Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Security overkill

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Oct 18, 2005 | 10:07 pm
  #31  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
Originally Posted by bambi47
Yes. I absolutely do think an x-ray operator at the checkpoint could catch explosives without the other components. Because we are trained to know how these things look on an x-ray. Not to mention some on the job experience. And thats really all I can tell you without risking my job.
Your replies to Spiff and GUWonder indicate that you fail to comprehend their posts.

C-4 or Semtex in a toothpaste tube or small peanut butter jar or shaped in typical modeling clay shapes (in the absence of other IED components) will not be identifiable to any x-ray operator as an obvious plastic explosive. It will appear as a dense object.

I don't want you to lose your job, so don't bother trying to explain to me how the plastic explosive in these examples looks different than any other dense item on the screen.

Last edited by FWAAA; Oct 18, 2005 at 10:10 pm
FWAAA is offline  
Old Oct 18, 2005 | 10:12 pm
  #32  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Midwest
Programs: AA, UA, DL, LUV, SPG, HHonors, Avis, Hertz
Posts: 3,033
Originally Posted by Sneezy
Yeah, it is. Of course, both times it was at Schipol after a hard redeye in Y on NW. And a bit less than ten years ago to boot. So it may not be all that accurate a memory.

Except for the part about Israelis driving on the sidewalks. That's a bit hard to forget when you have to dive into the nearest alleyway.
FWIW, I'm pretty confident that what you experienced was some kind of special situation, perhaps even a threat of some kind. Which is not to say that there aren't sometimes armed military personnel from host countries near the EL AL counter.

EL AL security agents who do pax screening are not active members of the Israeli military (I'm not saying an active member has never worked as an agent, who knows; but it's not the military who does the screening), and I'll bet you'll have a nearly impossible time locating anyone else who can point to a time that they've seen an actual EL AL security agent, doing screening, with an UZI.

(My response is just intended as an FWIW/FYI, not to argue with you - I quite believe that you saw what you saw. I'm just saying it's not typical, nor standard.)
Jakebeth is offline  
Old Oct 18, 2005 | 10:27 pm
  #33  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Midwest
Programs: AA, UA, DL, LUV, SPG, HHonors, Avis, Hertz
Posts: 3,033
Originally Posted by indo79
I think SFO is one of the worst. Yesterday the priority line was 30-40 deep and I dont believe they enforce the priority for everyone. And how is it that only SFO recommends that you take off your shoes, and if you dont, you will automatically be singled out for secondary screening even if it does not cause the alarm to sound.

ORD, SNA, LAX, BOS, SJC does not recommend you to take off your shoes.
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but there's a shoe carnival thread that recently noted that ORD is now a carnival, and my own experience last week confirmed it. You are now told going in that if you've got thick soles you'll have to remove your shoes. (T3/AA in my own experience)
Jakebeth is offline  
Old Oct 18, 2005 | 10:34 pm
  #34  
2M
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Land of ORD
Programs: AA Plat UA Premier
Posts: 9,339
Originally Posted by Jakebeth
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but there's a shoe carnival thread that recently noted that ORD is now a carnival, and my own experience last week confirmed it. You are now told going in that if you've got thick soles you'll have to remove your shoes. (T3/AA in my own experience)
No!!! Not T3!
SirFlysALot is offline  
Old Oct 18, 2005 | 10:55 pm
  #35  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Programs: AA Platinum Hilton Gold
Posts: 50
Originally Posted by indo79
I think SFO is one of the worst. Yesterday the priority line was 30-40 deep and I dont believe they enforce the priority for everyone. And how is it that only SFO recommends that you take off your shoes, and if you dont, you will automatically be singled out for secondary screening even if it does not cause the alarm to sound.

ORD, SNA, LAX, BOS, SJC does not recommend you to take off your shoes.
Saturday at SFO I got the whole random search procedure--the air-blower machine, complete wipedown of the inside of my luggage (I was using carryon)looking for explosive powder, check of all electronics, etc. And I'm a 74-year old 5'1" grandmother. Don't they have any common sense? I should have known. At JFK my 99-year old mother in a wheelchair had to remove her shoes and get patted down.
pfc870 is offline  
Old Oct 18, 2005 | 11:04 pm
  #36  
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
50 Countries Visited
5M
All eyes on you!
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 58,132
Originally Posted by bambi47
Really? Not true Spiff. You don't need the other elements. The x-ray doesn't indicate anything, ever. It only shows a pictuure. The operator knows what to look for. We may not know alot, but we know what a shoe is supposed to look like.
Actually, all you'll see is a dense object. If someone puts explosives in their luggage the x-ray will not tell you the operator that there are explosives in the luggage.

This focus on shoes is just plain stupid. And I'm not talking run of the mill, fell out of the stupid tree and hit every branch on the way down stupid. I'm talking about stupid to the point where someone has drawn a circle for the person in charge of harassment at the TSA and this jackass keeps insisting it's a square. I'm talking about a person so stupid it's a miracle they make it out of the house without assistance by at least three other people.

I can smuggle explosives past the so-called security at the airport at will. That's right, any time I or anyone else wants C-4 or any other non-metalic explosive (and most are non-metallic) airside, they can do so. Why? Because your agency is so incredibly stupid thinking that shoes are the only place that passengers could ever hide explosives that they fail to realize or care that plastic explosives are malleable. A volume of explosive that will take down a plane and more will easily fit in a person's undergarments or in their body cavities. These explosives will also fit and go unnoticed in carryon baggage unless someone puts wires and a blasting cap there too.

Don't believe me? Your x-ray tests are done so that your employees will pass them and Congress won't send your agency back to the streets where most of your employees belong. If someone takes some PETN and molds it carefully, the operator of the x-ray won't give it a second look. It's just another one of thousands of dense looking objects that bored x-ray people see every day. MAYBE if someone shaped it into one of those cute bomb looking devices on that ridiculous sign at the checkpoint and stuck some wires and a clock around it, a screener might notice it, but even that is a real reach.

Congratulations on knowing what a shoe looks like under the x-ray. Guess what? The explosives aren't there.
Spiff is offline  
Old Oct 18, 2005 | 11:04 pm
  #37  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
Originally Posted by pfc870
Saturday at SFO I got the whole random search procedure--the air-blower machine, complete wipedown of the inside of my luggage (I was using carryon)looking for explosive powder, check of all electronics, etc. And I'm a 74-year old 5'1" grandmother. Don't they have any common sense? I should have known. At JFK my 99-year old mother in a wheelchair had to remove her shoes and get patted down.
Welcome to Flyertalk.

As has been posted before, the minute the TSA stops treating you and your mom as potential (or suspected) terrorists, the bad guys will somehow morph into 74 year old grandmothers and 99 year old great-grandmothers. Or at least they will recruit people like you to do their bidding.
FWAAA is offline  
Old Oct 19, 2005 | 3:56 pm
  #38  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,389
Originally Posted by Spiff
Actually, all you'll see is a dense object. If someone puts explosives in their luggage the x-ray will not tell you the operator that there are explosives in the luggage.

This focus on shoes is just plain stupid. And I'm not talking run of the mill, fell out of the stupid tree and hit every branch on the way down stupid. I'm talking about stupid to the point where someone has drawn a circle for the person in charge of harassment at the TSA and this jackass keeps insisting it's a square. I'm talking about a person so stupid it's a miracle they make it out of the house without assistance by at least three other people.

I can smuggle explosives past the so-called security at the airport at will. That's right, any time I or anyone else wants C-4 or any other non-metalic explosive (and most are non-metallic) airside, they can do so. Why? Because your agency is so incredibly stupid thinking that shoes are the only place that passengers could ever hide explosives that they fail to realize or care that plastic explosives are malleable. A volume of explosive that will take down a plane and more will easily fit in a person's undergarments or in their body cavities. These explosives will also fit and go unnoticed in carryon baggage unless someone puts wires and a blasting cap there too.

Don't believe me? Your x-ray tests are done so that your employees will pass them and Congress won't send your agency back to the streets where most of your employees belong. If someone takes some PETN and molds it carefully, the operator of the x-ray won't give it a second look. It's just another one of thousands of dense looking objects that bored x-ray people see every day. MAYBE if someone shaped it into one of those cute bomb looking devices on that ridiculous sign at the checkpoint and stuck some wires and a clock around it, a screener might notice it, but even that is a real reach.

Congratulations on knowing what a shoe looks like under the x-ray. Guess what? The explosives aren't there.


You need to learn not to hold it in. You have to express yourself and really let it all out. Bottling up your emotions will just stress you out.

One minor picky point: your assertion about shoes would hold water if shoes were the only items passed through the x-ray. However, if you'll take a moment to notice, you will observe that everything goes through the x-ray with very few exceptions, and those exceptions are screened by an alternative method such as ETD sampling.

Of course, I was wondering how long it would take to bring up the ol' body cavity theory. Talk about degenerating down to potty humor. "What's that smell?" "Someone blew some sh*t up."
Bart is offline  
Old Oct 19, 2005 | 4:07 pm
  #39  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,077
Originally Posted by Bart
You need to learn not to hold it in. You have to express yourself and really let it all out. Bottling up your emotions will just stress you out.

One minor picky point: your assertion about shoes would hold water if shoes were the only items passed through the x-ray. However, if you'll take a moment to notice, you will observe that everything goes through the x-ray with very few exceptions, and those exceptions are screened by an alternative method such as ETD sampling.

Of course, I was wondering how long it would take to bring up the ol' body cavity theory. Talk about degenerating down to potty humor. "What's that smell?" "Someone blew some sh*t up."


5 to 19 people chewing "bubble gum" and there would be no need for "potty humor".
GUWonder is offline  
Old Oct 19, 2005 | 6:23 pm
  #40  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Programs: AA, WN RR
Posts: 3,122
Originally Posted by FWAAA
Welcome to Flyertalk.

As has been posted before, the minute the TSA stops treating you and your mom as potential (or suspected) terrorists, the bad guys will somehow morph into 74 year old grandmothers and 99 year old great-grandmothers. Or at least they will recruit people like you to do their bidding.
Before al-Qaeda recruits 74 year old grandmothers as shoe bombers, they will find 25 year old martyrs to smuggle butt bombs onto planes. Not trying to be too scatalogical, but al-Qaeda has been an extremely secretive group, unwilling to trust outsiders to carry out sensitive missions.
PatrickHenry1775 is offline  
Old Oct 19, 2005 | 7:03 pm
  #41  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 34
Originally Posted by pfc870
Saturday at SFO I got the whole random search procedure--the air-blower machine, complete wipedown of the inside of my luggage (I was using carryon)looking for explosive powder, check of all electronics, etc. And I'm a 74-year old 5'1" grandmother. Don't they have any common sense? I should have known. At JFK my 99-year old mother in a wheelchair had to remove her shoes and get patted down.
You might want to read this.
Sep 13, 4:47 AM EDT
Colombia Questions Its Airline Security
By DAN MOLINSKI
Associated Press Writer




BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) -- Colombia questioned its own airline security measures and ordered an immediate review after a father in a wheelchair dodged a checkpoint and smuggled grenades onto a plane.

The father and his son surrendered five hours after commandeering the Aires airliner around midday Monday after it departed from the southern city of Florencia on a flight headed to Colombia's capital, Bogota.

The plane, with at least 24 people aboard, including an American, landed in Bogota after the hijackers made a radio call to air traffic control indicating they had taken control, said Gen. Edgar Lesmez, chief of the Colombian Air Force.

The hijackers allowed government negotiators and a Roman Catholic priest to board while the twin-propeller plane sat on the tarmac. All passengers and crew were eventually freed unharmed before the hijackers, 42-year-old Porfirio Ramirez and his 22-year-old son, Linsen Ramirez, gave up and were arrested.

The older Ramirez boarded the plane in a wheelchair that was too large to pass through an airport metal detector, and he was not patted down by security agents, Luis Octavio Rojas, director of the Florencia airport, told The Associated Press.

A statement late Monday from President Alvaro Uribe's office said the Civil Aviation authority must find out "what allowed someone to take advantage of his disabled condition to pass through the security checks ... with grenades."

Rojas acknowledged his airport security agents only gave the elder Ramirez "a visual inspection."
Uribe's office said: "Remember that nobody is exempt or excluded from security controls at airports."
According to the government statement, the elder hijacker said he hijacked the plane to bring attention to a case in which he was partially paralyzed by a police bullet during a raid on his house some 14 years ago and had unsuccessfully sought government compensation.

Sen. Carlos Moreno, who helped negotiate the standoff, said a $43,000 check was handed to the hijackers as part of a "deal" between the government and the hijackers, but the government would not honor it.

No concessions were ever made to the hijackers, the government said.
Attorney General Mario Iguaran said the elder Ramirez led the hijacking and if convicted faces 25 to 40 years in prison for aggravated hijacking of an aircraft. He expressed sympathy for the man's case, but added: "Unfortunately he has to be brought to justice."

The elder Ramirez, speaking to reporters before being transferred to a jail cell, said he has "no reason to regret" his actions Monday and said that during the negotiation the government "said they would help me" and that they "would give me an indemnity, because that's what I need."

The government said Monday it plans to review his request for compensation, but said this would not affect the severe charges he faces.

A U.S. citizen was among the passengers on the hijacked flight, said a U.S. official in Bogota, who spoke on condition of anonymity. No other details were available on the American
larkinmusic is offline  
Old Oct 19, 2005 | 7:49 pm
  #42  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,077
Originally Posted by PatrickHenry1775
Before al-Qaeda recruits 74 year old grandmothers as shoe bombers, they will find 25 year old martyrs to smuggle butt bombs onto planes. Not trying to be too scatalogical, but al-Qaeda has been an extremely secretive group, unwilling to trust outsiders to carry out sensitive missions.
Regarding the "extremely secretive" aspect:

That is actually not entirely true ... at least it was not until more recently. Even in the case of 9/11, it was Mohammed Atta who was the least willing to trust "outsiders" or even "insiders" to do much or know much. KSM, on the other hand, had talked about "his plan" to even his second cousins' in-law's nephew and the corner grocery store guy whom he new years before in Kuwait but had not met for several years. OBL had talked to his daughter-in-law about "the idea" in the presence of an Arab former US intelligence asset around the spring of 2001. Even some American idiots shook OBL's hands -- with OBL's knowledge that they were American -- in the months and years between when OBL became wanted by our government and when 9/11 happened.

Grandmothers are used, wittingly and unwittingly, as mules for drugs and drug money often enough. Why not for bomb components suddenly handed over at an airside drop-off/hand-off?
GUWonder is offline  
Old Oct 19, 2005 | 8:19 pm
  #43  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Upstate, NY
Programs: NWA Gold Elite, USAirways PC, Delta, Marriott, Hilton Honors
Posts: 111
Originally Posted by Flyer23
SJC always makes me take off my shoes. I've protested multiple times (like when I'm wearing sneakers, which I know have no metal in them), and they're always firm on that.

Haven't been through LAX in a while, but I seem to remember them being the same.
Actually, they're not so much concerned with metal in your shoes as other type of plastik explosives, and non-metal material. To avoid the hassle now, I just take my shoes off - regardless of the type. It's a pain, but letting TSA raise my blood pressure over it is just not worth it. TSA and the security farce has us FF by the short hairs and there's really nothing we can do about it! Complain yes, and goody, we get to go through personal screening!

redjr...
redjr is offline  
Old Oct 19, 2005 | 8:30 pm
  #44  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,077
Whenever I return to the US for my first domestic flight, the following thoughts now come to mind: This idiotic shoe obsession?!?!? Again?!?!? Only in America.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Oct 19, 2005 | 8:33 pm
  #45  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: IAH
Posts: 2,674
Originally Posted by Bart
Checkpoint x-rays do not detect explosives. The screener has to study the image and look for certain things that are consistent with improvised explosive device configurations. No matter what type of IED you have, they all have one common trait. To explain it another way, without violating SSI, every firearm has to have a trigger mechanism, a device that acts as a firing pin mechanism, a chamber to house the bullet itself and a barrel to launch the bullet through. Doesn't matter whether you're looking at a zip gun or Smith & Wesson pistol or M-16 rifle; all firearms have to have certain components in order to work. A similar principle applies to explosives.

The procedure is that you either submit your shoes for x-ray examination OR we will swab it for explosive residue.

Having said that, I believe TSA can scale back on its shoe examination policy and go to a random procedure (one out of every five, one out of every seven, one out of every ten, for instance) rather than inspecting each and every shoe. The reason I say this is because there has only been one incident of an attempt to use shoes as improvised explosive devices in the past four years. We can accept the risk of mitigating that threat with a random check as opposed to a mandatory check. Should there be any indication of an increased threat to aviation based on intelligence information (and not just a response to political rhetoric), then perhaps we can go to a mandatory check of all shoes until the "threat window" is closed, then go back to the random checks.

This is the difference between risk management and risk avoidance.

C'mon Bart! We're not in the Army anymore. Kick in with the vernacular. 'kay?
Martinis at 8 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.