New TSA Security Procedures

Discuss the latest news and rumors in the magic world.
Pepka
Posts: 412
Joined: May 4th, 2008, 9:40 am

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Pepka » November 18th, 2010, 7:39 pm

As someone being treated for cancer, I get MORE than my fair share of radiation and have NO intention of going through a scanner. Not sure how I feel about getting felt up either.

However, I DO like Penn's suggestion for this he made a few years ago. BACON and a KISS AIRLINES. Right before you board, you have to eat a piece of bacon and kiss someone of the same sex on the lips. As long as they don't mind bacon breath, I got no problem with that.

User avatar
Kevin Connolly
Posts: 2437
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Kevin Connolly » November 18th, 2010, 8:47 pm

You'll be exposed to more radiation during your flight than through the scanner, so it's be bantered about.

Maybe we should go back to square one? Profiling.
Please visit my website.
http://houdinihimself.com/
I buy,sell + trade Houdini, Hardeen items.

User avatar
Dustin Stinett
Posts: 6919
Joined: July 22nd, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Sometimes
Location: Southern California
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Dustin Stinett » November 18th, 2010, 9:36 pm

No offense, but for now I will take the word of the actual doctors and scientists at Johns Hopkins, Columbia University, and even USC (though Id rather hear from UCLA) who dont have a chip in the game before I take the word of Doctor Napolitano and her government bureaucrats (who have gone all in) particularly when one of her own found the governments report on the safety of these machines, deeply flawed.

User avatar
Kevin Connolly
Posts: 2437
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Kevin Connolly » November 18th, 2010, 10:23 pm

Tough call. Nappy or Columbia. I'd think I would need a third opinion with those two options.

Any new ideas from the Peanut Gallery here?
Please visit my website.

http://houdinihimself.com/

I buy,sell + trade Houdini, Hardeen items.

User avatar
Dustin Stinett
Posts: 6919
Joined: July 22nd, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Sometimes
Location: Southern California
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Dustin Stinett » November 18th, 2010, 10:50 pm

Kevin, it's Johns Hopkins, Columbia, and the University of Southern California. That is three independent (sans agenda) studies/opinions versus one (with an agenda). Hardly a tough call.

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 25626
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Richard Kaufman » November 18th, 2010, 11:53 pm

No institution is sans agenda. What you're looking for is a consensus. But you can certainly see why airline professionals like flight attendants and pilots don't want to go through these machines multiple times a day.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

User avatar
Kevin Connolly
Posts: 2437
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Kevin Connolly » November 19th, 2010, 12:08 am

Have to agree with Richard. They all have agendas.
Please visit my website.

http://houdinihimself.com/

I buy,sell + trade Houdini, Hardeen items.

David Alexander
Posts: 1549
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Aurora IL

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby David Alexander » November 19th, 2010, 12:19 am

I read the article Dustin linked to. The "assurances" that the machines are safe sound suspiciously like they came from the machine's manufacturer or people hired by the machine's manufacturer. I would value the assurances if they came as a result of independent tests done by people with no financial incentive to gloss over bad results.

Bill Duncan
Posts: 1600
Joined: March 13th, 2008, 11:33 pm

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Bill Duncan » November 19th, 2010, 1:26 am

If I thought the intrusion might make us safer,it might be easier to accept. But since our chances of being killed by a cow, or by a fire we accidentally set in our own homes, are greater than our being killed by terrorists (even before such measures were taken), I think we may be overreaching on the "safety" issue.

If you want something to fear...
http://www.firesafety.gov/citizens/statistics/index

I'm just sayin'

User avatar
Dustin Stinett
Posts: 6919
Joined: July 22nd, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Sometimes
Location: Southern California
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Dustin Stinett » November 19th, 2010, 1:31 am

And that is what I mean by "agenda." I'm not sure what agenda the institutions involved in the other studies could have in that regard. The more that comes out, the more "follow the money" becomes a good rule of thumb.

User avatar
mrgoat
Posts: 4242
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Brighton, UK
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby mrgoat » November 19th, 2010, 3:51 am

How many terrorists attacks has all the security since 9/11 stopped?

Ian Kendall
Posts: 2506
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Ian Kendall » November 19th, 2010, 6:19 am

Probably more than we will ever be told. For a start, there was the liquid bomb plot from a few years ago, plus the more restrictive carry on rules have possibly stopped (or at least made a lot more difficult) overpowering an aircraft. The thing is, we will never know.

User avatar
mrgoat
Posts: 4242
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Brighton, UK
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby mrgoat » November 19th, 2010, 6:38 am

Wikipedia and I think that the good old British Bobby stopped the liquid bomb plot, nothing to do with Security Theatre at the airports?

Maybe you should correct this entry according the the info you have:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_trans ... craft_plot

;)

Ian Kendall
Posts: 2506
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Ian Kendall » November 19th, 2010, 6:44 am

Point taken, but the restrictions have made it hard to do again...

User avatar
mrgoat
Posts: 4242
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Brighton, UK
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby mrgoat » November 19th, 2010, 6:48 am

AFAIK, the TSA have not apprehended, or stopped a single threat.

And now they want to touch our cocks too.

I am not sure of the cost of the exercise, nor the impact on travel because of the delays they cause, but is there value for money?

Or is it all a massive con to try and keep America 'scared'?

I fly to Vegas in January. I will bring a porn mag, lotion and tissues and ask them if they mind me 'reading' it whilst they search me.

User avatar
Doug Thornton
Posts: 525
Joined: January 18th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: David Copperfield, Penn & Teller, Harry Anderson, Derren Brown, Mac King
Location: Gorgeous New Jersey USA
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Doug Thornton » November 19th, 2010, 8:06 am

Security, shmoocurity, ridiculous.
There are unfortunate lapses even with the old procedures; the new ones will be flawed also.
I work retail sales in Newark Airport, go through the employee security line every day.

Remember when that guy ran through the exit here to hug his girlfriend goodbye? And they shut down the entire terminal? There was just a roped off passageway - anyone could get by it. It took 3 days - 3 days - for the suits to put up a waist-high plexiglass partition and post a second TSA person there. A plexiglass partition. That was their solution. Sheesh. Anyone can still easily rush through into the exit.
And the second TSA person? Now the first one has someone to chat with.

Last night - I'm not making this up - the woman was reading one of those celebrity fanmags. That shows the caliber of people working to protect us. Me, I stay pessimistically optimistic. Something's bound to happen.

And Mr. Goat, make sure your lotion is 3.4 ounces or less.
Smiles all around
https://www.facebook.com/groups/SAM161CALENDAR/
SAM 161 - The David Copperfield Assembly
https://www.sam161.com/

Roger M.
Posts: 1506
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Roger M. » November 19th, 2010, 10:32 am

"And Mr. Goat, make sure your lotion is 3.4 ounces or less."
........and non-scented too please, as you'll be in a public place during its [color:#CC33CC]application[/color].......and ('erm) [color:#CC0000]use[/color] :)

David Oliver
Posts: 193
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby David Oliver » November 19th, 2010, 10:53 am

Does anyone have contact info for Amtrak?
- DO

User avatar
Magic Newswire
Posts: 2502
Joined: March 29th, 2008, 12:32 pm
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Magic Newswire » November 19th, 2010, 11:32 am

From the Toronto Sun: http://bit.ly/dAEhED

A pilot from Skywest was going through security in Denver with his 18-year-old daughter and overheard a TSA officer saying into his headset, heads up, got a cutie for you.

Secondhand account here: http://bit.ly/duVqfZ

He then confronted the TSA clerk with what he said and that neither of us are going through the NoS. The TSA clerk said you must have misunderstood me.

He said pat-down was pretty evasive, and his daughter felt uncomfortable.

He is taking it up with Skywest, with this behavior. Normally, crews there go through a different screening area, but since he was with his daughter, he got to see the TSA clerks at their finest in Denver.

User avatar
David Scollnik
Posts: 284
Joined: January 19th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Calgary

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby David Scollnik » November 19th, 2010, 12:24 pm

I always found it ironic? / curious? / odd? to see stories like that in the Toronto Sun (I am a former Torontonian and used to read the Sun semi-regularly). In this case, the columnist in the article appearing in the Toronto Sun is outraged that someone is objectifying women. But then scroll down to the bottom of the page and check out the SSG of the day. Let's not even get into the material appearing in the back pages of the paper.

BTW, I wonder if the search was really "evasive" or if they meant to say "invasive"? Quite a difference in meaning there.

User avatar
Magic Newswire
Posts: 2502
Joined: March 29th, 2008, 12:32 pm
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Magic Newswire » November 19th, 2010, 5:10 pm

Hah!

Here's another version from Boston.com:
http://boston.com/community/blogs/on_li ... s_a_t.html

User avatar
NCMarsh
Posts: 1223
Joined: February 16th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Devant, Wonder, Richiardi, Benson, DeKolta, Teller, Harbin, Durham, Caveney, Ben, Hoy, Berglas, Marceau
Location: Orlando, FL
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby NCMarsh » November 19th, 2010, 5:13 pm

No idea if this is mentioned above, but the insane thing is subjecting pilots to these searches. If a pilot wants to bring down the plane he is flying, feeling him up isn't going to stop him. As it stands, pilots go through security screening 200-400 times a year. And that raises questions about the risks of cumulative exposure to the radiation involved; yes, individual doses are small -- but how much are we pumping in them if this stays in place over a 20-30 year career?

There's a reason the tech at your doctor's office ducks behind a lead wall....

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 25626
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Richard Kaufman » November 19th, 2010, 5:14 pm

I believe I just read that pilots have been excused from patdowns.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

User avatar
Magic Newswire
Posts: 2502
Joined: March 29th, 2008, 12:32 pm
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Magic Newswire » November 19th, 2010, 6:07 pm

There are also some pictures that have shown items Being irradiated at approx 8 feet from the machine. Yeah, that sounds like safe doses of radiation!

Roger M.
Posts: 1506
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Roger M. » November 19th, 2010, 6:54 pm

Richard's right about the pilots......but they're excused from almost everything, not just pat-downs.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/11/19/ai ... tml?hpt=T2

This is the first noticeable crack in the TSA armor.

David Alexander
Posts: 1549
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Aurora IL

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby David Alexander » November 19th, 2010, 7:01 pm

Go here http://fedupflyers.org/resistance-101/m ... d#more-225 and look at the video. It's a few seconds of a fat cow of a TSA agent abusing a 3-year-old who is screaming "Don't touch me."

She's the daughter of a TV reporter who did a report on it. He notes that children can be randomly selected for searches and how to determine if they've been as it's printed on the ticket.

If the TSA agent was doing this in any other location she would be arrested.

Doc Dixon
Posts: 215
Joined: April 16th, 2008, 1:45 pm

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Doc Dixon » November 19th, 2010, 7:11 pm

Excuse me if this has already been mentioned, but this entire thread once more shows Del Ray's genius for not flying.

DD

Jim Maloney
Posts: 708
Joined: July 23rd, 2001, 12:00 pm
Location: Central New Jersey
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Jim Maloney » November 19th, 2010, 7:30 pm

I seem to recall Tommy Wonder refusing to come to the US due to policies about fingerprinting non-US citizens. I can only imagine what he'd think about this.

-Jim
Books and Magazines for sale -- more than 200 items (Last updated January 10th, 2014. Link goes to public Google Doc.)

User avatar
Tom Stone
Posts: 1380
Joined: January 18th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Tom Stone » November 19th, 2010, 9:39 pm


User avatar
erdnasephile
Posts: 4338
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby erdnasephile » November 19th, 2010, 9:58 pm

In the interests of fairness, I should point out that the notion that the body scanners massively increase the risk of getting cancer does not seem to fit the best available data.

For example, an article published in the European Journal of Radiology found the scanners give a radiation exposure on the order of 0.07 to 6 microSv. (To put this in perspective, daily natural background radiation on the earth is about 10 microSv, whereas a high altitude plane flight can give you up to about 10 microSv per hour). I would also point out, this German study was not sponsored by the US Government.

Based on this level of radation, the increased number of cancers due to the scanners has been estimated to be about an additional 1.6 cases per 100 million people, so the individual risk is quite low, since the lifetime risk of cancer for most of us is much higher.

The comment by a Columbia physician cited earlier in this thread boiled down to this: although the individual risk is low, when that small risk is applied to very large numbers of scans on the population as a whole over time, the risk may become significant.

Therefore, based on the current evidence, the overall risk of these scanners is low for the individual, but not zero.

I do think that confirming these data with further studies of the scans is warranted before rolling them out large scale. It is possible that additional studies will show a higher risk than previously thought.

However, some of the claims currently being made by some media outlets about how everybody is going to get cancer from these scanners cannot be supported scientifically at this time.

User avatar
Tom Stone
Posts: 1380
Joined: January 18th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Tom Stone » November 19th, 2010, 10:24 pm

...an article published in the European Journal of Radiology found the scanners give a radiation exposure on the order of 0.07 to 6 microSv. (To put this in perspective, daily natural background radiation on the earth is about 10 microSv...
...so why not save energy, and use the natural background radiation to power those scanners?

David Alexander
Posts: 1549
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Aurora IL

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby David Alexander » November 20th, 2010, 12:50 am

Here's a gem of an article that notes that the TSA spends $200 million a year on 3,000 "behavior detection officers" deployed at 161 airports, they didn't catch a single terrorist.

Further, the article states that "...the GAO noted that at least 16 individuals later accused of involvement in terrorist plots flew 23 different times through U.S. airports since 2004, but TSA behavior-detection officers didn't sniff out any of them."

Oh yes, one other thing, the article states that nonaffiliated security expert Bruce Schneier coined the term "security theater."

User avatar
Magic Newswire
Posts: 2502
Joined: March 29th, 2008, 12:32 pm
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Magic Newswire » November 20th, 2010, 9:43 am

As far as the radiation goes, the machines that the TSA is deploying HAVE NOT BEEN SPECIFICALLY TESTED. All we have is guesses and estimates, no actual data. It may be that they are not dangerous, but we really don't know.

Terry
Posts: 1303
Joined: January 18th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Kentucky

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Terry » November 20th, 2010, 10:57 am

Correct Dodd, and the fact that cancer develops over time and not as soon as one is scanned. Results from the exposure to increased radiation will be years down the road.

Any "authority" spouting numbers could be a shill for the industry just like the one's who shill for the Big Pharma poison plants.

User avatar
erdnasephile
Posts: 4338
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby erdnasephile » November 20th, 2010, 11:10 am

Dodd wrote: "As far as the radiation goes, the machines that the TSA is deploying HAVE NOT BEEN SPECIFICALLY TESTED. All we have is guesses and estimates, no actual data. It may be that they are not dangerous, but we really don't know"

I would partially agree with this statement. After all, nearly every scientific study is an estimate of the truth. For example, for most studies, if we claim there is a statistically significant difference in a treatment outcome, what we are saying is that there is at least a 95% probability that the results of the study did not occur by random chance. Which, of course, means there is at most a 5% chance the results of the study were as a result of luck.

In studies that measure risk, they are typically going to give you estimates. If you want an observational study (i.e., where you measure the actual number of cancers that develop as a result of the scanners), you would have to do a longitudinal study following people over decades. This is just not practical because if you waited until the study was complete before rolling out new technology, the tech you were testing would never get into the field because it'd be obsolete by then.

However, Johns Hopkins actually did test the specific model (Rapiscan Secure 1000) for the TSA http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/jh_apl_v2.pdf and found numbers similar in magnitude to what I quoted above. Now, I suppose it is possible that the TSA coerced the researchers into giving those particular results; however, to assume that those academics who are currently objecting to the scanners are somehow automatically trustworthy is probably not valid either. (I can tell you from first hand experience that even independent academic researchers are sometimes influenced by various agendas, bias, and politics--both theirs and others')

What is a more interesting question to me is whether the radiation exposure will increase as the machines age from the wear and tear of actual use.

The bottom line for me is: for all practical purposes all we will ever have is best estimates until decades from now. Based on what we know now, on the grand scale, these scanners are almost certainly on the lower end of the risk spectrum. Far less than other cancer-causing activities many of us expose ourselves to. (Not to mention, we all have at least a 1 in 4 chance of getting cancer during our lifetime just from being alive.)

Of course, if you are the 1 person in 100 Million who gets cancer from one of the scanners, it would suck. But so would sitting on a plane next to a terrorist trying to set his skivvies on fire!

User avatar
erdnasephile
Posts: 4338
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby erdnasephile » November 20th, 2010, 11:32 am

PS: to Terry-- I hope I'm not whom you are referring to with your comment :) I'm unfortunately not a shill for anyone (because I was, I would be getting paid for summarizing these data instead of posting them on Genii Forum :) )

It's just that part of my day job is dealing with the interpretation of conflicting scientific data and how it applies to medicine, which compels me to be as fair as possible when looking at this issue.

If I could find a reasonable controlled study on this issue that illustrated a higher risk, I'd be the first to report on it, but I have not come across one yet. (The most compelling medical argument against the scanners thus far is the idea that the radiation of the scan is focused on the superficial layers of tissue; however, at this point, the effects are still spectulatory with no measurements I can find.) That said, I agree that this true risk in this area is clearly not settled by any stretch (which is why I support further independent testing).

It may surprise you, but I don't support the use of these scanners for various reasons, but my tentative conclusions can only be based on what's out there now. It's just my take, and I certainly respect those that disagree.

Jonathan Townsend
Posts: 8352
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Westchester, NY
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Jonathan Townsend » November 20th, 2010, 11:40 am

A story, by Greg Egan as best I recall, comes to mind where invasive scanning/modification is used on passengers so they become unable to act aggressively or even process anti-social thinking of various sorts.

For today, perhaps folks might just work on developing a fetish for getting probed as part of travel, put on a "probe me for my IED" pin and make something enjoyable of the situation.

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 25626
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Richard Kaufman » November 20th, 2010, 12:10 pm

This is pretty damn heartless:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40278427/ns/travel-news/

My mother suffered from breast cancer and wore a prosthetic breast. I can't begin to imagine the humilation she would have suffered had she been asked to remove it or had it squeezed in front of hundreds of people in a public place.

The TSA are a bunch of f*cking idiots. Call or email your congressmen and make them hold the TSA accountable for this activity until it stops.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Jonathan Townsend
Posts: 8352
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Westchester, NY
Contact:

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby Jonathan Townsend » November 20th, 2010, 12:49 pm

Richard, I'm in agreement and take a stand somewhat further down that road toward sensible yet noninvasive security.

IMHO our nation is all about the opportunity to trade goods and services - to get the best product from the best manufacturer at the best price - from personal demonstration of product to manufacture to product support. That means anything which impedes this flow of goods and services is questionable. IMHO we are not well served by making the travel experience any less appealing than it has to be (cramped seats, less than delicious food, lack of entertainment..)

While tempting to discuss some pragmatic and more serious dimensions of legitimate strategic concern - I feel that would not be to our benefit and those who are charged with keeping the peace can find and keep a watch over those things and place without lowering our standard of comfort, service and sense of security. Certainly, both a large population and a tolerance of bronze age moral systems may make the likelihood of occasional acting out something to be wary of - however we also live in an age where the materials, communications and social networks used so unwisely are readily traceable.

In our wonderful diverse marketplace it is simply not to anyone's benefit to distract those bringing their best product to market from meeting those seeking the best products in the market.

David Alexander
Posts: 1549
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Aurora IL

Re: New TSA Security Procedures

Postby David Alexander » November 20th, 2010, 2:25 pm

Jonathan's take would be interesting if it wasn't a fantasy. The "best product" doesn't always meet the buyers without strong sponsors inside and outside the government.

Manufacturers hire lobbyists who contribute to politicians who then promote the manufacturer's product. They also hire shills to promote their products.

For example, Michael Chertoff, the second head of Homeland Security, has been a long-time proponent of full-body scanners. After leaving government he formed his own security company, Chertoff Group which also employs a number of high ranking Homeland Security people from his time at that agency. One of the Chertoff Group's clients is Rapiscan Systems, one of the two manufacturers of full body scanning machines.

After the Christmas Day attempted bombing Chertoff did dozens of interviews pushing the need for more full body scanners at airports never mentioning that his company's client was the primary makes of such technology.

Only after he was asked a question on CNN did he admit the connection.

So much for "free" markets.


Return to “Buzz”