TSA, the Fun Never Ends..

[ReefHound]

Ok, so how many planes did we "lose" before TSA was created? How many did we lose before the current administration was elected? How many did we lose before the sun rose on 9/11/01? Again, just because it hasn't happened since doesn't necessarily mean anything...it wasn't a regularly occuring event prior either.

We lost 4 on 9/11. Some would say we should count TWA 800 and Egypt Air 990.

What do you attibute the absence of attacks to? Make your case.

There haven't been any more planes lost. The terrorists have publicly stated that they intend to get more planes. Maybe the TSA is more effective than you think. Or maybe the TSA is less effective than the terrorists think. Who knows? Either is more plausible than the idea the terrorists lied and really don't want to get more planes.

As for banning liquids, maybe they will find other ways to get them onboard. Is your logic that since we can't prevent every possible intrusion that we therefore shouldn't try to prevent any? No security system is foolproof. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't do what we can, make it as hard as we can, raise the bar of complexity for any attack to succeed.

 

[ianr33]

I flew out of Houston in the summer with an HID can light. Bunch of potted electronics in a metal housing,NiMH battery that looks like sticks of dynamite. Sailed through security,no explosive test.
I imagine it would be pretty easy to make a bomb that looks just like that.

 

[PriusDrIVER]

We lost 4 on 9/11. Some would say we should count TWA 800 and Egypt Air 990.

What do you attibute the absence of attacks to? Make your case.

There haven't been any more planes lost. The terrorists have publicly stated that they intend to get more planes. Maybe the TSA is more effective than you think. Or maybe the TSA is less effective than the terrorists think. Who knows? Either is more plausible than the idea the terrorists lied and really don't want to get more planes.

As for banning liquids, maybe they will find other ways to get them onboard. Is your logic that since we can't prevent every possible intrusion that we therefore shouldn't try to prevent any? No security system is foolproof. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't do what we can, make it as hard as we can, raise the bar of complexity for any attack to succeed.

Terrorists make many claims and statements, a large part of their success is that our government never tests the validity of any of them before taking action on these claims. Terrorism doesn't require an act of violence to exist, if the threat of violence achieves an action that limits/damages/hinders the entity they threaten. You could view the threats that are being acted upon with random "security measures" and removal of Constitutional liberties and freedoms as success for them.

How many people die each year due to cigarette smoke (1st or 2nd hand)? And yet we don't take any real action to prevent this. We overlook corporate "terrorism" against the US people, its more important to protect the profits that pay the lobbyists that bribe the politicians. You want to talk about innocent lives being lost, there are larger causes we should be focusing on...not the distraction that the TSA is part of.

What perecentage of cargo that goes on the same planes is given the same scrutiny as passengers and passenger luggage? Just because the package was shipped without the HAZMAT box checked doesn't mean it isn't a dangerous substance. There is far more "insecure" freight coming and going every day than suitcases, but somehow everyone just accepts that the threat is the 10# suitcase carried by the guy with olive skin and an accent that isn't from the Americas.

 

[cdiver2]

Trip 1/ Tampa-NY & return. Nothing said about matches and I traveled with them.

Trip 2/ (one week after trip 1) Tampa-NY-Boston-London & return. Nothing said about matches going but on my return I was told no matches so I handed them in, forgetting about the book of matches AND lighter in my inside pocket. I got all the way back to Tampa with them.

Trip 3/ (one week after trip 2) Tampa-NY-London & return, no mention of matches, I had matches going and coming back.

TSA works...sometimes?

 

[ReefHound]

I flew out of Houston in the summer with an HID can light. Bunch of potted electronics in a metal housing,NiMH battery that looks like sticks of dynamite. Sailed through security,no explosive test.
I imagine it would be pretty easy to make a bomb that looks just like that.

Go for it. Can you get it by again? Are you sure? Sure enough to stake a major operation on it?

 

[ReefHound]

What perecentage of cargo that goes on the same planes is given the same scrutiny as passengers and passenger luggage? Just because the package was shipped without the HAZMAT box checked doesn't mean it isn't a dangerous substance. There is far more "insecure" freight coming and going every day than suitcases, but somehow everyone just accepts that the threat is the 10# suitcase carried by the guy with olive skin and an accent that isn't from the Americas.

There you go again with the old "if we can't check everything what's the point in checking anything" argument.

 

[Bill51]

Ok, so how many planes did we "lose" before TSA was created? How many did we lose before the current administration was elected? How many did we lose before the sun rose on 9/11/01? Again, just because it hasn't happened since doesn't necessarily mean anything...it wasn't a regularly occuring event prior either.

I don’t know what you consider a regularly occurring event, but skyjacking in general has been a huge problem since the 1940s peaking in the 1960s with more than 40 per year. That is what lead to the introduction of metal detectors in 1973 for all passengers and that reduced hijackings to around 20 per year with more than 120 prevented (and 22,000 arrests) in the US alone. In 1974, we even had an attempted hijacking with several people killed where the hijacker intended to fly the plane into the White House to kill President Nixon. These numbers don’t include things like PanAm 103 in 1988 that was just blown out of the sky with no attempt made to hijack it – just terrorize people. Interesting side note – in 1998 in an interview with the Washington Post, the attorney representing the families of flight 103 made the statement that Americans would never tolerate arriving 2 hours before a flight just to get through security.

What changed on 9/11 was that hijackings were no longer a risk that could be negotiated over, so it became necessary to not just make them an annoyance, but completely avoided. How many hijackings have we had since 9/11?

 

[agilis]

Thank you, PriusDriver, for stating what should be obvious, but clearly is not.

The TSA is a horrible waste of resources. Every study or test conducted that has been allowed to see the light of day demonstrates that this agency accomplishes little or nothing beyond making air travel difficult and frustrating. Their processes primarily affect ordinary citizens, not potential terrorists, and I believe the intent is to keep people frightened in order to facilitate the not-so-gradual destruction of freedom and civil liberty, and hasten the descent of this nation into fascism.
A secondary purpose is to give the illusion that something major is being done in connection with air travel security. Most of the TSA staff are the same people who used to work the security checks at airports for minimum wage before 9/11; they simply were Federalized a few months later. Most were incompetent then, and they still are. A major difference is that they now have badges and far too much authority. They also are able to steal the possessions of people who fly, an event that happens fairly frequently.

Terrorists intent on destroying aircraft are unlikely to use the same playbook that was followed in the past. Nevertheless, virtually every security measure is focused on previously employed tactics. We are really lucky that the mentally unbalanced shoe bomber attempted to use the method he chose. If he had hidden his explosives in an anal suppository, airport security checks would be much more unpleasant.

Inspection of hand luggage has been the norm for many years. No real changes were needed, beyond increasing the quality of both the personnel and the process. Securing the air crew compartment was an obvious need that had been pointed out repeatedly, and the lack of such security was the principal element in planning the 9/11 attack. Correcting this glaring weakness would not have inconvenienced anyone, and had it been done many years ago, when various groups representing the interests of pilots requested, the 9/11 scenario would not have been possible.

The presence of the TSA does not make us one bit safer; most of the security measures that have been imposed are worthless, and the restriction on liquids is truly ludicrous. The origins of most of this idiocy can be found in corrupt and deceptive government policy, and is made possible by cynically orchestrated public hysteria.

"When I reflect that God is just, I fear for my country." (Thomas Jefferson)

 

[Bill51]

I flew out of Houston in the summer with an HID can light. Bunch of potted electronics in a metal housing,NiMH battery that looks like sticks of dynamite. Sailed through security,no explosive test.
I imagine it would be pretty easy to make a bomb that looks just like that.

Are you sure it didn’t get a neutron bombardment test?

 

[ianr33]

Go for it. Can you get it by again? Are you sure? Sure enough to stake a major operation on it?

With 100 bombs and a bunch of idealistic/unsuspecting mules yes,I am sure a few of them would get through.

Or I would just check it. Or bribe the cleaning crew.