitutional by the US supreme court to conduct “general” criminal checkpoints. The only reason that drunk driving checkpoints are allowed and the TSA checkpoints are allowed is to stop imminent and immediate threats due to a drunk driver or in the TSA’s case an equipped terrorist. The TSA seems to be expanding it’s focus at our expense and circumventing these constitutional rulings:

      http://papersplease.org/wp/2011/01/08/tidbits-from-the-tsa-show-screening-being-used-as-illegal-general-criminal-dragnet-not-for-aviation-security/

  2. RickinStHelen says:

    So after a long business trip, I can spice up my trip home by wearing crotch pasties, Cool!

  3. Kishi says:

    Hahahaha, like these measures really help much with security anyway.

  4. Juravial says:

    I choose to vote with my money, and I will not be flying anywhere until this crap is removed.

    It is an unreasonable search by the TSA security theatre, but any citizen that wants to can just move along and follow orders because ignorance is strength, freedom is slavery, and war is peace, right?

    • jason in boston says:

      Stop it with your doublespeak!

      By the way, your rations of chocolate have gone up…

    • There's room to move as a fry cook says:

      I’m boycotting airlines also. I refuse to fly to Paris, stay at The Hôtel Scribe, and snorkel caviar until these pat-downs end.

      • Humward says:

        Oh, honey. This ain’t the 1950′s anymore — flying is now something akin to taking a really loud bus full of screaming children. There ain’t nobody sipping champagne on the red-eye these days.

        • tooluser says:

          God bless the flight attendants that still give you a cup of ice, two bottles of booze and a full can of Coke.

    • myCatCracksMeUp says:

      Despite my intentions to not fly again, I really need to go somewhere too far to drive in the short an amount of time I need to get there in, so I’m flying tomorrow, out of BWI.

      I’ll take the pat-down, as objectional as I consider it to be. I am going to wear multiple layers of clothing. Since I’ve lost a little weight and haven’t gotten rid of the larger clothes, I think I can easily get 4 layers of pants and shirts on without being too uncomfortable. Plus a bra and a couple of camisoles.

  5. Blueskylaw says:

    Maybe if 99% of fliers wore these, they would spend so much time patting everybody down that most flights would be delayed and the airlines would start losing money for real.

  6. Omali says:

    http://xkcd.com/779/

    This is a much better way to make your stay at the airport enjoyable.

  7. jason in boston says:

    Hmm…radiation or getting touched?

    I hate security theatre. With that said, flying pasties are rather clever.

    • Difdi says:

      I wonder how the TSA would react if someone aimed one of those infrared cameras, the ones that can see through clothes, at them? After all, photography is perfectly legal at TSA checkpoints, so long as it isn’t taking pictures of x-ray machine display screens and the like.

      If they can take nudie shots of us, why would they object if we returned the favor?

  8. Virginia Consumer says:

    Ok, so look at it this. It’s your job to make sure the next underwear bomber doesn’t get on an airplane. However, a small part (if it were a big segment there would be insanity at the airport, but most people are going along) flying public would rather go down in flames than have to submit to the regulations that your employer has established.

    So there you are patting people down all day. Bear in mind there are a lot of people slimier than you flying on that airplane. People that don’t believe in bathing, people that don’t wear clean underwear, you get the idea.

    Now on top of that you have people throwing insults your way throughout the day.

    Then you get this a-hole that thinks they are being cute by trying to bypass the system that has been put in place (for better or worse, it’s not the TSA agents decision on these policies). Now you have to do a pat down on someone clearly out to cause trouble.

    Now next in line you have someone using the same technique only now they really are hiding the key element to the bomb they have in another part of their luggage (say the fuse).

    How do you the lowly spat upon gate TSA agent deal with it. You got it. Everybody gets a pat down that tries to conceal something, whether that something is modesty or bomb making components.

    Remember it was shoddy security and smaller airports that put 4 planes at the control of a total of 12 terrorists. 12 people got past security, without one incident.

    If you got an issue with the TSA and their methods, contact your congressmen they and the TSA policy makers are the ones you need to deal with, not the lowly gate agent.

    Disclosure: I am not a TSA employee nor related to one, but I do know a few gate level TSA agents and the stories they tell will make your skin crawl. It is a thankless demanding job with all the politics and bureaucracy of a govt. job to boot. I think working at walmart would be better hearing some of their stories.

    • jason in boston says:

      The full body scanners would not have caught the underwear bomber.

      Why not just have bomb sniffing dogs like in Russia? Ahh yes, no lobbyists there.

      It isn’t “being cute”. It is standing up for the rights that America was founded on.

      • RevancheRM says:

        This is exactly what I’m saying! Screen 100% of the passengers much more effectively, without violating the Constitution.

        Why screen 1/10th of the passengers, simply to attempt to justify a multi-million dollar device? Screen 100% of them. Make people show up 5 hours prior to a flight to be screened…or just sniff them with dogs as they exit the metal detector.

        Hmmmm…..

    • Doubts42 says:

      I don’t buy it.
      No one is forced to work for the TSA, nor is anyone forced to conintue working for the TSA.

      Don’t like dealing with the great unwashed masses, get a real job with a real salary based on what you contribute to the profits of that company. Don’t keep whining about the way i behave as you live off of my tax dollars.
      Gate agent for the TSA, or phone rep for a scummy debt collection agency. you picked your job, you picked the abuse that comes with it.

    • Wei says:

      I’m not saying they get their jollies by doing their job, but don’t try to sell me on “people who don’t want to be searched/groped are ok with the plane going down”

      The scanners have been circumvented numerous times, they are tantamount to a warrant-less strip search, and the company that installs them is owned by the former TSA director.

    • RadarOReally has got the Post-Vacation Blues says:

      So your assumption is that nobody would find the bomb in the luggage? The tiny bit of whatever you could sneak behind those pasties is nothing compared to what you could sneak in in areas they can’t scan. (In the interest of good tasted, I’ll leave that last bit to your imagination.)

    • Juravial says:

      I’m not gonna blame the TSA agent, but neither should he/she complain about the stress his job entails. I get it, its a job with benefits in a recession (or post recession, depends on which economist you ask), but if you perform a task that is in itself unreasonable, expect to get unreasonable feedback.

      Its not a “cute” way of bypassing the system, its a way to protect my privacy and genitalia from being posted on a view-screen for any TSA goon that wants to snap a cell shot whenever he/she thinks someone interesting is going through. I’m still not gonna fly though until they remove those damn machines.

    • samonela says:

      Remember it was shoddy security and smaller airports that put 4 planes at the control of a total of 12 terrorists. 12 people got past security, without one incident.

      Are you implying that the current system is any better?

      http://consumerist.com/2010/12/eagle-eyed-tsa-screeners-dont-notice-loaded-handgun-in-mans-carry-on.html

      http://consumerist.com/2010/12/oops-i-made-it-past-the-tsa-screeners-with-a-6-hunting-knife.html

      http://consumerist.com/2010/11/adam-savage-tsa-scanners-missed-my-12-long-weapon.html

      Or perhaps that the TSA agents are any better or anymore trustworthy than pre-2001?

      http://consumerist.com/2010/10/tsa-screener-stole-up-to-700-a-day-from-passengers.html

      http://consumerist.com/2010/08/sea-tac-security-supervisor-pleads-guilty-to-stealing-20k-worth-of-stuff-from-luggage.html

      And that’s just the stuff we are actually privileged enough to hear about…

    • MuffinSangria says:

      You don’t get it. People that criticize TSA “security” would not “rather go down in flames.” No one is calling for no security. Critics of these machines can see that these measures are worthless and don’t add any value to truly securing air travel in the US. They were put in place, and still pushed today, by the previous head of DHS who makes money off these machines.

      If your TSA friends don’t like their jobs, then quit. Stop using the Nuremberg defense of “simply following orders.”

      “Remember it was shoddy security and smaller airports that put 4 planes at the control of a total of 12 terrorists.”

      Wow, I didn’t realize that Logan, Newark and Dulles airports were small. Those were the originating airports for the 9-11 hijackers. Would not want to go through what you consider a large airport.

    • Awesome McAwesomeness says:

      Agents are doing a job that violates peoples bodies. It’s not our job as airline passengers to make them feel better about a forced violation our privacy. They took the job, they have to know that people don’t want to have their body looked at that way. It’s not my problem that they have a crappy job. If they don’t like it, maybe they could join the rest of the 15% of the nation that is standing in the unemployment line.

    • FredKlein says:

      Ok, so look at it this. It’s your job to make sure the next underwear bomber doesn’t get on an airplane.

      Scanners won’t do that. At best*, the scanner might see something ‘anomalous’ and you’ll be patted down. Which leads right into the next point-

      The pat down won’t stop an undie-bomber, either. The TSA screener is supposed to run their hand up your thigh ‘until they meet resistance’. Of course, there’s no way to tell if the ‘resistance’ is your ‘package’, or a ‘package’ of explosives.

      *I say “at best”, as there was a recent study showing that a flat pancake of explosive with a tapered edge easily is missed by the scanners.

    • Zowzers says:

      its wasn’t shoddy airport security that allowed the hijacking of those flights, it was the faulty intelligence leading up to that event that was the root cause.

      If you want to improve the safety of the US vs terrorists, then improve the intelligence gathering side, not the knee jerk reactionary “security” side. As once they’ve entered the air port, you will have already lost.

    • legotech says:

      actually, airport security did not fail on 9/11…box cutters were not prohibited items. In fact, pre 9/11 I used to fly with a swiss army knife and a leatherman tool.

      The failure was and still is in the intelligence community. And the TSA could not possibly have caught the underwear bomber no matter how invasive their search…The underwear bomber boarded his flight in Europe.

    • Pax says:

      Then you get this a-hole that thinks they are being cute by trying to bypass the system that has been put in place (for better or worse, it’s not the TSA agents decision on these policies). Now you have to do a pat down on someone clearly out to cause trouble.

      So … not wanting someone to see my actual penis, is “lkooking to cause trouble” …?

      Funny, I thought the word for that was “modesty”.

      Besides, if I wanted to get a bomb past the TSA, I’d arry it [b]inside[/b] my body. And I’m a big guy – 300 pounds. There’s a LOT of volume in there that could be used for hiding an explosive device …

      Still feeling particularly safe?

    • dee1313 says:

      I see your point, though your wording could have been better (as others have pointed out).

      Basically, it sucks for the TSA agents too.

      I disagree with many people’s idea of “if you don’t like it then get out” approach. (If a TSA agent doesn’t like their job, then don’t do it.)

      That is not a solution, and the people who believe that are no better than those who come up with these security methods they’re complaining about. Basically, the TSA is saying “if you don’t like it then get out” as well. Pat down, scanner, or don’t fly.

      I am not saying I support the TSA and their idea of security, but handing the bullshit that was given to you over to their agents, who have no power to change anything, just makes you an asshole.

      “If you got an issue with the TSA and their methods, contact your congressmen they and the TSA policy makers are the ones you need to deal with, not the lowly gate agent.”

    • mewyn dyner says:

      Ugh.

      The problem is, the TSA hasn’t, or at least won’t say they have, caught any terrorists going through checkpoints. You’d think with all the animosity toward them, they’d go and say that they’ve caught all these stinky nasty ter’rists.

      The thing is, these checkpoints are actually a lot worse off for our safety than if they weren’t there. There were two things that were enacted right away that helped make us safer, and nothing else has been a help. Those two things are reinforced, locked cockpit doors and a more aware populace. I believe that all the attempted terrorist attacks (I still need to research this, which I plan to do when I am back at my University) since the 9/11 attacks have been stopped by the passengers or law enforcement and intelligence.

      How are these checkpoints making us less safe? Well for one it pools masses of people in one area. A prime target for anyone bent on causing a lot of lives lost. A terrorist doesn’t need to get a bomb past security, they just need to bomb security and you cause much more loss of life than one downed airplane. Two, it lulls people into a false sense of security. It makes people slower to react to actual threats, and that can be a bad thing when time is of the essence in stopping said threat.

      Also, if you stop to think about it, blowing up just one airplane doesn’t really further most of the radical, terrorist religionist agendas very well. They want big messages, not tiny little pock marks that are easily forgotten. This is why they opted to take control of the planes instead of just blowing them up. Now that doing that is near impossible, they’ll look into other targets; things hopefully our intelligence community is onto (and let’s hope they don’t drop the ball this time).

      • Virginia Consumer says:

        Terror is about fear, just look at the response that has resulted from failed attempts like the shoe bomber and the chemical bomb plans in the UK. We now have this great fear that something will happen in the air and these policies.

        I don’t necc. agree with the policies, but it’s not TSA people on the ground that have anything to do with it other than enforce it. I you can bet they get severely reprimanded when not properly enforced (at least when it comes to lax security, not sure about abuses, which unfortunately have occurred).

        It’s a large workforce you will undoubtedly get some bad apples, especially when pay is not that much over minimum wage (although I have had people tell me it’s a gateway job to other government jobs at least here in the DC area which will get some better candidates).

    • Iaimtomisbehaveintheblack says:

      Ok,

      So I have a kilogram of plastic explosive shoved up my pooper, a pen and a digital camera in my carry on, and a watch on my wrist. Guess what? The pat down would do absolutely not a thing. However, I just smuggled on the components of a powerful bomb capable of taking down an aircraft. The digital camera battery is used as a power source, the modified watch is a lovely timer, and the pen contained a small blasting cap. It would literally take me less than five minutes to put a device together. Oh, and if I was a wacked out suicide bomber, I would not even need the watch. How is security preventing an attack like that? Fact of the matter is that there is ABSOLUTELY no way to ‘armor’ our transportation networks. If they want to take a plane down, they will. I for one am not going to worry about it.

    • Big Dave says:

      Ohhh, poor baby. Don’t like being treated like a jack-booted gestapo thug? Here’s a solution … Don’t take a job as a jack-booted gestapo thug. How’s that for logic?
      Those TSA scum-bags LOVE what they do. They are virtually ALL failed cop wanna-bees. To a man/woman are all closet fascists, who need to be treated as such.
      Ever notice how the majority of them speak with such a thick accent, it is obvious English is not their first language?
      Don’t make me laugh. They are exactly the kind of worthless scum we already think they are.

  9. YokoOhNo says:

    i’m getting patted down regardless so this doesn’t pertain to me anymore than the entire sham of security theater Der TSA and Der Materland have instituted to redistribute money from my pocket to their friend’s pocket or simply abscond with taxpayer funds to better fund their ill-gotten lifestyle.

  10. Mcshonky says:

    I deliberately wear a huge “toy” “strapped on” and await my chance to crack wise since it is not illegal to enjoy the feeling of silicone against my thigh during a flight.

    Excuse my I’ll be right back.
    I’ve aroused myself.

    • The cake is a lie! says:

      I do that as well. I’m naturally equipped and carry a backup just in case I’m asked to pleasure two women at the same time. It keeps me more balanced when I walk as well, so that is another benefit.

  11. The cake is a lie! says:

    If a TSA agent isn’t aware of what is under an area covering my privates, then they are obviously an advance part of the alien android invasion and should be arrested themselves. If I don’t want you seeing my junk, then you aren’t seeing it. Personally I prefer to just decline the scanner and go for the pat down. So far nobody has touched me inappropriately, but nobody has seen me naked yet either.

  12. FredKlein says:

    SO, will the (approx.) 1/4 of all women who are on their periods and wearing maxi pads be forced to be groped?

  13. HighontheHill says:

    Well all I know is that I have to fly for business in a few weeks, I will not enter an x-ray device and plan on putting on quite a show when they molest me; I’m gonna be a moaner and a groaner and will almost certainly beg him/her not to stop until I’ve completed.

    Should be interesting.

    • healthdog says:

      You, sir/madam, are an American hero.

    • Virginia Consumer says:

      Don’t be surprised if they decide to not let you fly then. You don’t have to be a dick. If you don’t like the policies contact your congressman or senator. They are the ones that have the power to lean on the TSA management.

  14. sir_eccles says:

    I opted out of the magic terrorist scanner at PHX recently. Just took a step to the left and walked through the old fashioned metal detector. No one said a word, no pat down, no nothing.

    Also worth noting that all children were being told to go through the metal detector and were not allowed to go through the magic box.

  15. Red_Eye says:

    People are so gullable.

    The TSA cant tell the difference by feel of a Maxi Pad, a soaked Poise incontinence pad or a lump of C4. These searches are about conditioning and control. Bow to your new masters. BTW have you noticed not only terrorists use fear to condition your response.

  16. AgostoBehemoth says:

    Refuse the scanners, and insist they put on fresh rubber gloves. During the process, ask the TSA folks why haven’t they been given film-badges (radiation exposure…), as these backscatter/x-ray machines leak all over the place.

    oh, and yes – do moan. :)

    • MuffinSangria says:

      Fresh rubber gloves straight from the box, not out of some TSA agent’s pocket who may not have washed their clothes is who knows how long.

    • GuyGuidoEyesSteveDaveâ„¢ says:

      Because the machines put out/generate less radiation than a dosimeter can accurately measure for the time being exposed i.e. 10mRem? IIRC, my dosimeter badge could not be worn in the sun because the solar radiation would affect the readings in the exposure range, since I was working with an actual xray machine.

      Also, from what I can find, these machines don’t put out enough to require a dosimeter:
      Rules require personal dosimetry monitoring if the dose to the individual, in one month, could possibly exceed 10% of the maximum annual occupational dose limit of 5,000 mRem (500 mRem per month).

      • AgostoBehemoth says:

        all fine and good, I believe what you say. But, they told us Agent Orange was safe too. Wait 10-20yrs and see the lawsuits.

  17. damicatz says:

    If the TSA attempts to touch my genitals and commit a sexual assault on me, I will use all necessary force to stop the assault and defend myself from government violence.

    These strip searches are unconstitutional and every citizen has a duty to resist them using any and all necessary force. Force is the only thing a government understands; if even 10% of air passengers physically resist the screening they will have no choice but to stop.

    • Doubts42 says:

      which will be too late for the 10% in federal prison.

      I am as anti-TSA as you can get, but assaulting an agent would be incredibly stupid.

      • evnmorlo says:

        It would take less than 2 weeks with 10% of the 2 million passengers who fly each day opting to be arrested for the federal prison system to be completely saturated.

        • catastrophegirl chooses not to fly says:

          and long before that happens it would become problematic for the police forces closest to each airport. all the pressure would be on a few areas of the system and some law enforcement sectors will feel the impact in a big way long before they could even begin to spread out the population of people arrested for airport infractions

    • J Brill says:

      They can and will apply a lot more “necessary force” than you can.

  18. pegasi says:

    If they’ve gotta search me, I wanna at least watch them change gloves first!

  19. fs2k2isfun says:
  20. Pig_Farmington says:

    Proof that they just want a peek at your junk

  21. Jessie Ventura says:

    So baisically it’s “Show your tits or GTFO.”

  22. dush says:

    The only thing the govt has going for them is they don’t actually force people to fly.
    But just think if they had people groping you in order to buy some groceries. Or scanning you in order to enter your place of worship. Probably not far off.

  23. prismatist says:

    Well then how about a product that just makes you look really really impressive down there? Foil-wrapped cucumber like in Spinal Tap anyone?

  24. baquwards says:

    Are people so insecure that they get uncomfortable having their genitalia seen with a body scanner? I mean the person looking at this sees this stuff all day long and probably couldn’t care less. Do people think that they are going to point and laugh?

    My mom went through one after christmas and thought it was painless, she did feel bad for the poor person that had to see her bits and pieces.

    I actually know someone who wore a kilt and refused the scanner, so they would have to put their hand up his kilt and touch his junk, and no he wasn’t wearing any underwear, this guy is truly pathetic. I feel bad for the TSA agents.

    • sir_eccles says:

      Most of us aren’t that insecure. What most of us are complaining about is the millions upon millions of dollar being spent on these machine when they haven’t actually been shown to be any good compared to proper intelligence.

      How many times has TSA caught someone trying to board a plane?
      How many times has TSA had to change their procedures after someone got something onboard?

    • catastrophegirl chooses not to fly says:

      i wear medical appliances that can’t be exposed to the xray in the AIT machine. and can’t be removed/run through on the belt. if i could be scanned i’d prefer it, as a rape survivor, over being groped by a stranger. i’d still consider the pasties though if i didn’t know it would get me scanned.

    • Pax says:

      It’s not about insecurity. It’s about the loss of my expectation of privacy.

      And all you complacent Sheeple are undermining it. }=

      • myCatCracksMeUp says:

        Exactly what Pax says goes for me too.

        It’s MY body and my right to say who sees it and who doesn’t. I’d no more allow a stranger at an airport to see it than I would allow it to be photographed and posted on the internet for all strangers to see.

      • dush says:

        It’s not even about the privacy, it’s about being treated like a criminal just for wanting to travel. Standing there in a tube in spread eagle formation while they scan you and probe you. There’s no grounds whatsoever for detaining you and searching your person. Pathetic.

  25. Buckus says:

    TSA’s already admitted that the pat-down is a “punishment” for opting out of the x-rays. Any further punitive actions will actually be sexual assault.

  26. FrugalFreak says:

    And be warning to The Stupid Army, those with attached patsies will start eating gassy foods and releasing at the proper time. HA That will teach ya!

  27. moonunitrappa says:

    I think all the bitching and moaning has worked in some areas. I flew 4 times this Christmas. I never once went through the cancer machine and I had my dog with me on two of those trips. I’m sure other people have other experiences, but at DFW , LAX and TPA the machines were there but not used. I thought they were all mandatory booga booga booga we will rule your thoughts required? Luckily, I didn’t have to pull out my crazy to protest.

  28. Not Given says:
  29. Pax says:

    “[P]assengers should be aware that the use of these types of products will likely result in a pat-down. Some might think this is TSA’s way of getting back at clever passengers. That’s not the case at all. It’s just security theater.”

    There. Fixed that for them.

    Also, if I were inclined to eve fly an airplane again (which I’m not, thanks to the TSA scope-and-grope-athon), I would wear these products:
    http://www.etsy.com/shop/4thamendmentwear?ref=seller_info

  30. Jennlee says:

    The scanners don’t even actually work well at finding explosives, which is their supposed purpose: http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/full_body_scanner_case_explosive_freedom_203916-1.html

    The 4th Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause…

  31. Hudson Valley Chronic says:

    You should opt for the pat-down, no matter what. The backscatter scanners — foisted on the TSA by Rapiscan lobbyist/former DHS secretary Michael Chertoff — are dangerous and, according to a number of experts, can be easily thwarted by anyone with a slab of foam latex and a can of FX-grade putty. Even a large pancake can disguise a handgun.
    Although such issues were intentionally not addressed for security reasons, the video posted below from After the Press (afterthepress.com) has broken through the major media hyperbole barrier to answer the real questions about what’s wrong with these machines. Neither of the interviewees, two of the most reputable scientists in the field of radiation physics and technology, will step into one. So whether or not you’re offended by the prospect of becoming the subject of a live peepshow for blue-gloved agents, or care about your rights being abrogated, you’ll still want to be cognizant of the danger in subjecting your or your children’s bodies to backscatter radiation.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eS0UxXDNs4w

  32. pot_roast says:

    With the way oil prices and airline ticket prices are going up, I can’t afford to fly anywhere as it is. :/

  33. addiction.orange says:

    Death penalty for all TSA agents, effective immediately please!

  34. Mysterry says:

    Next; Passenger sues TSA because scanner caused cancer!

    In honesty, what the hell are you going to hide under those pasties? A nipple? A crotch? That was the point right?

  35. tz says:

    SHAME on them. They are molesting children. Rationalize it for “national security” or whatever but they are doing heinous acts. In any other context they would be arrested and probably be in solitary or dead in jail or prison. They should refuse or quit.

    They needed guards at Auschwitz, Bergen Belsen, and Treblinka. They followed orders too.

    It doesn’t matter. They are doing horrible things and should be shunned. If any attend church they should be put out of the congregation. No club or organization should allow them as members.

    If they want to be paid by the government to be perverts, (redefines perverse incentive,) they should still be treated like perverts. I have no sympathy.

  36. jim says:

    So….

    if having the TSA prevents terrorists from blowing themselves up on planes and killing lots of people….

    what is to prevent the terrorists from blowing themselves up while waiting in a TSA line surrounded by lots of people?

    Is this just the most useless and wasteful government organization ever created?

    I think yes.

    • IceCat says:

      That’s what I’ve been thinking, that and one of those scanners plus a explosion is a ready made dirty bomb too.

  37. lawgirl502 says:

    If I shove a dildo up my arse, would they make me take it out? Don’t I have the right to have it there? Would I have to put that through the scanner and then reinsert? I don’t do this….just wondering is all…..

  38. CyberSkull says:

    Look, can I just walk in naked and skip all this crap?

  39. Rhinoguy says:

    One night a friend and I sat down and thought up every trick we could think of to bring down a plane. We came up with almost two thousand over a week. Then we weeded until we had only ones that would easily get past the TSA. Still over five hundred. We destroyed the list and realized that any intelligent nut could bring down a plane. Or far more easily, kill several TSA agents at a check point, which would have the same effect. Again we decided to destroy the list. Security Theater indeed. All the arguments in favor of keeping the TSA involve profit.
    Personally I will never go near an airport again. The security agents are too likely to hurt me “accidentally” and they truly scare me.

  40. IceCat says:

    Well this is another great example of everyone is guilty of something , until proven innocent…

  41. brianguyy says:

    she’s wearing shoes in the picture. that’s how you know it’s fake.