“Your safety is our priority,” the Transportation Security Administration web site tells us. So how does the TSA explain these four ways it’s keeping air travelers unsafe?
First, there’s getting your ticket from the airline. If you’re one of the unlucky million people or so whose name matches an entry on the TSA’s watchlists, you’re going to have an even stranger experience at the ticket counter. The TSA has said that airline ticket agents aren’t allowed to tell passengers their name was on the list, or they face fines of $25,000. The problem, of course, is TSA can’t tell the difference between two people with similar names. Most of us managed this trick before we grew up.
There’s getting to the checkpoint. TSA says it’s going to allow the Registered Traveler program to expand to any interested U.S. airport, and is eliminating the required background check, but at the same time it’s backing away from the program. Head idiot Kip Hawley says the background check is duplicative, and the program overall is not “an effective operational tool” against terrorists. So all you get by registering is your personal information taken and stuck in yet another database where it can get lost or stolen, and shorter lines at some airports before you get to the security checkpoint.
Then there’s the insanity of security screening. TSA spokeswoman Ellen Howe admits that the agency “over-hyped” a story posted on its Web site about a passenger who built a homemade battery pack to power his DVD player during a flight from Mississippi to Hawaii. The passenger, described as an engineer, was required to give up the battery pack because running a portable DVD player on external batteries “could be seen by other passengers as a threat.” More likely that other passengers would ask him where to get one of their own. Here’s some over-hype:
“We must treat every suspicious item the same and utilize the tools we have available to make a final determination,” said Federal Security Director David Wynn. “Procedures are in place for a reason and this is a clear indication our workforce is doing a great job.”
“But the average person doesn’t know what a bomb looks like; all he knows is what he sees on television and the movies,” explained the real security expert, Bruce Schneier. “And this rule means that all homemade electronics are confiscated, because anything homemade with wires can look like a bomb to someone who doesn’t know better. The rule just doesn’t work.
“And in today’s passengers-fight-back world, do you think anyone is going to successfully do anything with a fake bomb?” Why should they, when the TSA is so focused on water bottles that it misses real bombs?
What if someone strips naked, runs up and down the aisles and then tries to open the emergency exit door? Or what if someone goes to the lavatory and dies of a heart attack? The air marshals will take care of it, right? Well, no, they won’t, because they weren’t on those flights and they aren’t on your flight either. Where have all the air marshals gone? (In May we reported that air marshals were leaving the agency in droves and the remaining ones being reassigned to short-hop, low-risk flights.)
Back at the loony bin that is Homeland Security headquarters, the TSA is hiring the most unqualified people it can find, such as Sonia Pitt, a new “transportation security specialist,” whatever that is. Pitt, described as a “belligerent, abusive” employee, when the I-35W bridge collapsed a year ago in Minneapolis, Minn., skipped out and went on an unauthorized trip to D.C. on the taxpayers’ dime, and a state auditor found she had bilked the state for “thousands of dollars in excessive compensation for airfare, hotels, mileage and personal cell phone calls,” the Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported. Pitt was fired for violating state ethics codes and “activities that cannot withstand public scrutiny without embarrassment. . . . do not safeguard the public trust in the integrity of MnDOT, and undermine public trust in the Department.” Naturally, as a belligerent, abusive employee who likes to pad the expense account, she’ll fit right in at the TSA.
(Update: DHS has fired Sonia Pitt after receiving information from Minnesota about the circumstances of her firing there.)
Hopefully you’ve had an uneventful flight, but if something happens, as it invariably will, just remember, the TSA are the ones who put you in danger.
(2 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading ...
Tropical WeatherLast week, in the wake of another uptick in the official unemployment rate, the administration continued to claim that their economic policies were working, just not fast enough. Not only does the administration have a funny way of ending a war, but now they claim their economic policies are successful. For whom, I wonder?
Gardner Goldsmith teams up with Brett Veinotte, of the excellent School Sucks Project and the School Sucks podcast. Gard and Brett discuss the impetus of the series and project, and why public education must be stopped.
Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works license.
Video published by this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Sampling+ license.
Facebook
Digg
del.icio.us
reddit.com
Newsvine
Ray
Aug 03, 2008
Yeah I have wondered exactly how the TSA people will spot a bomb at the security point. It might be possible to more or less insure that guns and knives stay off the flights. But bombs come in so many forms, and cab be about any shape you what them to be.
TSA Guy
Aug 03, 2008
Many policies of TSA are indeed stupid. However, most rants like these don’t have much better ideas, or ignore the big issue. If you want better security AND more convenience, then you have to be willing to pay much, much more than we currently are at a much faster rate. If you want to pay less and still have more convenience, then you have to accept greater risk. In engineering, the phrase is “better, cheaper, faster, pick any two of the three”.
I’ve seen suggestions that we re-privatize air security. The critics say that would work better. I disagree, but for sake of argument fine. Let’s do it. BUT, if another major terror attack occurs there should be NO bailouts for the airline industry. They should be liable for both criminal and civil penalties, and if it puts them out of business, tough.
Michael Hampton
Aug 03, 2008
No more airline bailouts? I’m all for that.
jaysters
Aug 03, 2008
it seems america’s security is somehow threatened by the contents of my ipod. seems they are more interested in protecting corporate interests than safety of its citizens b/c i don’t know of how some guy at an airport scanning laptops will prevent anything.
Aug 03, 2008
Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!
Ray
Aug 03, 2008
TSA Guy:
If there is a major attack, or maybe when would be the better phrase, it will be because of the policies and procedures of the TSA.
Lets look at the “rant” at little.
Start with the no fly list. First there are so many names on it that it is totally worthless. Any concept of matching names is useless. The other guys are many things, but stupid is not one of them. Do you really think that they will in fact use their real name when flying for purposes of an attack. The way we handle the no fly list is at best counter productive. So guy (or gal) up to no good could do a great deal of intelligence gathering by simply going to the airport and flying. In their planning they could make the names that they would use to be the piece of information they keep the loosest. Then just before the attack they could go to the airport and take a flight. If they get stopped, they now know that there was a leak. If they don’t you have given them addition confidence in the security of their plans. Of course then they could have a second set of closely held ids which they would actually use for the attack flight. So exactly what does the no fly list gain us. It also does seem to be used as a means of the TSA attacking people who are critical of it. Certainly there is good reason to believe that it is used this way.
Next this “rant” discusses the stupid things that the TSA regularly does, especially those that indicate that it has not idea about security. Then it discusses how the TSA is now proposing to hold even more critical data about people in a database, and how their past history makes this something to worry about.
The “rant” then discusses several security rules which the TSA has that are totally useless. Certainly the water bottle one is at the top of the list. This is doubly true now that the airlines are charging for water. Do you really think that this does one thing to add to our security? this part of the “rant” then goes on to discuss specific security steps that the TSA is missing. Certainly very much on target.
Then this “rant” goes into the fact that the air marshals program is a useless joke. Oh so day one of them will stop someone. Probably more in the strip naked and run down the aisle trying to destroy the plane type, but they will stop someone. But in reality this will be a very lucky exception. We will probably have another successful attack first.
The fact that you can’t see this indicates that you are part of the problem.
Mike
Aug 04, 2008
Exactly how many real terrorists have the TSA ever caught? I think the count is at zero or close to it. So all these security measures, and not one real terrorist has ever been caught? You’d think from what they tell us someone would be caught and sent to Guantanamo every day. But no.
Dan
Aug 05, 2008
While I would have to agree that Ms. Pitt should have never been hired the persons working the security lanes are quite another story. They are far and away the most tested work group in the federal gov. The testing is daily, both internal and external, and simply never ends. I would not be wrong to say that most who hate the TSA would not or could not hold their current jobs if the requirements to keep them were as high. The comments on who knows what a bomb looks like – - – great question, do you? Or, are you just slamming a group on what you think you know? Also, not all homemade electronics are “confiscated”, not even close.
I hope the addition of much better technology at security checkpoints allows for much less intrusion but you have to work with what is available. Enjoy and safe travels to all, regardless of how you plan on getting there:)
Michael Hampton
Aug 05, 2008
Yes, TSA Dan, I do know the difference between a real bomb, a fake bomb, and harmless homemade electronics. But this takes specialized training, which few in the general population have received.
But that’s not the point: The point is that harmless homemade electronics can be treated the same as a real bomb based on the discretion of a supervisor. Then again, management isn’t tested on much of anything, including common sense…
Mr. Brown
Aug 06, 2008
If anyone really cared about getting fixing the situation they would install doors on the sides of planes like cars have and make the cockpit a separate part of the plane that you can not access from inside. If you added a mini fridge and a bathroom there would be no reason for anyone or anything to have to enter the cockpit. Then if you get a hijacker or bomb the pilots just land at the nearest airport and you arrest the guy. It is really high stakes poker, I have a agenda (religion, friends in jail, need money, etc.) so I get on a plan or in a building for that matter, hold people hostage and make the driver do what I say, if the drive did not have to comply and felt no threat then who has the better hand? The pilots do they can land and then you have another standoff on the ground, really if you can’t drive the plane you loose some of the reasoning for grabbing them in the first place you might as well hijack a building or a cab or something. Give the pilots a side door and I think hijackings go down 75% terrorists can’t take over the plane and they can’t use the radios no one knows their demands. Really I don’t know why no one has designed this all ready there are really smart people at Airbus and Boeing…
Ray
Aug 07, 2008
It does impress me that trying to add a door for the cockpit, and completely closing it off would be a huge logistics nightmare.
Just adding the door means making major structural changes to the plane. This definitely would make a major change in the cost of tickets. And one can’t be sure that this was always done right, ore more to the point some of them won’t be and the cockpit would fall off in flight. Not good. Then you have to add the stuff needed to get the pilots in and out that door at every airport.
Plumbing in an additional bathroom would also be both expensive and complicated. I am presently working on fixing the plumbing for my RV bathroom and these are much more complicated than a normal bathroom.
Both of these would make a noticeable addition to the weight of the plane. This would increase fuel usage, and another national security issue is the amount of fuel our nation uses.
Anonymous
Aug 15, 2008
TSA Sucks. I miss the days of private security firms at airports.
Kevin Fields
Aug 19, 2008
James Robinson is a suspected terrorist on the so-called “no fly” list. Ironic that Mr. Robinson is licensed to carry a gun onto those planes he’s trying to bring down. He’s also licensed to fly them. He’s also employed by a commercial carrier in the United States. That’s right, even our own pilots who are trying to get us from point A to point B cannot get off these fucking lists.
Kevin Fields
Aug 23, 2008
Erich Scherfen is a decorated Gulf War veteran. After his conversion to Islam, his name, and possibly his wife’s name (a Pakistani immigrant), have turned up on the TSA’s list of suspected terrorists. Mr. Scherfen’s job is now threatened unless the TSA, which until last week has been uncooperative and unresponsive, can remove his name from the list before October 1st. CNN Story
Colonel Hogan
Mar 10, 2009
Did u hear about the lady who was put on the list because her son had autism?
Dennis
Jun 29, 2009
TSA decided that an empty pistol magazine found in my carry on constituted a violation of 49 CFR 1540. 111A1. This is a part of a weapon in their view. USPS doesn’t consider this a weapon . You can mail it. BATF doesn’t consider it as an “essential” part of a weapon. A weapon will work without it. It won’t work without a weapon (or bullets). It’s not sharp. It’s not heavy. It’s not liquid. You don’t have to show ID to purchase one. You don’t have to a certain age to possess one.
But TSA confiscated it while denying a receipt for the incident. So,a letter comes informing me that this “Warning Notice” is sufficient penalty for violation of this serious regulation. If I had known that, maybe I would have tried to slip the rest of it in, too. Intelligence is certainly not a virtue in this agency. They don’t even know when this occurred. They say” on or about”….
Go figure.
Anonymous
Jul 02, 2009
The problem here is the general public does not know what has been caught at airports because it is not made public. If it was made public what do you think that would do to public air travel? It would produce a response of fear making far less people travel by air which is exactly what the terrorists want, to provoke an action by use of fear. As far as the water bottles have you ever heard of hydrogen explosves, very potent and hard to detect, a shot glass of the stuff acts as a catalyst so a firecracker with hyrogen as an accelerant can easly take down a plane. The hydrogen is clear and odorless like water. So the bottom line is ignorance if you dont understand why these procedures are in place just remember that it must have worked when you reach your destination alive. Throwing out a 99cent bottle of water is a small price to pay to make it home safely.
For those who have fought for it freedom and safety has a taste the protected will never know.
rick
Aug 15, 2009
TSA sucks.
rick
Aug 15, 2009
i will NEVER fly again until the TSA is disbanded.
Wally F
Feb 09, 2010
I don’t like TSA either, I saw a good video that slams TSA,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFIRfiFdx0A
it is really to the point
Wally