I disagree with your characterization of the military.

It does not take the military or professional law enforcement to keep weapons, explosives, or incendiaries off commercial aircraft. Nothing more than screening clerks that have that single focus, along with metal detectors, x-rayed bags, and explosive trace detection is needed.

I'll reply to some of the other posts when I get a free moment, but wanted to quickly reply to yours...

I think that you are asking the wrong question. It is not the policies nor procedures that drive my belief that the TSA is necessary: it is the accountability. Private companies are accountable only to shareholder wealth.

A quick story that puts it into perspective: when I was at University and worked as an RA, I knew all the campus security, and I knew which ones were good and which ones were either lazy or incompetent. After graduating and taking a job that caused me to travel alot, I used to go through airport security, and on more than one occasion I encounter the lazy or incompetent ones had become airport security with a private firm doing the security checks. And I recall just how inconsistent and poor the security checks were. So when I say that it would be an unmitigated disaster, I am not speaking of the policies or procedures, but rather the accountability of those doing the screening. I would much rather have an agency that has long-term employees performing security than private companies with revolving doors of employees, answering to shareholders above all else.

Turnover for TSA is the same as it was for private contractors. This disgusting, un-American agency fails every test, including the smell test.

What do you think the primary mission of the military is then?

I am on the other side. I believe that an unfettered free market is superior to authoritarian government in that the intelligence of the marketplace almost always exceeds the intelligence of the bureaucracy. More people, examining more evidence, making more decisions that personally affect their own lives will, on average, make better decisions.

Is it messy? Often.

Will people make mistakes? Of course, they are people, just like those in the bureaucracy.

Is it risky? Absolutely.

But, it is more than that. It is liberty. What we have now is a soft tyranny.

Which is pretty much what TSA is expecting. If they get full LEO powers at the checkpoints, I can almost guarantee that authority will be abused.

Local police - in many areas - are becoming almost para-military.

Out of curiosity, are Red Team tests directed at the guys with the black lights, TDCs? If so, are there any reports of failure to detect fraudulent ID?

Thinking out of the box here, and that have its consequences. (Running on strong meds, sleep deprivation, and on med leave with lots of time to think. Forgive me if this is ridiculous.)

Can the old puffer technology, adapted differently in a more controlled environment, be used at the time of boarding? Once the plane is full and the doors are closed. Circulate air and do an overall plane explosive detection. If the whole plane passes, kick it out of the gate and let it go. If not, re-screen. Gigantic PITA but it may be very rare. How often do the carry on ETD check actually show explosive?

Has this been tested and looked at? Short answer please, no technical explainaintion necessary. As in, tried it, did not work. Showed too many false positives. Whatever.

This, combined with WTMD, would be simple, if it worked. Just looking for answers. Not that they care.

I don't think TSA had any desire to make the puffers work.

They are used in many places with success.

I honestly believe that TSA had already made the decision to move to Strip Search Machines before the first puffer was taken out of any airport.

Is the technology adaptable to a full plane scan? If you can check the air in the area of a puffed upon PAX why could not the circulating air be checked. It could even be checked on the process of boarding by sampling jetway air and cabin air continuously. If explosive detected, stop the boarding.

Uh oh.....bad thought here.

If found during boarding it would mean a total secure area failure and a terminal dump.

Forget it. This is a nightmare waiting to happen.

There's one key item that's missing from any/all of these suggestions: security liability. Below is merely presumption on my part so grain of salt and all that.

Before 9/11 the airports and airlines that operated out of them were co-responsible for security (the airport hired the screeners and charged the airlines the gate/terminal fees). When "everything" hit the fan that day, suddenly you had everyone (airport operators to airlines themselves) scrambling to minimize/mitigate the lawsuit risks from such a huge security lapse.

What's forgotten is there was a significant change in liability assignment as part of the Patriot Act that established the DHS/TSA and thus the government assuming the liability for all commercial airline security. I even want to assert there was a retroactive immunity applied to the airlines solely based upon the potential of deleterious effects on their ongoing operations should negligence lawsuits against them proceed.

So yes, "eliminating the TSA" would not happen without the reassignment of liability back to something else other than the government and somehow I don't think you'll get too many commercial airlines to agree to that.

To note, some have suggested that any NGO would have an issue with the legality of the administrative searches (as they've been dubbed) but as before 9/11 this had already been hashed out in established case law decisions.

With that in mind, this establishes a perimeter you would need to operate within while maintaining liability with the government.

Transitioning the TSA away from the intelligence/law enforcement branch of the cabinet would go a LONG way towards alleviating a lot of this scope creep from a search for WEI to all manners of criminality.

I'm reminded of how the FCC has been given the ability to establish rules & policies regarding "communications" within the US however they're stymied at numerous points in their charter by the multitude of entities that are associated with "communication" - Internet service providers, ad-supported broadcasters, pay-supported broadcasters, end users. All parties with a vested interest in the outcome are (generally) involved in negotiations and suits are filed, settled, or decided to create the path Congress (perhaps not 100%) envisioned.

Why can't we have the same thing with airport/airline security?

Somewhat tongue in cheek: the customer is locked into a duopoly of choosing between "Charter Airlines" or "Verizon Airlines" depending upon what level of security they've chosen to apply to their flights. :D

What liability? :confused:

Do you really believe the US government will allow itself to be sued for damages in the event of another incident? And do you think the scumbags "in charge" of TSA will ever be personally accountable for anything with the present system?

Agree, hell. The federal government needs to leave the airline/airport security racket immediately and inform the airlines and airports that once again the liability is all theirs. No agreement? No common carrier/operator certificate.

I was in ATL terminal A centerpoint Skyclub yesterday, a woman with a heavy eastern European accent was talking on her cell phone and going on an on about the idiots at TSA.

No need to replace the TSA, just the DHS and TSA senior leadership. Then, from the top, dictate some sanity at the checkpoints, like this:

Primary: WTMD, baggage x-ray, ETD as necessary. No more carnivals.
Secondary (alarms, SSSS, and random pickings): bag check and European-style security interview
Tertiary (interview "fail"): choice of pat-down or NoS

I see lots of pros and few cons. The primary rolls back most of the security theater that was added by that idiot Kip Hawley. The secondary replaces a physically invasive screening with a psychologically stressful, but more effective, one. Existing BDOs can be re-trained to conduct interviews. Maybe they'll actually start being effective in this new role. Relegating body searches to tertiary restricts the most invasive procedures to the smallest subset of flyers. I'm aiming for fewer than 20 physical searches per day, nationwide.

Yes, an interviewer can abuse power and kick a passenger to tertiary if they don't like his/her attitude. As this already happens today, we're not making the situation any worse. As for language barriers for international visitors, yes, that's a legitimate issue.

Sounds like most here are not too pleased with the TSA and I can only imagine a vast majority of the general public would feel the same. Can we actually do something about it? Something at least to get the ball rolling? I mean all of the "security theaters" have only gotten worse ever since DHS & TSA were created, and I can't imagine what it would be like 5 to 10 years from now if they are allowed to continue unfeathered. Any ideas/suggestions?

LAX

Wait! I believe they do screening at Port Authority terminals only for buses & trains, too.

Out of the many things that failed on 9/11 airport security was not one of them.

Speaking of technology didn't the puffer machines WORK? (I know they broke down) Wouldn't it make more sense to work the bugs out?

Prohibition against passengers taking box cutters. Next?

Because we all know if box cutters had not been used, the whole 9/11 plot would have crumbled and fallen apart. :rolleyes:

That doesn't require having a very expensive army of "security" screeners living off the federal government's taxpayer-funded workfare workfarce program.

Wirelessly posted (Motorola DynaTAC: BlackBerry9630/5.0.0.624 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/104)

Yes, and they are successfully being used in other venues such as the CN Tower in YYZ.

Because TSA is removed all Explosives Trace Portal out of checkpoints. So that's why I didn't see it. TSA doesn't usually the ETP very often. Those passengers who likely to get through WTMD is better way to do it.

the general public loves the TSA. They think this "security" is great.

The general public are horses buttz.

The airlines ought to be solely responsible for security, so the public can decide which airline to patronize and the passenger can make that decision based upon whatever he or she feels is most important.

The markets work for everything, not the way everyone wants them to, but in the best way as in the place where WILLING customers contract with WILLING suppliers, rather than coercion and compulsion as it is today.

Absolutley not. First, remember that something designed to knock out an adult can kill a small child or baby.

Second, even with a double key system, there is still a chance of the wrong people getting their hands on the system, and I'm not talking about the bad guys either **cough ** tsa **cough**

With all the jets they scramble because some Okie from Muskogie is flying with someone who's *(looks around conspiratorially and whispers)* "Brown" for the first time, and he gets up to use the lav one time too many, I'm not sure I would want knockout gas on board either.

After all, there's no such thing as a OVERabundance of caution...

After running the TSA gauntlet in BWI, ORD, and LAX the past week, I am now convinced it is nothing more than a government-run jobs creation program. There must have been twenty TSA people standing around at BWI and LAX. I was greeted by the BWI ID-checker with "yo mister let me see them documents" and in ORD two of the employees were flirting while they scanned items--one said to the other "You got one fine body" right in front of the other passengers. Completely unprofessional.

Just wonderful.

Completely unprofessional:TSA Job #!

Just think of what he's saying as they run passengers through the strip-search machine.

Remember - "You don't professionalize, until you federalize."

I'm surprised that Fox hasn't ressurected "Married....with Children and made Al Bundy a modern day TSA employee.

SO they work, but they break down....

How about fix the bugs?!?!?!!?!? Hell combine it with a WTMD machine.

Very good point.

:td::td::td::td::td::td::td:

Al Bundy would never lower himself to working there. He'd rather sleep with Peggy.

BNA this afternoon was an absolute travesty. It took over an hour to clear. Only three WTMD open until I finally got to the end of the line when they opened another one. The lines were backed up both sides all the way into the ticketing area. No one could move. No NOS in use, no pat downs. Just xray and WTMD.

They are usually pretty good here, but someone really, really lost control. They did not even bother to ETD my bag of equipment, which gets done at 90% of check points. And should. I'll post a photo sometime. So, not only was the security a farce, they were no even pretending.

Lots of running, small computers back through, though.

I have not seen a mess like this since the new security area was finished.

Americans have to visit Israel and demand Israeli-style security, not the jack-boot Mickey Mouse pantomime nonsense we have in the US.

In Israel, they don't do this. See my post on a typical Israeli airport experience :)

TLV style security is not scalable.



The TSA failed in the acquisition contracts and not testing them in the actual environment they would be used in. They are a perfect alternative to the Nude-O-Scopes and Genital Gropes, however people like Michael Chertoff and Tom Blank do not have a financial interest in the deployment of Explosive Trace Portals.

WHAT IS THE WALL? HAVE YOU BEEN TO ISRAEL?

HOW MANY SUICIDE BOMBERS WE HAVE NOW GOING OFF? I SEE FEWER GUNS AT THE KOTEL THAN AT THE SUBWAY IN MANHATTAN!!! Scalable??? You nuts? Of course it is!

The US CAN have Israeli security at the airports, but THERE IS NO LEADERSHIP -- NONE -- and the government is crushing the people.

It's also halachicly incorrect to do this to people. Some rabbis condone it, but they are TOTALLY wrong... those same rabbis probably condoned Jim Crow, too.. aie-yah.

I would like to formally apologize to all of those critics on this thread... based on the actions of this month and the attitude of the TSA employees on this board to the groping, in addition to the attitude of the TSA leadership, I would like to officially change my position on this. The TSA needs to go.
:mad: