excellent post (redux) ^ and i would simply be happy with items 1 & 2

Been there, done that. You must never have worked in a high-tech manufacturing facility where high-value, easily pocketable items are made.

With that argument, you're putting your own personal convenience over aviation security.

If you don't like the environment of your workplace, leave and work somewhere else. I did.

I just love people that tell others if you don't like your environment leave. First off you don't know me & what I like or dislike. So don't feed that crap to some one you don't even know.


TSA & aviation security b/s I see "their aviation security" 5days a week.

A way for passengers to secure their checked luggage from theft. Like plastic wrap or the starpping system Trollkiller has suggested. The TSA approved locks are a joke.

17. Quit wasting MY tax dollars on worthless, self promoting POSTERS. :mad:

I don't need to see a photo of TSO Jamaal's nice smile while I wait in line. In mere minitues, I am going to see him live, in person, and hear him barking at me at WTMD #3. Gazing at his PV Smile is not going to find or stop a single Terrorist.

Does anyone else see the gaping holes in these theories?

“Fail a Red Team test? You’re fired”. And not allow them the chance to learn from their mistake? What if it’s a brand new employee? Someone just certified on their first day working the checkpoint alone? Gonna fire the newbies?

“A pattern of complaints from PAX and not following the SOP? You’re fired.” How many? Over how long a period? General complaints or specific complaints only? How about compliments, do they offset the complaints?

“Ditch the LEO look-alike uniform and tin badge”. Oh, we have to run around naked on the checkpoint? No one is going to want to see my naked body in public, it would close the airport for good. The uniform and badge change was 10% for passengers, 90% for TSO’s. An integral part of the whole Engage Training program.

I can only try to teach you, if you refuse to learn then I cant help that. One last time I offer you the chance to educate yourself on the subject.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/liquid-explosives.htm
Read, learn, enjoy. And afterwards, if you get your foot out of your mouth, we can discuss the various pluses and minus’s of liquid explosives.

Correct, it cant. What it CAN do is indicate to the educated TSO that there is an anomaly in the bag or whatever (shoe) that needs to be examined more closely by a human. And that’s all the X-Ray is supposed to do, give us a better idea of those items that need to be examined more closely. IOW, it may look like a knife, but maybe it’s part of a musical instrument in reality. X-Ray cant tell us that, but a human can.

Actually, its called “Random Screening”. If we use the same screening methods day in and day out just how long do you think it would take a bad guy to see the pattern and find a way around it? Lets put our thinking caps on folks.

And deprive them of their right to due process? Heaven forbid!! Where did that cap go anyway?

TDC’s don’t care who you are, only that you present a valid ID and are the one listed on the boarding pass.

But those “other government agencies” are not at the checkpoint. SO, would it be better if we just denied entry of the individuals to the sterile area if they present a fake ID? You do know that possession of a forged ID is a crime, right?

Are you of the opinion that private aircraft cannot be crashed into buildings?

Maybe that the BDO’s could provide them with an additional resource, level of detection, for a major sporting event (ever see the movie “Black Sunday”) that the normal local police department does not have?

And there we get a return to the policies and procedures, as well as the level of professionalism, that brought us 9/11. Brilliant. Sorry N965VJ, but the proposals you have here are ludicrous. We get it that you don’t like TSA, but a return to the policies of the past is not the answer to the problems in todays world.

The only thing I know about you is that you have a consistent disdain for properly screening airport employees. You don't like it....leave.



I agree with you there wholeheartedly there.

You sir, are lying once again. Liquid explosives cannot be manufactured airside without time and temperature control. ANYTIME you want to go over the manufacture of TATP or nitroglycerin, you just say the word. Or any other chemical reaction, for that matter.

You lied about the existence of firearms that are not detectable by WTMD. What other lies do you have for us?

You were doing fairly well, Ron, until you got to the end.

No matter how many times you try and repeat the above lies, it will not make them the truth.

Lax gate security was not the cause of the 9/11 hijackings. Period. No matter how many times you claim otherwise, that is a bald-faced lie.

The hijackings were successful because of airline policies in place at the time that forbid resistance to a hijacking. the hijackers knew this, and exploited this vulnerability. Not the contract screening in place at the time.

The more I read your posts, the more I'm convinced that you must be posting on FT at the direction of TSA management. Your other colleagues that post don't parrot the party line nearly as faithfully as you do.

No I do not.

Yes, I would. If they fail on their first day, how on earth could I reasonably expect them to get better?

It is called accountability. Plenty of it here in the real world. None of it in the Government world.

You are NOT, I repeat, NOT a LEO. Look-alike uniforms is not going to change that.

Not a credible threat. Period.

The same poorly trained "humans" who fail red-team tests all the time?

It is called stupidity. If the screeners at the checkpoint were doing their jobs properly, and not constantly failing red-team tests, there would be no need for this idiocy.

If they are arrested, they can have their due process.

How, prey tell, does that involve security????????????????

You are NOT, I repeat, NOT a LEO. Mission creep is not going to change that. If screeners were spending less time looking for items that are NOT a threat, they very well might fail less red-team tests.

Credible threat????????????????

Not likely and certaintly not worth the waste of taxpayer money.

Screening on 9/11 did NOT fail. All of the iotems used to hijack the aircraft were ALLOWED.

What did fail on 9/11 was the cooperation of the pax and crew with the hijackers. That failure is highly unlikely to be repeated.

Yes, I see plenty in your theories. Let me point them out.


It has been reported it costs $16,000 per person in man hours, equipment, and OTJ training. Supposedly 60 hours of classroom training, etc. If you can't figure out the job by then, start looking.

As for the "let's give them a second chance" argument. That's a load of crap as well. It's the TSA that positions its every move with regards to screening that you're saving lives, protecting the public, etc. You can't get a "do-over" when you screw up. One of these days, your agency is going to screw the pooch big time, and it's going to be more than a dent in PR.

Aviation is filled with life-and-death situations. Either the TSA is there just for show, or do some actual security. It's the TSA's choice.

If you want proof of inadequate life-or-death training, Google the names Marvin Renslow or Rebecca Shaw.


When the initial press release shamelessly says the TSA is trying to buy respect for its employees, it has NOTHING to do with individual people, and everything to do with intimidation.


Giving you the benfit of the doubt, how do you know what any of those 100ml containers contain?

I know Spiff would be more than happy to discuss chemistry with you. Better eat your Wheaties, though.


There are more patterns to the TSA and more loopholes that can be exploited than the TSA can put bandages on.


So long as the "valid ID" is to the TSA's liking. Because the Passports from countries with mostly brown people are not valid.


They can, but the TSA doesn't have the manpower, or frankly the smarts, to prevent such a terrible event.

And please stop stepping on top of the corpses of the people who died on 9/11 by saying "look, this is what can happen to you if it weren't for us."


If today's policies are so effective, why does the GAO say we are no more better off with the TSA than with the private security folks?

Once again Ron-please describe the one policy or procedure, for which the TSA is 100% responsible, that would have prevented '9/11' (TM) had it been in place on 9/10.

Either back up your statements or stop making these insipid claims.

As others have pointed out to you, repeatedly, the only reason '9/11' (TM) succeeded was because 4 pilots, following the policies & procedures of their airlines at the time, opened the doors to the flight decks & cooperated w/the hijackers.

Once again spiff, I’m going to prove you wrong. It should be getting pretty old for you by now, the newest TSO of the forum showing you your errors on an ongoing basis.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,356491,00.html

http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...225032,00.html

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/200...id_explos.html

And of course, this last one is the kicker:

“In order to use Kinepak, the liquid component is simply poured into the solid component. Within about five to fifteen minutes, the liquid (which is usually colored red) will soak down to the bottom of the container, as evidenced by the pink color. At this point, it has the consistency of moist powder and is a cap sensitive, high explosive. It can be used in most situations where it would be suitable to use cartridged explosives such as dynamite, water gels and small diameter emulsions.”

“only other known commercial product is marketed under the name Binex. Binex uses a two component system of an aqueous solution of sodium perchlorate and aluminum powder. When these two components are combined, a liquid explosive is formed that is cap sensitive.”

“Pure nitromethane is actually a very powerful explosive. However, without the addition of some additives or modifiers, it is so insensitive that it is classified as a "Flammable Liquid" for transportation purposes.”

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ves-liquid.htm

Now, care to retract your statement calling me a liar sir? There are several liquid explosives that can be mixed without the controls you say are required. Mixed on an aircraft, in a car, on a boat, with green eggs and ham if you like.

I await your apology.

Halls, I never said that there was lax security. I said that their policies and procedures were not up to the task. The hijackers of 9/11 brought with them weapons that were allowed, so it was not a failure of the folks on the checkpoint. It was a failure of their plans and programs section for not anticipating the possibility that box cutters could be used to hijack a plane. And because the air crews of the time were trained to not resist but to comply with any hijackers requests/demands.

Your turn, care to retract your claim that I have lied?

Nah, that’s not it. I post here because I was invited, and because here I can see the same level of ignorance that one sees from the folks posting in response to the EOS bloggers. Like old Spiff there, he just cannot get past the fact that he is wrong about liquid explosives, or about non-metalic firearms. I’m not denigrating him, not one bit, I just know that he is not going to be able bring himself to admit that he is wrong in public, to a member of a workforce he hates.