Newsstand - Custom agents may be crosstrained as air marshalls

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TRAVEL/09/02/air.security.ap/index.html

It looks like Loy's Ploy worked. Check out the end of this snippet: <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Customs agents to join air marshal system


The Associated Press
9/2/2003, 9:16 a.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Bush administration is shuffling its homeland security operation to make available more armed agents for airliner protection.

According to a plan being unveiled Tuesday, the reorganization will combine the federal air marshal's program with the customs and immigration security programs so agents in both can be cross-trained and used for aviation security, officials said.

Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge planned to outline the reorganization in a speech to the American Enterprise Institute. He was to describe the changes as a way to better mobilize the resources of his department.

Earlier this year, the administration came under criticism from lawmakers when it was learned the Transportation Security Administration wanted to cut 20 percent of its funding for the air marshal's program to plug other budget holes.

Lawmakers vowed to block any such funding cuts.</font>

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by airbus320:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TRAVEL/09/02/air.security.ap/index.html</font>

"The Bush administration is shuffling its homeland security operation to make 5,000 more armed agents available to protect commercial flights."

I'm sure there may be some shuffling, but I doubt there's any protection.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/thumbsdown.gif

d

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/thumbsdown.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/thumbsdown.gif

------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry

The waste continues. Thousands are dying from disease, lack of food and shelter, murder, drugs, abuse, accidents, etc. etc, yet we spend our tax dollars on a POSSIBLE threat. One that has happened but a few times in millions of flights. What a shame that we can not set priorities in this country. What a shame.

Dont worry in 2009 when the taxes go back up to 50% to pay off the debt we're adding to day by day... GWB, Ridge, Loy, Ashcroft, etc. won't be blamed for any of this... just you and I will be paying for the next 30 years... took from '84 to '98 to get the last big "debt" paid down...and that was only coz of the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act and a super economy... and yes i feel soooo safe on my airplane coz of the air marshall and the 30 min rule at DCA http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by xyzzy:
It looks like Loy's Ploy worked. Check out the end of this snippet:</font>

Hardly, he lost his air marshals. They're being tranferred to from TSA to ICE (the new Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement). Now all he's got is his screeners and a few investigators.

What a joke now we will really be safe.
I suppose the first one they will transfer from the TPA office is the officer who drank so much (on board, couresity of the captain) that they called a taxi to take him home since he was in no condition to drive.
He promptly kicked out the taxi's rear window, threatened to shoot the driver ( they are all armed remember) and ended up spending the night in the local jail.
As far as I know he was'nt even suspended frpm work and was back boarding ships in a short time.
mike

Customs agents? Please...

Give those FC seats back to customers.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by IJK:
Customs agents? Please...

Give those FC seats back to customers. </font>

Customs agents have the same job classification and training as FBI, DEA and ATF agents.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by CATSA Screener:
Customs agents have the same job classification and training as FBI, DEA and ATF agents.</font>

And they belong ON THE GROUND unless they have to take the occasional official trip for work. Being human ballast doesn't count as work IMHO.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by xyzzy:
And they belong ON THE GROUND unless they have to take the occasional official trip for work. Being human ballast doesn't count as work IMHO.</font>

I was just countering the other message that implied that customs agents weren't real agents. I won't address your issue because it's just a matter of opinion.

Why are people against this? It seems very sensible to me. If they already have 90% training in common already, why not make it 100% so you can move people back and forth between areas as conditions merit. It could cut costs and increase efficiency. If anything, should this type of thing be done more in the Federal government? If you want to spend less money and have fewer people in government, it seems this is a step towards that?

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by benoit:
Why are people against this?

If you want to spend less money and have fewer people in government, it seems this is a step towards that?</font>

I'm against it because I don't want any marshals in the first place, let alone another 5,000 of these people to take up space and provide little value.

This isn't a step towards fewer people and spending less money, as I think the whole FAM program is a waste in the first place. Regardless of how efficiently we channel more people and money into it, it's still a waste.

I'd support an FAM program like we had pre-9/11. Maybe 200 marshals.

d

Ok... here's the challenge... find ALL incidents within the past 5 years with FAM's on board where something happened, from them stopping an attempt, to where they arrested the doctor for "being suspicious".... should be an interesting comparison.

(actually I think this is right up doc's alley)

[This message has been edited by thezipper (edited 09-03-2003).]

The old air marshall program (with competent, highly trained agents) which placed marshalls only on certain high-risk flights worked just fine...there is no need to change that program. Not to mention that every single flight on a US carrier nowadays has as many air marshalls onboard as there are passengers and crew.

I dont need my FC seat taken by another loosely trained government employee traveling on my dime, who is going to wave his gun around at the next heated customer service problem (assuming he remembers to take his gun with him out of the lavatory). If someone jumps up and tries to take over the plane (precisely what the new cockpit doors will prevent), the air marshall is only going to get in the way of every passenger rushing to the offensive. So far, the passengers' success rate at foiling disasters is much higher than the air marshalls'. The infamous shoe bomber is one case in point. I believe the score for the air marshalls so far is some drunk and disorderlies and one 'suspicious' looking doctor.

A press report I read said that 5k customs agents would be trained so that they'd "be available" for service. Which is not the same as saying they'll actually be more air marshalls in service. Seems to me this is just something so they can give the appearance of additional marshalls in the air w/o actually putting them in the air. tls

"Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge planned to outline the reorganization in a speech to the American Enterprise Institute."

Ahhh...The good old American Enterprise Institute. That is where the Vice President's Wife serves as one of the officers. I'm sure they will give Tom Ridge's speech a very critical examination.

Why doesn't he just give the speech to Bush's dog?

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by GetReal:
Why doesn't he just give the speech to Bush's dog?</font>I think the dog is still recovering from being dropped on its head. That would be a more interested audience, though!

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by GetReal:
Why doesn't he just give the speech to Bush's dog?</font>

Or to you, the comprehension would be the same, you know, tilted head, raised ears.



------------------
"All life is a concatenation of ephemeralities" - Alfred Kahn, American economist

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by GetReal:
Why doesn't he just give the speech to Bush's dog?</font>

hey... wasn't he talking to his dog that one time when he passed out? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">
Bush said he believes he lost consciousness for only a few seconds at about 5:35 p.m., because when he opened his eyes, he said, his dogs were in the same location as his last memory from being seated on the couch.

However, he told a top aide, Karen Hughes, "they were looking at me a little funny."
</font>

[This message has been edited by thezipper (edited 09-03-2003).]