Boggie Dog

While I expect no honest answer I have to wonder just what training that TSA employees have on clearing large structures of possible IED's? Do TSA employees require all airport workers to depart the terminal during a terminal dump. Are these airport workers screened before departure or re-entry? Do TSA employees investigate all areas of the terminal, kitchens, work areas, vendors stores, etc.?

I think a terminal dump is nothing but security theater if the answer to any of the questions above is a NO.

Tom M.

Creating a terminal dump is a great way for a terrorist group to concentrate a large number of people in a small place.

If a group wanted to further disrupt air travel in the US, staging an attack at a checkpoint would be very effective.

RichardKenner

I disagree. The level of infiltration necessary to sneak a bomb into cargo is high. That portion of cargo that's unscreened is from known shippers. The more people are needed to execute a plot and the deeper they need to be, the harder the plot is to execute and hence the less of a threat.

RichardKenner

I don't see why. It seems highly unlikely to me that a single plot would involve both passengers sneakings items through checkpoints and insiders. If you find evidence of the potential forthe former plot, I don't see that it's necessary to look for evidence of the latter, since it's too unlikely that both would be involved. Few on this forum would advocate looking for every possible plot at the checkpoint, just the more practical ones. So why advocate it in that situation?

WillCAD

And yours shows that your ego overrides your civility.

Whoa - are you seriously trying to say that, if a person who worked for TSA brought explosive materials to work, either accidentally or intentionally with no malicious intent (perhaps just to show them off to coworkers), that you would support NOT firing but simply retraining that person and allowing them to keep their job with TSA? That's what you said, SAT - I sure hope that's not what you meant.

When it comes to IEDs, the most dangerous IED is the one with the explosives connected to the detonating equipment. Everything else is just clockwork and chemicals, except in the case where morons try to use unstable explosives that can detonate by jostling; bit most of them blow themselves up before they have a chance to connect the detonating gear.

Certainly, your hypothetical scenario of multiple components being smuggled through multiple airports and meeting up for assembly at a single destination is not impossible, but it's so wildly improbable that it's not worth spending the electrons to type about it online. And the fact that you're positing it as a possible or partial reason for a terminal dump after explosives are found simply illustrates the rank, unbridled, rabid, over-the-top paranoia which permeates not only your agency, but the entire country in general.

While I disagree with almost everything that SATTSO says, there are a few points where we agree. One is that a terminal dump is not about searching the terminal from the flagpole to the septic tank for additional explosives, it's about re-screening all of the pax who were in the terminal at the time of the initial alarm. The cursory search of the terminal is done only in areas where a suspected bad guy's potential confederates might try to conceal weapons or explosives while he exits and re-enters the sterile area - bathrooms, trash cans, underseat areas, etc.

I don't know if this is done, but it also seems that it would be a logical time to check the suspected bad guy's ticket to see if her was traveling alone or with companions who might have gotten through already, and to interrogate him and get a rough idea of whether he's a genuine threat or just a moron with no ill intent.

Done as such, I find a terminal dump in the case of actual explosives being discovered to be a prudent move, a moderately effective search methodology, and a reasonable delay.

A terminal dump based on a knife being found would not be reasonable.

A terminal dump based on a gun being found would not be reasonable.

A terminal dump based on a single positive ETD swab would not be reasonable.

But a terminal dump based on actually finding real explosives in a traveler's bag? Yeah, I'll go along with that one, for sure.

Boggie Dog

If the purpose of a terminal dump is to simply re-screen passengers then I would agree with you. That would negate any reason for TSA employees walking through the terminal peeking into trash cans and such. Peeking in but not dumping the contents of the dust bins is pretty much a useless action. If TSA employees are doing this then that is Security Theater.

If TSA employees are tasked with searching for WEI inside the terminal after a dump and are not trained on clearing large structures then I would suggest that is also Security Theater.

From a security point of view not suspecting all avenues as a means of compromise is in my mind just more Security Theater. The people with the most opportunity to bring a prohibited item into the secure areas of the airport are employees since they are rarely screened.

Knowing the reason and actions taken when a terminal is dumped would be required to know how much effective the steps taken by TSA are.

RichardKenner

Agreed. Two things have to be done: re-screen passengers and check every public area where something could have been concealed. What I don't see the need for is checking the non-public areas in that scenario.

Loren Pechtel

Well, a mass of antimatter that size would have a lethal range that far out and given how the TSA reacts...

chollie

(bolding mine). What exactly does that mean? If I own a business and I want to be a 'known shipper', presumably my business must pass some sort of verification/certification process.

I wonder if that verification/certification process is a one-time thing (like the TSA background check - pass once, you're good for the rest of your employment), or if it is something that is reviewed periodically (company changes hands, cost-cutting/financial difficulties lead to corner-cutting or out-sourcing to unmonitored agents).

I also wonder if DHS/TSA ever performs the equivalent of 'Red Team' tests to verify that the 'known shipper' is actually following the rules.

TSA's own baggage screeners were found to be shirking their duties in HNL and I believe there was an issue a few months ago in ATL that had to do with procedures not being followed when airside vendors were delivering products to the airport.

Boggie Dog

We can disagree on the scope of the terminal inspection.

I would say if it is important enough to dump the terminal then that would be all peoples and require inspection of all areas. Employees have more opportunity to bring something in (for a hand off), or to hide something somewhere (for a hand off). Why should TSA automatically rule out non-passengers?

My questions also go to what skills do TSA employees have to inspect large buildings. According to TSA some of the detonators or other items they are concerned about are very small. Something that could be taped to the bottom of a chair or such. A true inspection could take a day or more if it was thorough.

All I am suggesting is that for TSA to walk through a terminal after a dump is more likely to make sure all passengers have exited than to find a suspect item.

SATTSO

Gotcha. But at the point where you find explosives at the checkpoint, you wouldn't know if anything or anyone else is inside the terminal waiting for that person. So a terminal dump and sweep is the best possible solution.

SATTSO

You entire comment is silly, as the groups I cite come from their reports or statements regarding possible terrorist attacks, how it may be carried out, what type of weapons may be used - and that is all.

SATTSO

All TSA employees are above reproach.

SATTSO

Civility on this site? Serious? But no, its not my ego, it is that those here think they know everything, and make statements based on false assumptions - and then call TSA "stupid". ^ I would say its the ego of the other parties involved.

And its amazing to me that some here would actually take my other comment serious. I post that in the sense, "ask a silly question, get a stilly answer".

SATTSO

Deleted the rest of your statement without reading. If you do not expect an honest answer, don't ask. Ok? Thanks!