TSA will work to make pat-downs less invasive

Huffington Post:


WASHINGTON — The head of the agency responsible for airport security, facing protests from travelers and pressure from the White House, appeared to give ground Sunday on his position that there would be no change in policies regarding invasive passenger screening procedures.

Transportation Security Administration head John Pistole said in a statement that the agency would work to make screening methods "as minimally invasive as possible," although he gave no indication that screening changes were imminent.

-snip-

Pistole said that, as in all nationwide security programs, "there is a continual process of refinement and adjustment to ensure that best practices are applied."

Still, he pointed to the alleged attempt by a Nigerian with explosives in his underwear to try to bring down an Amsterdam-to-Detroit flight last Christmas. "We all wish we lived in a world where security procedures at airports weren't necessary," Pistole said, "but that just isn't the case."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/21/tsa-john-pistole-pat-downs_n_786517.html

Can we all breathe a little easier now? Just a little bit?

As per the OP.

Let's give credit where credit is due.

as a result of TSA's failure to do due diligence. A rather late response for me to credit WH with taking the initiative of doing the right thing, sorry. They were responding to the pressure and reading the (quite obvious) political tea leaves.

I doubt the head of the TSA would have changed his tune if President Obama had not interceded.

But I know better than to expect some people to give credit to the Obama administration when it's due.

preemptively acted, rather than intervened in response to the intense backlash. I WISH I could believe the former were true. I WANT to believe the former were true. But, given Obama's defending of the policy, well into the backlash period, I believe it was a reaction to the emerging political realities. Not intervening only to halt BAD policy.

By contrast, I credit the Obama administration with being proactive in responding to the emerging Nuclear Weapons ban issue and the RETHUG hypocrisy. They are being both smart and principled in that response, IMO

<< given Obama's defending of the policy, well into the backlash period >>

From what I read, President Obama said he wanted procedures to be less invasive, which is almost exactly what the TSA head is now saying.

You are wrong in denying he did not defend the policy as necessary. Google it. Biden was on MOrning Schmoe defending it on Thursday or Friday morning, followed by Obama responding to a reporters question that the "pat downs" were necessary and unavoidable.

That is exactly what the TSA head is now saying.

The timing speaks for itself.

President Obama leads after judiciously hearing the concerns of the public, the TSA head follows.

Yes, the timing DOES speak for itself.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

They owned this from the beginning.

It was wholly their doing. Also, this article doesn't say anything is actually going to change. It doesn't say the nude-like x-rays are going to stop. It doesn't even suggest that those who opt out will not get groped. It just reinforces the fear-mongering and says that they will make it a least invasive as possible, which they have already claimed they have been doing. Here is the quote: "No, we're not changing the policies...We all wish we lived in a world where security procedures at airports weren't necessary," Pistole said, "but that just isn't the case."

Not much for the WH to be proud of here.

The entire TSA culture needs to be changed.

So what does this mean? Tomorrow, next week, next year, next decade?

Considering he was pressured to change by the WH (as per the OP), why would you expect him to say anything else? It's not as if he has been working on this before this afternoon. It is Sunday, you know, and he's hardly going to call in his colleagues today to work some new rules out.

that's just one aspect I object to as unsafe, but I'm not relaxing until that aspect is optional and better yet, nonexistent.

aren't the machines any good?

1. not all airports havethe machines; and 2. some people refuse to go through the machines

one girl had a tissue and a rubber band in her pocket and that was suspicious enough for her to undergo a pat down after her scan.

There's no indication it even adds anything to security. Just another one-size-fits-all, expensive, hazardous intrusion reminding Americans that Anyone Could Be a Terrorist.

I hope Obama isn't being set up. Let's all cross our fingers and hope that everyone gets to where they are going safely this holiday season.