Clicky clicky

If you mouseover the picture, it reads "Photo of behavior detection being used at an aiprort." However, I don't see any BDO's? What's the point of the picture?

And this is front page news for the TSA? He wasn't arrested for the multiple IDs. And of course, the catch-all: Disorderly conduct.

How does secondary screening work at MIA? If he bolted at the ID check, then I don't see how or why his bag was on the x-ray belt (except to legally show that he had started the screening process and could not revoke consent at that point). If it was after the WTMD he bolted, then that is a different story.

"Beydoun was questioned and then arrested on charges of resisting arrest without violence and disorderly conduct and found to be carrying multiple IDs in several names

"resisting arrest without violence"?? that's a new one on me. I guess that covers things like asking "are you arresting me? on what grounds?"

It's a commonly used Florida statute that involves resisting without physical altercation.

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then.

Why am I getting the feeling the TSA website should have a banner proclaiming, "DHS Ministry of Propaganda"?

Of course it is. Because if the put out enough propaganda, then it justifies whining if there is ever the threat of a budget cut or congressional oversight (just look at the whining that Mike McConnell & the administration is doing over wiretaps).

Better to condition the sheep now, rather than later.

Blind squirrel? Since when is the TSA's job to find someone with multiple IDs?

I have been involved with plenty of BDO screening that have turn into arrests for one reason or another and the media hasn't covered it. If they wanted it to be propaganda, they would put out more. Besides, there is more to this case than just multiple IDs. Maybe once the investigation and court hearing are finished, they will do a follow-up article or the media will cover it.

Must be one of those terrorists who are constantly probing security as we are told on the TSA blog.

I'm waiting for the day when some zealot screener (SPOTnik or otherwise) blows a huge sting that the FBI or other real cops have been planning for months or years. There's no way that the FBI would entrust advanced information to the DHS.


When I am in the office, I read a bunch of electronic situational awareness morning reports from various government agencies most every morning. These are at a pretty high classification level. My advice: Don't flatter yourself.

A serious question....and you don't have to blow your precious SSI here to answer.

Does any of what you allude to have to do with aviation security? Seriously, does it? Did you your brave and heroic brethren find a pipe bomb, liquid explosives or something that could have brought down the plane he was going to ride on?

Actually, they have. They have given us a heads up, so that the person they were following would make it to the gate with intent to fly. They were following someone and they gave us a photo description so that we wouldn't pull the person aside and spook them.



I wasn't attempting to "flatter" myself. I was just trying to make a point that sometimes there is more to a given situation than what the TSA or the media puts out. So, did any of your "pretty high classification level" reports go into any detail about this event?

Does any of it have to do with aviation security?

Well, I'm not sure how to answer that. You seem to base your concern off of whether or not someone is an immediate threat. What about future intent? Dry - runs? What about the people who mule money/drugs to fund terrorism? Should we not be concern with any of these activities?

C'mon, I specifically asked whether that person was an immediate threat to the safety of the aircraft he was about to board.

I'll take your reply as your answer being "no."

I ask because I'm tired of the TSA making these shameless chest-beatings about things that do not carry a direct threat to the aircraft the person was about to board, all at a time when they can't master what is supposed to be its core competency.

We're told by your fearless leader about the dire need to secure aircraft through banning shampoo, bottles of water and challenging IDs. All of these extra things you do distract you from finding true threats to security.

The "well, he could be a criminal" doesn't hold water. ANYONE could be that, including you and your co-workers. Should you be arrested?

Mission creep, the slippery slope, the camel's nose under the tent. With TSA screeners looking for so many peripheral items, there is a very good likelihood that they will miss the obvious that are threats to airliners. This likelihood is only enhanced by TSA's inability to deploy technology that would detect items that are threats to airliners.

No "immediate threat".

He is a known criminal.