Originally Posted by
Superguy
Who did?
ICE.
Not when they stick out like a sore thumb making themselves the first targets to get taken out.
That is a problem of policy, which is mainly driven by the airlines at this point. Believe me, the rank and file FAMs I have spoken to want this to go away as much or more than you do.
Our government tells us that we're all at risk and that there's a terrorist behind every bush waiting to strike. Aren't they all at risk?
There's risk and then there's risk. Obviously some areas are higher risk than others.
Just telling you what the "gubmint experts" were teaching us.
I wish I could see that info, because it runs counter to everything I've learned and seen over the last two decades.
I think that's true ... to a point. TBH, I don't have a whole lot of confidence in any of them ... including intelligence agencies seeing how they're run (I'll leave it at that). I do think they do a better job than most agencies. You have more confidence in TSA's abilities than I do. However, I still maintain that it wouldn't take much to get the needed items on a plane if they really wanted to, and the pax checkpoint isn't the only way to get it done either.
TBH?
Well, we can argue 'till the cows come home about who, what, where or how things are done and effectiveness.
First principles - is it necessary?
Second - if its necessary, what is the best, most efficient way to get it done, given the mission.
As for the layers, I think the intelligence and LEO layers are the strongest, with the airport layers being the weak link. I'm not confident that outside of luck that there's all that much chance of truly bad stuff getting thru, and a lot of that has to do that TSO's have to look for WAY too much like shampoo, water, etc which detracts from looking for things like bombs.
I agree that the TSA needs better technology and needs to focus its resources. I doubt many of the rank and file would disagree with you on this.