The TSA - "A lot of what we do is make-believe."
Why do they even post signs like this? It's like a "here's how to blow up a plane" public service announcement. They go mental in one direction, and then mental in the opposite direction.
It's so strange. Can kids carry water bottles with them as well or is that still considered to be a security risk?
I got a pregnancy exemption this weekend. They let me keep my yogurt but they had to swab it down first. Sad thing is, it kind of was a yogurt bomb...when I opened it, it exploded all over my shirt.
It finally makes some sense. Nowhere in the EU have I had to take my shoes off at airport security. Now, the fact that the TSA has, on more than one occasion, found my forgotten water bottle while missing a fellow traveler's Swiss Army knife is somewhat disturbing.
Unless things have changed, I remember that flights departing to the U.S. from Europe require the shedding of shoes. Usually there's an announcement in the airport saying that Americans and other going to America prepare to take off your shoes with Europeans going elsewhere trying not to snicker.
If you're crazy enough to blow up a plane, you're crazy enough to use a child to sneak explosives on the plane. This rule makes no sense, and there certainly shouldn't be signs advertising a security loophole.
There was the story on NPR last week of the Dutch woman whose friend gave her a package to take to his family in Bethlehem. When she landed, she couldn't find the family nor any further contact with her friend. Finally she opened the box and saw wires. It was a pressurized detonator that failed. The incident was in the '70's.
what's the big deal? the threat of someone, anyone blowing up a plane you're on is infinitesimal. the chances of someone using a child's shoes to do so is about as close to zero as you can imagine.
there's a greater chance of being mauled by a bear. or hit my lightning. or hit by an asteroid. probably a greater chance of being mauled by a bear, hit by lighnting AND hit by an asteroid in the same day.
there's a greater chance of being mauled by a bear. or hit my lightning. or hit by an asteroid. probably a greater chance of being mauled by a bear, hit by lighnting AND hit by an asteroid in the same day.
ml1 said:
what's the big deal? the threat of someone, anyone blowing up a plane you're on is infinitesimal. the chances of someone using a child's shoes to do so is about as close to zero as you can imagine.
I think that the big deal is the inconsistent decision-making that's been typical for this organization. While we'd been taking off our shoes and being asked to go through the new scanners, it took nearly ten years for them to do anything about fully screening the cargo that was being loaded into the plane that we were boarding. Between the sudden shift in the shoe policy, the delay in enacting a cargo policy (they just quietly scrapped their deadline for screening non-US cargo after realizing that it couldn't work), the thefts, and the general lack of accountability, I'm not sure why more people aren't frustrated.
ml1 said:
what's the big deal? the threat of someone, anyone blowing up a plane you're on is infinitesimal. the chances of someone using a child's shoes to do so is about as close to zero as you can imagine.
there's a greater chance of being mauled by a bear. or hit my lightning. or hit by an asteroid. probably a greater chance of being mauled by a bear, hit by lighnting AND hit by an asteroid in the same day.
Yes, but do you want to be on that ONE plane?
TSA was started to give the impression that Bush was actually doing something constructive. It continues so that Chertoff can make money selling his porno machine.
project37 said:
ml1 said:
what's the big deal? the threat of someone, anyone blowing up a plane you're on is infinitesimal. the chances of someone using a child's shoes to do so is about as close to zero as you can imagine.
I think that the big deal is the inconsistent decision-making that's been typical for this organization. While we'd been taking off our shoes and being asked to go through the new scanners, it took nearly ten years for them to do anything about fully screening the cargo that was being loaded into the plane that we were boarding. Between the sudden shift in the shoe policy, the delay in enacting a cargo policy (they just quietly scrapped their deadline for screening non-US cargo after realizing that it couldn't work), the thefts, and the general lack of accountability, I'm not sure why more people aren't frustrated.
I thought people were upset that kids can leave their shoes on. if people are annoyed at the illogical inconsistency of the TSA's brand of security theater, I get that. I don't think anyone should have to take their shoes off. and the arbitrary nature of searches is frustrating as well. some airports insist that you take your ziploc bag of toiletries out. others let you keep it in your suitcase. in some places (Orlando and LAX for instance), a small belt buckle will set off the metal detectors. other places (Newark), you can wear a belt or a metal watch band and nothing happens.
if Heathrow or Charles DeGaulle or any other major European airport can conduct less intrusive and annoying security checks, I don't know why we can't do so in the U.S.
lewis9961 said:
Yes, but do you want to be on that ONE plane?
Of course not, but it's best if we base our decisions on probability. More importantly, it's important that we put our time and money and inconvenience where it will make a difference. Reducing a highly unlikely event to a slightly more unlikely event is a huge waste and doesn't make us safer.
ml1 said:
if Heathrow or Charles DeGaulle or any other major European airport can conduct less intrusive and annoying security checks, I don't know why we can't do so in the U.S.
That's one of my biggest beefs. I absolutely love the civility and common-sense security measures at European airports. I love that the security people aren't yelling and screaming at people, that the rules are clear and (not security related) that there are not 100 televisions blaring all over the place. I love that they have a pleasant and polite little conversation with each and every traveler as a screening tool.
The U.S. security theatre measures add up to nothing but stress and irritation.
ml1 said:
if Heathrow or Charles DeGaulle or any other major European airport can conduct less intrusive and annoying security checks, I don't know why we can't do so in the U.S.
It's very frustrating. It seems like places such as Heathrow and Charles DeGaulle are not providing a more operationally effective security procedure, but perhaps a more financially efficient one.
mjh said:
The U.S. security theatre measures add up to nothing but stress and irritation.
It also seems like a big waste of resources on the government's part. It's a big ask, but I wonder if there's a way to realistically re-purpose the organization so that it can provide a higher level of benefit to the traveling public? Perhaps shift to a more regulatory role and let another group do the actual ground-level screening while they set the standards and (gasp) enforce them?
Via Boing Boing, some excerpts from the House Oversight Committee's report on the TSA's finance:
http://oversight.house.gov/report/airport-insecurity-tsas-failure-to-cost-effectively-procure-deploy-and-warehouse-its-screening-technologies/
* As of February 15, 2012, the total value of TSA’s equipment in storage was, according to TSA officials, estimated at $184 million. However, when questioned by Committee staff, TSA’s warehouse staff and procurement officials were unable to provide the total value of equipment in storage.
* Committee staff discovered that 85% of the approximately 5,700 major transportation security equipment currently warehoused at the TLC had been stored for longer than six months; 35% of the equipment had been stored for more than one year. One piece of equipment had been in storage more than six years – 60% of its useful life.
* As of February 2012, Committee staff discovered that TSA had 472 Advanced Technology 2 (AT2) carry-on baggage screening machines at the TLC and that more than 99% have remained in storage for more than nine months; 34% of AT2s have been stored for longer than one year.
* TSA knowingly purchased more Explosive Trace Detectors (ETDs) than were necessary in order to receive a bulk discount under an incorrect and baseless assumption that demand would increase. TSA management stated: “[w]e purchased more than we needed in order to get a discount...
* TSA intentionally delayed Congressional oversight of the Transportation Logistics Center and provided inaccurate, incomplete, and potentially misleading information to Congress in order to conceal the agency’s continued mismanagement of warehouse operations..
* TSA willfully delayed Congressional oversight of the agency’s Transportation Logistics Center twice in a failed attempt to hide the disposal of approximately 1,300 pieces of screening equipment from its warehouses in Dallas, Texas, prior to the arrival of Congressional staff..
* TSA potentially violated 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1001, by knowingly providing an inaccurate warehouse inventory report to Congressional staff that accounted for the disposal of equipment that was still in storage at the TLC during a site visit by Congressional staff.
* TSA provided Congressional staff with a list of disposed equipment that falsely identified disposal dates and directly contradicted the inventory of equipment in the Quarterly Warehouse Inventory Report provided to Committee staff on February 13, 2012.
http://oversight.house.gov/report/airport-insecurity-tsas-failure-to-cost-effectively-procure-deploy-and-warehouse-its-screening-technologies/
* As of February 15, 2012, the total value of TSA’s equipment in storage was, according to TSA officials, estimated at $184 million. However, when questioned by Committee staff, TSA’s warehouse staff and procurement officials were unable to provide the total value of equipment in storage.
* Committee staff discovered that 85% of the approximately 5,700 major transportation security equipment currently warehoused at the TLC had been stored for longer than six months; 35% of the equipment had been stored for more than one year. One piece of equipment had been in storage more than six years – 60% of its useful life.
* As of February 2012, Committee staff discovered that TSA had 472 Advanced Technology 2 (AT2) carry-on baggage screening machines at the TLC and that more than 99% have remained in storage for more than nine months; 34% of AT2s have been stored for longer than one year.
* TSA knowingly purchased more Explosive Trace Detectors (ETDs) than were necessary in order to receive a bulk discount under an incorrect and baseless assumption that demand would increase. TSA management stated: “[w]e purchased more than we needed in order to get a discount...
* TSA intentionally delayed Congressional oversight of the Transportation Logistics Center and provided inaccurate, incomplete, and potentially misleading information to Congress in order to conceal the agency’s continued mismanagement of warehouse operations..
* TSA willfully delayed Congressional oversight of the agency’s Transportation Logistics Center twice in a failed attempt to hide the disposal of approximately 1,300 pieces of screening equipment from its warehouses in Dallas, Texas, prior to the arrival of Congressional staff..
* TSA potentially violated 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1001, by knowingly providing an inaccurate warehouse inventory report to Congressional staff that accounted for the disposal of equipment that was still in storage at the TLC during a site visit by Congressional staff.
* TSA provided Congressional staff with a list of disposed equipment that falsely identified disposal dates and directly contradicted the inventory of equipment in the Quarterly Warehouse Inventory Report provided to Committee staff on February 13, 2012.
I'm surprised you weren't tackled, wrestled to the ground, and hauled off to the interrogation chamber for daring to snap a picture so close to checkpoint charlie there.
I find the security screening in Europe to generally be much more thorough and "intrusive" than that in the U.S. The main difference is that people there don't bitch much about it. It's a few minutes out of your day, and you're about to get on a jet and travel thousands of miles in a matter of hours. Perspective.
project37 said:
Via Boing Boing, some excerpts from the House Oversight Committee's report on the TSA's finance:
http://oversight.house.gov/report/airport-insecurity-tsas-failure-to-cost-effectively-procure-deploy-and-warehouse-its-screening-technologies/
* As of February 15, 2012, the total value of TSA’s equipment in storage was, according to TSA officials, estimated at $184 million. However, when questioned by Committee staff, TSA’s warehouse staff and procurement officials were unable to provide the total value of equipment in storage.
* Committee staff discovered that 85% of the approximately 5,700 major transportation security equipment currently warehoused at the TLC had been stored for longer than six months; 35% of the equipment had been stored for more than one year. One piece of equipment had been in storage more than six years – 60% of its useful life.
* As of February 2012, Committee staff discovered that TSA had 472 Advanced Technology 2 (AT2) carry-on baggage screening machines at the TLC and that more than 99% have remained in storage for more than nine months; 34% of AT2s have been stored for longer than one year.
* TSA knowingly purchased more Explosive Trace Detectors (ETDs) than were necessary in order to receive a bulk discount under an incorrect and baseless assumption that demand would increase. TSA management stated: “[w]e purchased more than we needed in order to get a discount...
* TSA intentionally delayed Congressional oversight of the Transportation Logistics Center and provided inaccurate, incomplete, and potentially misleading information to Congress in order to conceal the agency’s continued mismanagement of warehouse operations..
* TSA willfully delayed Congressional oversight of the agency’s Transportation Logistics Center twice in a failed attempt to hide the disposal of approximately 1,300 pieces of screening equipment from its warehouses in Dallas, Texas, prior to the arrival of Congressional staff..
* TSA potentially violated 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1001, by knowingly providing an inaccurate warehouse inventory report to Congressional staff that accounted for the disposal of equipment that was still in storage at the TLC during a site visit by Congressional staff.
* TSA provided Congressional staff with a list of disposed equipment that falsely identified disposal dates and directly contradicted the inventory of equipment in the Quarterly Warehouse Inventory Report provided to Committee staff on February 13, 2012.
What you are overlooking is the reason for all this equipment: to funnel cash into the pockets of the well-connected contractors of the national security/private prison industry. We don't have too many other growing industries.
That's the first rule of government contracting - why get 1 when you can get 2 for twice the price?project37 said:
* TSA knowingly purchased more Explosive Trace Detectors (ETDs) than were necessary in order to receive a bulk discount under an incorrect and baseless assumption that demand would increase. TSA management stated: “[w]e purchased more than we needed in order to get a discount...
cmontyburns said:
I find the security screening in Europe to generally be much more thorough and "intrusive" than that in the U.S. The main difference is that people there don't bitch much about it. It's a few minutes out of your day, and you're about to get on a jet and travel thousands of miles in a matter of hours. Perspective.
I don't know what it's like nowadays, but my wife and daughters and I flew to Paris in summer of 2005 (four years after 9/11). The immigration officer at the airport saw us holding up our passports. He waved us on without stamping them or even reading them. He had no idea who we were, nor did he care. I'm still surprised by that experience.
There seems to be a wide range of practices in Europe. Last year I flew through Frankfurt airport multiple times--never had the same experience twice. One time I had my shoes removed after walking through the magnometer--they took them back and sent them through the X-ray machine. Another time they separated all of us women into one security line. The men appeared to go through their line quickly, but at least half of the women were asked to step aside to be frisked or have their hand baggage thoroughly examined. The balance of the time, security was similar to the US.
In Ireland, again a time when we were going through multiple times, once we were required to separate out umbrellas prior to going through the x-ray device and then open them. The other times through, it seemed they were quite casual about everything.
The German security guys, not unexpectedly, seem to be much more brusk than in many countries. The French, well, they can be very charming--need I say more. ;-)
Totally agree with Mr Burns on this one. Heathrow & secure buildings in London are big on the pat-down, hand search of luggage and the third degree, in my experience. I find the US to be less intrusive, but maybe we rely too much on machines.
As for complaints about shoes, there WAS a shoe bomber (Richard Reid) and the soles of most adult shoes contain metal. So explosives aside, a blade could be hidden in a shoe sole.
As for complaints about shoes, there WAS a shoe bomber (Richard Reid) and the soles of most adult shoes contain metal. So explosives aside, a blade could be hidden in a shoe sole.
In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.
project37