Flushing out terrorists
May 2, 2009 | 4:18 pm
#17
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: FrostByte Falls, Mn
Programs: Holiday Inn Plat NW gold AA gold
Posts: 2,157
Before the beginning of the modern jihadist movement, most terrorists were not willing to die for their cause, but they certainly were willing to kill for it. Most terrorists are not all that bright, not by modern standards. Which is how they can convince kids, old folks, women, and others to do what they do. Pohl Pot and the Khmer Rouge showed us that
I remember the airports pre 9/11 and remember that the security was much more pleasant then than they are now. As to effectiveness they found my steel toed shoes every time. They discovered pocket change and the occasional Swiss Army knife I forgot to remove.
TSA hasn't flushed any terrorists because the terrorists go after high value targets and since the cockpit doors have been hardened/airlines SOP for dealing with terrorists has changed, they've moved on to bigger and better things. The likelihood of another airline based attack is quite remote since other targets bring in a much higher return on investment.
TSORon, what if there was another attack and because you personally failed a standard screening, allowed the terrorists through to complete their mission? What would you do about that failure? How would TSA spin the failure? I propose that the terrorists know airline/airport security much better than does TSA and the only reason an attack hasn't taken place is due to the return on investment for a large scale terrorist attack.
May 2, 2009 | 4:20 pm
#18
Suspended
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,953
And now for something totally on-topic, please read here:
http://www.theaviationnation.com/200...a-flight-1824/
Funny, I can.
http://www.theaviationnation.com/200...a-flight-1824/
Funny, I can.
If you believe that was a terrorist act that was stopped by the TSA and other Federal agencies, why have we heard nothing further on this? Why were not these "terrorists" charged and brought to trial. Why did an FBI agent call the incident "benign?"
Quite honestly, I'm beginning to smell a real right wing extremist here.
May 2, 2009 | 4:29 pm
#19
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: FrostByte Falls, Mn
Programs: Holiday Inn Plat NW gold AA gold
Posts: 2,157
Oh my stars, where to start? Let's start with the link TSORon gives above.
If you believe that was a terrorist act that was stopped by the TSA and other Federal agencies, why have we heard nothing further on this? Why were not these "terrorists" charged and brought to trial. Why did an FBI agent call the incident "benign?"
Quite honestly, I'm beginning to smell a real right wing extremist here.
If you believe that was a terrorist act that was stopped by the TSA and other Federal agencies, why have we heard nothing further on this? Why were not these "terrorists" charged and brought to trial. Why did an FBI agent call the incident "benign?"
Quite honestly, I'm beginning to smell a real right wing extremist here.
May 2, 2009 | 5:13 pm
#20
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 684
May 2, 2009 | 8:18 pm
#22
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: SW Rapid Rewards, Hilton Honors, Marriott, Avis First
Posts: 4,831
This message deleted by the author.
May 2, 2009 | 10:08 pm
#24
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA
Programs: AAdvantage, MileagePlus, SkyMiles
Posts: 4,338
I don't know what it is that bothers me so much about this post, but I really don't like the whole "you're guilty until proven innocent" vibe I'm getting from his post. This is a nation where you're innocent until proven guilty. TSA's job is to screen us for explosives, guns, and other dangerous items. Leave the determination of who's a terrorist and who isn't to the FBI, CIA, and other agencies who know what they're doing.
In America, you're not supposed to have to prove that you're not guilty in the first place. That's what probable cause is for. Blogger Bob claims that he doesn't know if we're a terrorist or not. Why does it matter? As long as you don't have any explosives, guns, or other dangerous items on you, then you're deemed safe to be on an aircraft.
I don't see why TSA is even posting this in the first place. Again, their responsibility is to screen us for the following mentioned above, and they're not FBI.
In America, you're not supposed to have to prove that you're not guilty in the first place. That's what probable cause is for. Blogger Bob claims that he doesn't know if we're a terrorist or not. Why does it matter? As long as you don't have any explosives, guns, or other dangerous items on you, then you're deemed safe to be on an aircraft.
I don't see why TSA is even posting this in the first place. Again, their responsibility is to screen us for the following mentioned above, and they're not FBI.
May 2, 2009 | 10:19 pm
#25
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Doha, Qatar
Programs: Air Canada Aeroplan, Lufthansa Miles & More, Flying Blue, Hyatt Gold Passport
Posts: 1,894
TSORon, what if there was another attack and because you personally failed a standard screening, allowed the terrorists through to complete their mission? What would you do about that failure? How would TSA spin the failure? I propose that the terrorists know airline/airport security much better than does TSA and the only reason an attack hasn't taken place is due to the return on investment for a large scale terrorist attack.
May 3, 2009 | 6:24 am
#27
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Doha, Qatar
Programs: Air Canada Aeroplan, Lufthansa Miles & More, Flying Blue, Hyatt Gold Passport
Posts: 1,894
May 3, 2009 | 5:48 pm
#28
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Salish Sea
Programs: DL,AC,HH,PC
Posts: 8,972
Much as it irks me, I will have to agree with Ron. TSA is there primarily to deter terrorists from accessing the secure area of the terminal.
You all jumped to disputing that the TSA has ever caught a terrorist. That they haven't (examples to the contrary PLEASE
) does not mean that nonehave been deterred by our vigilant screeners and SPOTniks. How many ? You'd have to ask the terrorists, but they probably aren't going to tell you.
Of course, all the other loopholes (or oppportunities depending who you are) still exist, and I don't see any attempt to deter say, driving a truck through the flimsy perimeter fence/gates, a suicide body bomber in the terminal or a drive-by massacre of the poor fools lining up on the sidewalk. Still, that's not Ron's job; it's err.., umm.., nobody's I guess.
You all jumped to disputing that the TSA has ever caught a terrorist. That they haven't (examples to the contrary PLEASE
) does not mean that nonehave been deterred by our vigilant screeners and SPOTniks. How many ? You'd have to ask the terrorists, but they probably aren't going to tell you.Of course, all the other loopholes (or oppportunities depending who you are) still exist, and I don't see any attempt to deter say, driving a truck through the flimsy perimeter fence/gates, a suicide body bomber in the terminal or a drive-by massacre of the poor fools lining up on the sidewalk. Still, that's not Ron's job; it's err.., umm.., nobody's I guess.
May 3, 2009 | 9:19 pm
#29
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 72,226
I think there is some validity to what you say. True, a highly-trained professional "terrorist" (read that to mean the cold-hearted men in black who work special operations) could find ways to defeat any security program. In my previous life, I conducted what is popularly referred to as Red Team attacks against high-profile targets and always found a hole.
Where your argument is somewhat flawed is the assumption that terrorists are infallible. Even highly-trained professional field operators exhibit poker-like "tells." Argue against this all you want, I'll match my field experience against anyone on this board and prove you and anyone else wrong. The tricky part is sensitizing security personnel to detect these subtle signs and incorporating that into their security screening routines. This is where the advantage falls to the bad guys because humans are creatures of habit. This doesn't make screening pointless. It only raises the point of the challenges officers need to focus on when they screen.
There are other aspects of airport security screening you conveniently overlook: the dumb passenger. No insult intended, but there are people who simply don't think. They pack acids, corrosives, flammables and other dangerous items in their checked luggage which are detected by TSOs on an all-too frequent basis. While not terrorism, these dumb acts certainly pose an equal danger to the safety of aircraft as would an IED.
As for the other incidents, such as the passenger who brings a loaded firearm to the checkpoint (happens on a regular basis) or has some other dangerous prohibited item such as a hunting knife, martial arts weapon, etc., a lot of that can be attributed to either forgetfulness, ignorance or other simple mistakes. Still, the point you overlook is that TSA catches these items on a fairly frequent basis. No, none of them to date have proven to be terrorist-related. But the point you deliberately ignore is whether there is any value added to catching these items at the checkpoint. Don't bother attempting an answer, I fully expect you to fit this into your anti-TSA mantra.
Pointless job? Hardly.
Where your argument is somewhat flawed is the assumption that terrorists are infallible. Even highly-trained professional field operators exhibit poker-like "tells." Argue against this all you want, I'll match my field experience against anyone on this board and prove you and anyone else wrong. The tricky part is sensitizing security personnel to detect these subtle signs and incorporating that into their security screening routines. This is where the advantage falls to the bad guys because humans are creatures of habit. This doesn't make screening pointless. It only raises the point of the challenges officers need to focus on when they screen.
There are other aspects of airport security screening you conveniently overlook: the dumb passenger. No insult intended, but there are people who simply don't think. They pack acids, corrosives, flammables and other dangerous items in their checked luggage which are detected by TSOs on an all-too frequent basis. While not terrorism, these dumb acts certainly pose an equal danger to the safety of aircraft as would an IED.
As for the other incidents, such as the passenger who brings a loaded firearm to the checkpoint (happens on a regular basis) or has some other dangerous prohibited item such as a hunting knife, martial arts weapon, etc., a lot of that can be attributed to either forgetfulness, ignorance or other simple mistakes. Still, the point you overlook is that TSA catches these items on a fairly frequent basis. No, none of them to date have proven to be terrorist-related. But the point you deliberately ignore is whether there is any value added to catching these items at the checkpoint. Don't bother attempting an answer, I fully expect you to fit this into your anti-TSA mantra.
Pointless job? Hardly.
Lax gate security did not cause the 9/11 hijackings. Yet the taxpayers and the traveling public have had TSA foisted upon them by a government intent on "doing something" post 9/11. Even though sane and cool heads within government knew very well that the hijackings weren't the fault of pre 9/11 gate security, TSA and its corps of "professional" screeners are the product of a CYA mentality in government that overrode sanity and common sense in the weeks and months following 9/11.
I know this from direct participation in interagency meetings during that time.
May 3, 2009 | 9:36 pm
#30
In Memoriam, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Southern California
Programs: DL: 3.8 MM, Marriott: Lifetime Titanium
Posts: 24,575
Folks, we've had to delete several posts as inflammatory, personal commentary.
Please stick to the topic at hand and refrain from commenting on your fellow FT'ers.
Thanks for your cooperation.
______________________
Cholula
Travel Safety/Security Forum Moderator
Please stick to the topic at hand and refrain from commenting on your fellow FT'ers.
Thanks for your cooperation.
______________________
Cholula
Travel Safety/Security Forum Moderator