Patrick Smith @ Salon.com: TSA an inefficient fight against the wrong enemy
#1
Original Poster
FlyerTalk Evangelist




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Marriott or Hilton hot tub with a big drink <glub> Beverage: To-Go Bag DYKWIA:SSSS /rolleyes ☈ Date Night:Costco
Programs: Sea Shell Lounge Platinum, TSA Pre✓ Refusnik Diamond, PWP Gold, FT subset of the subset
Posts: 12,523
Patrick Smith @ Salon.com: TSA an inefficient fight against the wrong enemy
Are passengers safe from terrorists?
The TSA wastes a lot of time and money on an inefficient fight against the wrong enemy
By Patrick Smith
Salon.com *-28-09
<SNIP>
Pan Am 103 was but one in a long string of terrorist attacks against civilian aircraft throughout the 1970s and 1980s. Despite what many young Americans seem to think, aircraft sabotage did not begin with the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. It has been with us for decades (see a list of them). But through it all, and despite our intoxication with security, we have still not adequately confronted the danger. On the contrary, our obsession with the events of 9/11 has left us vulnerable.
The novelty of the Sept. 11 attacks notwithstanding, the primary threat to commercial planes is, was and shall remain the smuggling aboard of explosives, which is what happened on Pan Am 103. The bomb came onboard in a suitcase. The hijack paradigm changed forever on 9/11, rendering the inflight takeover concept unworkable for a terrorist.
In any case, and in spite of the Transportation Security Administration's best efforts, there are limitless ways to sneak knives and other dangerous materials past guards; not to mention, a deadly weapon can be fashioned from just about anything, including plenty of materials found on airplanes. (I'll point out that even maximum-security prisons are unable to eliminate knives and contraband.) Yet whether by virtue of incompetence or willful ignorance, TSA continues to waste untold time and untold millions of dollars on a tedious, zero-tolerance fixation with blades and sharps. This does nothing to make us safer, and in fact draws security resources away from worthy pursuits.
The TSA wastes a lot of time and money on an inefficient fight against the wrong enemy
By Patrick Smith
Salon.com *-28-09
<SNIP>
Pan Am 103 was but one in a long string of terrorist attacks against civilian aircraft throughout the 1970s and 1980s. Despite what many young Americans seem to think, aircraft sabotage did not begin with the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. It has been with us for decades (see a list of them). But through it all, and despite our intoxication with security, we have still not adequately confronted the danger. On the contrary, our obsession with the events of 9/11 has left us vulnerable.
The novelty of the Sept. 11 attacks notwithstanding, the primary threat to commercial planes is, was and shall remain the smuggling aboard of explosives, which is what happened on Pan Am 103. The bomb came onboard in a suitcase. The hijack paradigm changed forever on 9/11, rendering the inflight takeover concept unworkable for a terrorist.
In any case, and in spite of the Transportation Security Administration's best efforts, there are limitless ways to sneak knives and other dangerous materials past guards; not to mention, a deadly weapon can be fashioned from just about anything, including plenty of materials found on airplanes. (I'll point out that even maximum-security prisons are unable to eliminate knives and contraband.) Yet whether by virtue of incompetence or willful ignorance, TSA continues to waste untold time and untold millions of dollars on a tedious, zero-tolerance fixation with blades and sharps. This does nothing to make us safer, and in fact draws security resources away from worthy pursuits.
#2
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend




Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 72,305
I nominate Patrick Smith to be the next TSA Administrator. He gets it.
Check out the comments on Salon. All but three support Patrick's POV.
Some of the original post bears repeating, this time in bold.
I vote for both - willful ignorance and incompetence.
Check out the comments on Salon. All but three support Patrick's POV.
Some of the original post bears repeating, this time in bold.
Pan Am 103 was but one in a long string of terrorist attacks against civilian aircraft throughout the 1970s and 1980s. Despite what many young Americans seem to think, aircraft sabotage did not begin with the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. It has been with us for decades (see a list of them). But through it all, and despite our intoxication with security, we have still not adequately confronted the danger. On the contrary, our obsession with the events of 9/11 has left us vulnerable.
The novelty of the Sept. 11 attacks notwithstanding, the primary threat to commercial planes is, was and shall remain the smuggling aboard of explosives, which is what happened on Pan Am 103. The bomb came onboard in a suitcase. The hijack paradigm changed forever on 9/11, rendering the inflight takeover concept unworkable for a terrorist.
In any case, and in spite of the Transportation Security Administration's best efforts, there are limitless ways to sneak knives and other dangerous materials past guards; not to mention, a deadly weapon can be fashioned from just about anything, including plenty of materials found on airplanes. (I'll point out that even maximum-security prisons are unable to eliminate knives and contraband.) Yet whether by virtue of incompetence or willful ignorance, TSA continues to waste untold time and untold millions of dollars on a tedious, zero-tolerance fixation with blades and sharps. This does nothing to make us safer, and in fact draws security resources away from worthy pursuits.
The novelty of the Sept. 11 attacks notwithstanding, the primary threat to commercial planes is, was and shall remain the smuggling aboard of explosives, which is what happened on Pan Am 103. The bomb came onboard in a suitcase. The hijack paradigm changed forever on 9/11, rendering the inflight takeover concept unworkable for a terrorist.
In any case, and in spite of the Transportation Security Administration's best efforts, there are limitless ways to sneak knives and other dangerous materials past guards; not to mention, a deadly weapon can be fashioned from just about anything, including plenty of materials found on airplanes. (I'll point out that even maximum-security prisons are unable to eliminate knives and contraband.) Yet whether by virtue of incompetence or willful ignorance, TSA continues to waste untold time and untold millions of dollars on a tedious, zero-tolerance fixation with blades and sharps. This does nothing to make us safer, and in fact draws security resources away from worthy pursuits.
Last edited by halls120; Aug 28, 2009 at 11:01 am
#4
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 252
#6
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,004
If TSA fully embraces that philosophy, the new TSA Administrator should be Mordac, the preventer of Information services.


^^^
#7
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,195
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/...bar/index.html
#8
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend




Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
I believe one is best served by reading one of the links to another article by the same author, a link found on the same page.
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/...bar/index.html
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/...bar/index.html
#9
Suspended
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,953
I believe one is best served by reading one of the links to another article by the same author, a link found on the same page.
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/...bar/index.html
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/...bar/index.html
S*** happens, Ronnie. No one can protect us from everything.
#11
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,725
If TSA fully embraces that philosophy, the new TSA Administrator should be Mordac, the preventer of Information services.



