FlyerTalk Forums
Page 10 of 15
« First
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   Practical Travel Safety and Security Issues (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-security-issues-686/)
-   -   TSA and the Law (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-security-issues/948783-tsa-law.html)

halls120 May 2, 2009 8:03 pm
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 11684603)
Was this report ever released to any public source?

I would really like to read it.
No - Kippie was quick to kill that idea. When and if I think I can post it without it being traced back, I will.

When the bogus replacement report is issued (sometime this year, if at all), that might give me the cover I need.

mn_voyageur May 2, 2009 11:43 pm
What about FOIA?

Could my Senator get a copy from the creator, not the end-user.

I would think the oversight committees would be interested in the report.

Boggie Dog May 3, 2009 8:19 am
Originally Posted by halls120 (Post 11684630)
No - Kippie was quick to kill that idea. When and if I think I can post it without it being traced back, I will.

When the bogus replacement report is issued (sometime this year, if at all), that might give me the cover I need.
I don't think anyone here would ask you to risk your job.

How was this report classified? Did a copy go to the LoC?

Who prepared the document, a contractor or government agency?

How many people know what this report stated or had access to this report?

mn_voyageur May 3, 2009 8:40 am
Boggie Dog,

Since you and I are both racing down the same path, would you mind telling me what or who "LoC" is?

Thanks.

NY-FLA May 3, 2009 9:20 am
Originally Posted by halls120 (Post 11684575)
As I've noted previously, a report prepared by an interagency experts on aviation security last year was rejected by Kip Hawley and his cohorts, in part because it didn't produce the answer he wanted. The report concluded that the biggest threat to aviation security was under the wing - cargo, not passengers. Since that would undermine the whole TSA Kabuki theatre, he rejected it.
Pax as the TSA's #1 enemy and threat. :rolleyes: Who knew?

AngryMiller May 3, 2009 9:51 am
Originally Posted by NY-FLA (Post 11686506)
Pax as the TSA's #1 enemy and threat. :rolleyes: Who knew?
What is more surprising could be the possibility that Kip effectively 'cooked the books' on a report. Haven't people gone to jail for actions like this? If this proves to be true I hope that Kip has a tough hide.

doober May 3, 2009 9:53 am
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 11684603)
Was this report ever released to any public source?

I would really like to read it.
With the amount of stuff that is leaked all the time, it would seem to me that somebody should be able to get this report.

IslandBased May 3, 2009 9:56 am
Originally Posted by NY-FLA (Post 11686506)
Pax as the TSA's #1 enemy and threat. :rolleyes: Who knew?
TSA is TSA's #1 enemy and threat... the evidence has been extremely clear over the past seven years. Like most dysfunctional organizations, they are in complete denial. :mad::mad:

mn_voyageur May 3, 2009 9:58 am
Why not just move the existing TSA employees to search/observe under the wing, instead of the passengers?

Maybe TSORon would like to comment on the suggestion.

It should not be a threat to their jobs. We would still need security. Just not as much scrutiny towards the passengers.

I'd bet the airlines would welcome it, but I welcome opinions to the contrary.

AngryMiller May 3, 2009 10:03 am
Originally Posted by NY-FLA (Post 11686506)
Pax as the TSA's #1 enemy and threat. :rolleyes: Who knew?
Originally Posted by mn_voyageur (Post 11686654)
Why not just move the existing TSA employees to search/observe under the wing, instead of the passengers?

Maybe TSORon would like to comment on the suggestion.

It should not be a threat to their jobs. We would still need security. Just not as much scrutiny towards the passengers.

I'd bet the airlines would welcome it, but I welcome opinions to the contrary.
TSORon would hate that because flight line searches are unpleasant due to weather extremes.

IslandBased May 3, 2009 10:04 am
Originally Posted by mn_voyageur (Post 11686654)
Why not just move the existing TSA employees to search/observe under the wing, instead of the passengers?

Maybe TSORon would like to comment on the suggestion.

It should not be a threat to their jobs. We would still need security. Just not as much scrutiny towards the passengers.

I'd bet the airlines would welcome it, but I welcome opinions to the contrary.
It is too bad they can't model themselves after Airport Watch.

Boggie Dog May 3, 2009 10:05 am
Originally Posted by mn_voyageur (Post 11686366)
Boggie Dog,

Since you and I are both racing down the same path, would you mind telling me what or who "LoC" is?

Thanks.
Library of Congress

mn_voyageur May 3, 2009 10:18 am
Originally Posted by IslandBased (Post 11686672)
It is too bad they can't model themselves after Airport Watch.
If they did, would that mean that the commercial airlines would have to install throttle locks, as the FAA has discussed for GA?

mn_voyageur May 3, 2009 10:29 am
Originally Posted by AngryMiller (Post 11686614)
What is more surprising could be the possibility that Kip effectively 'cooked the books' on a report. Haven't people gone to jail for actions like this? If this proves to be true I hope that Kip has a tough hide.
Maybe he should talk to G Gordon Liddy.

TSORon May 4, 2009 11:06 am
Originally Posted by mn_voyageur (Post 11683939)
I agree that TSA appears to have ignored the Constitution.

You ask for specifics. They were given. Yet, your responses are not direct and fail to provide any 3rd party support for your position.

Could we just address the shoe removal issue? Let's limit the discussion to that topic.

Regarding shoe removal, you have responded, but not defended TSA's position.
I don’t really feel a need to defend TSA’s position.

If magellan315 is correct and we are the only country that requires this, then challenging TSA's position is warranted. We share the same intelligence. Why are they not requiring shoe removal?

The question is simple and straight forward. Please answer.

I do have an answer:
"I believe that TSA continues this dance to avoid being challenged in other areas. If they stopped requiring the removal of shoes, then the public might expect them to stop gate searches."
Easy, you said it not I. But I have to agree with it. No other country has actually been threatened by someone using or attempting to use a “shoe bomb”. That should be justification enough, but for magellan315 and others it will not be.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 8:04 am.
Page 10 of 15
« First
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page


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.