TSA Worker Ridiculed for His Body Scan Image

[OceanAnnie]

Anatomical ridicule raises body-scanning concerns

(CNN) -- Full-body scanning machines may reveal a little too much, if an incident of workplace violence this week among Transportation Security Administration screeners is any indication.

A TSA worker at Miami International Airport in Florida was arrested for allegedly assaulting a co-worker who had repeatedly teased him about the size of his genitals.

The insults stemmed from an X-ray of the accused captured during a training exercise with the airport's full-body scanning machines, the report said.

Rolando Negrin "stated he could not take the jokes anymore and lost his mind," allegedly striking the victim with a police baton. According to the report, a witness heard Negrin say in Spanish, "get on your knees or I will kill you and you better apoligise [sic]."

In response to the incident, TSA said it has a zero-tolerance policy for workplace violence. "At the same time, we are investigating to determine whether other officers may have violated procedures in a training session with coworkers and committed professional misconduct," the agency said in a statement.

The incident puts the spotlight back on technology some privacy advocates liken to a virtual strip search.

"As far as I'm concerned, this really demonstrates exactly how detailed the images are, exactly how invasive the search is," said John Verdi, senior counsel with the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a Washington-based research center specializing in civil liberties and privacy issues. It receives much of its funding from private foundations.

Verdi said the Miami incident "... also demonstrates that this technology, and the way it's being implemented by TSA, is ripe for abuse."

The TSA screener scuffle is not the only recent case of workplace tension involving the technology. A security worker at London's Heathrow Airport allegedly made lewd comments about a female colleague who mistakenly entered a scanner, according to the UK's Press Association. The accused worker was given a police warning for harassment.

TSA officials stressed that the incident in Miami was internal and did not involve any member of the traveling public. When the technology is used in airports, one screener views the scan in a remote location and does not come into contact with passengers being screened. The images are permanently deleted and never stored, according to the TSA.

EPIC has filed a lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security under the Freedom of Information Act seeking details about the government's use of advanced imaging technology.

In April, DHS revealed in a letter to EPIC that it has 2,000 full-body scanning test images, "using TSA models, not members of the public," stored at its test facility. The agency is withholding the images, citing exemptions to the Freedom of Information Act for information pertaining only to internal personnel rules and practices and records that might "benefit those attempting to violate the law."

Verdi finds the idea that the images might be used to evade security "highly problematic."

"Because if merely publishing examples of the images that the TSA has generated during testing would harm security, that really calls into question the effectiveness of the machines," he said.

Examples the TSA says are consistent with what screening officers see in airports are available on the agency's website.

Aviation security expert Douglas Laird said it is "perfectly logical" for the TSA to withhold the 2,000 test images.

"If they were available to the public, then if you were trying to defeat the machine you would study the images to find the weak link, so to speak. I would think they would be crazy to release them," said Laird, who is president of aviation security consulting firm Laird & Associates.

There are shortcomings for any technology, Laird said.

Still, Laird said he believes body-scanning technology would have given officials at Amsterdam's Schipol Airport a much better chance of catching a Nigerian man who boarded a Detroit, Michigan-bound flight on Christmas Day with explosives concealed in his groin area.

The alternative pat-down, which U.S. passengers may opt for instead of body scanning, has to be very intrusive to be effective, and studies show people are less tolerant of physical intrusion than of intrusive technology, Laird said.

While advanced imaging technology doesn't involve direct physical contact, the screener training incident in Miami highlights some travelers' reservations about full-body scans.

"I really think it would give a lot of folks pause if they thought that TSA employees were mocking naked body scans of American air travelers," Verdi said.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/05/06/tsa.scanner.assault/index.html

------------------------

It would make me pause!

I did read an article about a celebrity that had his body scan image circulated amongst TSA workers, after being assured the images were destroyed after viewing. I do think they have some kinks to work out.

What do you think?

 

[Carly_Roach]

I think what I thought several months ago when people here were lauding this technology as a good idea: it's an invasion of privacy, the images are much clearer than you're being led to believe, and if you think naked images of your body AREN'T going to get out on the internet to be ridiculed, then you're being incredibly naive.

But there will always be the Chicken Littles out there who are willing to give up everyone else's civil liberties in favor of a perception of safety. Hopefully, the people who are actually in charge will be a bit more intelligent about giving up human rights to privacy in favor of hysterics about perceived safety.

 

[OceanAnnie]

I read not too long ago, there was talk of women getting breast implants that have hidden bombs in them. They would be undetected. They seem to have an answer for every precaution.

 

[Carly_Roach]

I think what bothers me the most about this is that they seem to be putting all their focus and resources into the people who board an airplane rather than anything else like the 60% (or more) of stuff that gets loaded onto the aircraft that is NEVER scanned or the 90% of goods that come into this country by boat and is not even looked at.

The whole "blowing up the airplane" thing has been done on a grand scale. It's not likely to happen again because that sort of thing needs time, precise planning, and secrecy. It won't happen again or, if it does, it'll happen 50 or 60 years from now. Kind of like how if you're robbed once, you are always aware of what went wrong and you're always on the lookout for the clues you missed before that allowed you to be robbed.

Osama bin Ladin did what he wanted to do: strike fear into Americans. We're running scared and are willing to give up ANY freedom just as long as we're told it'll make us "safe".

So we allow these "security measures" to be implemented and congratulate ourselves on how we're "making the skys a little safer", not realizing that if there's a next terrorist attack, it's not going to come from the skies but rather from the ground:

• A potential dirty bomb going off that kills thousands and closes a city for 30 years
• The power grid is interrupted for 3 months during the height of winter
• Our drinking water supply is poisoned
• A chemical plant is blown up and the fumes kill thousands surrounding it
• Our food supply is tampered with
• Our pipelines and/or drilling capabilities are rendered inoperable
• And many more potential targets that, when destroyed, could cripple our country

The only reason we see "terrorists" on planes is because they're copy-cats who are trying to run on the coattails of one of the most successful attacks on US soil in recent history. And they aren't succeeding in their tasks because we're so good at catching them. Like the car bomber in NY or the underwear bomber in Detroit, these guys are failing because they're acting alone and they are screw-ups.

Don't know about you, but I'm not really afraid of an incompetent wanna-be.

The only real way to stop another major attack is through cold, hard, experienced police work studying the facts, watching the clues (which aren't dramatic and don't make it on the 24-hour news channels), and paying attention to suspect behavior. Not taking naked pictures of every American (yes, even children) who gets on a domestic flight.

 

[OceanAnnie]

I think what bothers me the most about this is that they seem to be putting all their focus and resources into the people who board an airplane rather than anything else like the 60% (or more) of stuff that gets loaded onto the aircraft that is NEVER scanned or the 90% of goods that come into this country by boat and is not even looked at.

The whole "blowing up the airplane" thing has been done on a grand scale. It's not likely to happen again because that sort of thing needs time, precise planning, and secrecy. It won't happen again or, if it does, it'll happen 50 or 60 years from now. Kind of like how if you're robbed once, you are always aware of what went wrong and you're always on the lookout for the clues you missed before that allowed you to be robbed.

Osama bin Ladin did what he wanted to do: strike fear into Americans. We're running scared and are willing to give up ANY freedom just as long as we're told it'll make us "safe".

So we allow these "security measures" to be implemented and congratulate ourselves on how we're "making the skys a little safer", not realizing that if there's a next terrorist attack, it's not going to come from the skies but rather from the ground:

• A potential dirty bomb going off that kills thousands and closes a city for 30 years
• The power grid is interrupted for 3 months during the height of winter
• Our drinking water supply is poisoned
• A chemical plant is blown up and the fumes kill thousands surrounding it
• Our food supply is tampered with
• Our pipelines and/or drilling capabilities are rendered inoperable
• And many more potential targets that, when destroyed, could cripple our country

The only reason we see "terrorists" on planes is because they're copy-cats who are trying to run on the coattails of one of the most successful attacks on US soil in recent history. And they aren't succeeding in their tasks because we're so good at catching them. Like the car bomber in NY or the underwear bomber in Detroit, these guys are failing because they're acting alone and they are screw-ups.

Don't know about you, but I'm not really afraid of an incompetent wanna-be.

The only real way to stop another major attack is through cold, hard, experienced police work studying the facts, watching the clues (which aren't dramatic and don't make it on the 24-hour news channels), and paying attention to suspect behavior. Not taking naked pictures of every American (yes, even children) who gets on a domestic flight.

You raise a lot of great points.

But I am concerned with all of the attacks. I think it brings to the forefront the areas in which our security is lacking. One of my greatest concerns is the broadcasting of the way they failed, the steps that didn't work and what they could've done for better results. Our journalists are helping to pave the way for any terrorist's success.

The Taliban had many failures before they achieved success.

 

[Mrs. Charming]

I think what bothers me the most about this is that they seem to be putting all their focus and resources into the people who board an airplane rather than anything else like the 60% (or more) of stuff that gets loaded onto the aircraft that is NEVER scanned or the 90% of goods that come into this country by boat and is not even looked at.

The whole "blowing up the airplane" thing has been done on a grand scale. It's not likely to happen again because that sort of thing needs time, precise planning, and secrecy. It won't happen again or, if it does, it'll happen 50 or 60 years from now. Kind of like how if you're robbed once, you are always aware of what went wrong and you're always on the lookout for the clues you missed before that allowed you to be robbed.

Osama bin Ladin did what he wanted to do: strike fear into Americans. We're running scared and are willing to give up ANY freedom just as long as we're told it'll make us "safe".

So we allow these "security measures" to be implemented and congratulate ourselves on how we're "making the skys a little safer", not realizing that if there's a next terrorist attack, it's not going to come from the skies but rather from the ground:

• A potential dirty bomb going off that kills thousands and closes a city for 30 years
• The power grid is interrupted for 3 months during the height of winter
• Our drinking water supply is poisoned
• A chemical plant is blown up and the fumes kill thousands surrounding it
• Our food supply is tampered with
• Our pipelines and/or drilling capabilities are rendered inoperable
• And many more potential targets that, when destroyed, could cripple our country

The only reason we see "terrorists" on planes is because they're copy-cats who are trying to run on the coattails of one of the most successful attacks on US soil in recent history. And they aren't succeeding in their tasks because we're so good at catching them. Like the car bomber in NY or the underwear bomber in Detroit, these guys are failing because they're acting alone and they are screw-ups.

Don't know about you, but I'm not really afraid of an incompetent wanna-be.

The only real way to stop another major attack is through cold, hard, experienced police work studying the facts, watching the clues (which aren't dramatic and don't make it on the 24-hour news channels), and paying attention to suspect behavior. Not taking naked pictures of every American (yes, even children) who gets on a domestic flight.

I could not agree more.

 

[Poppinsme]

FEAR.
I grew up in Omaha Nebr. In the 60s. Sac Air Force base is there. Thats the Strategic Air Command and where there is a B52 always 24/7 circling. It is the nuclear first strike headquarters.
So as a child we were told if there was an air raid siren we were to get under our school desks and if we were home to get in the basement.
And we were also told we had probably 20 minutes to live.

So I am not afraid. I refuse to live my life in fear. You can be alive one minute and dead the next.
Live your life and enjoy every moment you have on this wonderful planet.

 

[luvmy3]

FEAR.
I grew up in Omaha Nebr. In the 60s. Sac Air Force base is there. Thats the Strategic Air Command and where there is a B52 always 24/7 circling. It is the nuclear first strike headquarters.
So as a child we were told if there was an air raid siren we were to get under our school desks and if we were home to get in the basement.
And we were also told we had probably 20 minutes to live.

So I am not afraid. I refuse to live my life in fear. You can be alive one minute and dead the next.
Live your life and enjoy every moment you have on this wonderful planet.

Thats a great attitude and its something everyone should try to live by however that doesn't mean we should sit and do nothing to prevent the preventable.

 

[Poppinsme]

Thats a great attitude and its something everyone should try to live by however that doesn't mean we should sit and do nothing to prevent the preventable.

And there is never any way to prevent violence, or terrorism, or death. The security we have at the hospital I work at is a joke. When I drive into the parking lot at six in the morning the security guard is sleeping in there truck.
Obama in his helicopter and escort helicopters flew over my house last week twice. We live across the river from the New Orleans airport. Obama was on his way to the gulf oil spill. And I actually thought how easy it would have been for a terrorist to shoot that helicopter down.

What, Me Worry? Life is good.

 

[Jennasis]

Naturally I can see both sides of the argument. One one hand I honestly couldn't care less if body scan images of me turned up on page one of the NYTIMES. I think I'd be okay if it was actual nude photos...hmm..that gives me an idea.

But I also understand that not everyone feels like I do and thinks of the scan as an invasion of privacy.

Perhaps, those with objections could opt out of the body scan and be given a more thorough pat down, sniff down by K-9's or something else. I can see it certainly slowing down things at the airport, but maybe you can get discounted fare if you opt FOR the scans.

I always maintain that flying is not a right. It is a service you pay for and you have to abide by the airlines rules. If you don't want to or object to them, then don't fly..

 

[LisaR]

And there is never any way to prevent violence, or terrorism, or death.

I don't understand? You don't think violence, terrorism or death can EVER be prevented? Really?

 

[TheZue]

I don't understand? You don't think violence, terrorism or death can EVER be prevented? Really?

Unless we are all willing to have full cavity searches I honestly don't think we'd be safe. If somebody is willing to blow themselves up they are going to be willing to put the explosives in places we don't want anyone looking.

 

[LisaR]

Unless we are all willing to have full cavity searches I honestly don't think we'd be safe. If somebody is willing to blow themselves up they are going to be willing to put the explosives in places we don't want anyone looking.

I don't believe every single attack is preventable unless we went to great extremes. The statement that I was questioning was that attacks can NEVER be prevented. That isn't true at all. Many attacks have most certainly been prevented.

 

[Planogirl]

I always maintain that flying is not a right. It is a service you pay for and you have to abide by the airlines rules. If you don't want to or object to them, then don't fly..

I agree with this. I strongly object to some of the rules so I try hard to avoid flying. They've gone too far for me.

One caveat... Would the airlines really do these things if left on their own? I doubt it.

 

[sparklynails23]

Those security guard bullies should be fired. They earned the baton and the threats.

 

[SandrA9810]

if it was meant to be... it'll happen.

That's my motto in life. I don't get overly precautionary in things. Sure, I'll look before I cross the road. But my aunt flips out of I don't automatically lock the car doors after getting in. Seriously, if a guy is pointing a gun at you, you're not gonna just jump out of your car and let him take it?? Car theifs are still going to steal your laptop or gps or what have you whether your car doors are locked or not, it's only going to take them to seconds to pop the lock. Just don't leave that stuff in there.

This over precaution stuff is just really annoying.
And the fact that guys are willing to harras a co-worker like that is just a new low. Why do we have to give them that technology??

 

[luvmy3]

if it was meant to be... it'll happen.

That's my motto in life. I don't get overly precautionary in things. Sure, I'll look before I cross the road. But my aunt flips out of I don't automatically lock the car doors after getting in. Seriously, if a guy is pointing a gun at you, you're not gonna just jump out of your car and let him take it?? Car theifs are still going to steal your laptop or gps or what have you whether your car doors are locked or not, it's only going to take them to seconds to pop the lock. Just don't leave that stuff in there.

This over precaution stuff is just really annoying.
And the fact that guys are willing to harras a co-worker like that is just a new low. Why do we have to give them that technology??

Sorry, I don't see trying to prevent people from bringing explosives on airplanes as over pre-caution. I see that as a necessary evil in today's world.
I'm also confused by your last statement, we give them that technology because it could save 100s of lives. Technology doesn't make these people immature jerks they were that way before the machines and they'll be that way after.

 

[minkydog]

But I also understand that not everyone feels like I do and thinks of the scan as an invasion of privacy.

Perhaps, those with objections could opt out of the body scan and be given a more thorough pat down, sniff down by K-9's or something else. I can see it certainly slowing down things at the airport, but maybe you can get discounted fare if you opt FOR the scans.

..

Count me in as one who strongly objects to full body scan. I am very modest--it's hard for me to even put on a bathing suit in public. And then it's with a cover-up. So I definitely don't want to get virtually naked for the perusement of TSA. I would certainly want the option of having a personal pat-down by a person of my gender or give a drug dog a chance for a sniff. And I don't think one should have to pay extra for it either. Yes, air travel is a privilege, but I don't think I should have to get naked just so I can pay big bucks fly to Seattle.

 

[lacrosse_lady72]

Naturally I can see both sides of the argument. One one hand I honestly couldn't care less if body scan images of me turned up on page one of the NYTIMES. I think I'd be okay if it was actual nude photos...hmm..that gives me an idea.

But I also understand that not everyone feels like I do and thinks of the scan as an invasion of privacy.

Perhaps, those with objections could opt out of the body scan and be given a more thorough pat down, sniff down by K-9's or something else. I can see it certainly slowing down things at the airport, but maybe you can get discounted fare if you opt FOR the scans.

I always maintain that flying is not a right. It is a service you pay for and you have to abide by the airlines rules. If you don't want to or object to them, then don't fly..

I am with you down to every single word on this.

 

[SandrA9810]

I think full body scans are not necessary. And it's just been proven to be used as an evil tool. And not even for the good of the people.

People who want to blow up a plane are going to do so. Even the 9-11 guys went to flight school to learn how to fly a plane, spent years and years studying how we operate things. Just because we've heightened security getting on a plane doesn't mean they won't find ways around it.
They'll work for the airlines or the airport, learn the ins and outs, then act. Stupid people like the shoe bomber are just trying to get attention to make headline news.