Here it is for 2013
Airport security is something we need. The TSA does have a number of flaws, (too many to rattle off here in a post) but I am glad to see they are at least trying to stop prohibited items (and for the most part are) from getting on planes. No one will ever agree on how to go about securing air travel but at least we have something. I do however believe that some of the "finds" are government or private agencies testing the system.
Well said, but a determined insider (even a TSA employee) is the wild card and always will be.
Wow! My guess that at least some of these are from terrorists testing the system.
Boy I sure hope that is so! Good point.
you would hope so….. however, remember when the Dallas Cowboys coach got busted at the airport for having a firearm in his suitcase??? I thin there are many more morons in this country than terrorists……..
I have friends who put unloaded firearms in their baggage--they are in law enforcement--and they inform TSA and the airlines each time.
shoeman, I agree with you about morons, etc. I deal with them everyday. But it's not Barry Switzer and others like him that worry me...He' harmless. Terrorists on the other hand, well it just takes once.
I know, and believe me, I worry too. However, I remember Bush 43 telling everyone to live their life and don't allow the bad guys to win….. I think those words were profound. Those, plus "trust, but verify", are words to live by. Clearly, those pics of things found at airports were not, by and large, terrorist weapons. At least that is what I want to believe, otherwise I could never get on all the flights I do…...
shoeman1000 I also agree with not letting the bad guys win. And probably many, if not most, of those weapons shown were not seized from people who really want to harm us. But I also am sure that many evil plans have been thwarted and the public will never know about them. I really respect those folks on our front line...it's a tough position to be in.
Well said Husker, as someone (SECDEF Caspar Weinberger) said to me in 1981, "the world is a dangerous place." Truer now than ever.
I appreciate the point of view of those of you who served in our Armed Services. Thank you for sharing some of the wisdom your experience has brought you!
Much obliged, but I was only a three year Infantry Officer, not as much as some on the MRI like NUHusker. His wisdom far outweighs mine.
If TSA had ever stopped a real attack, a 9/11 style attack, we would have heard it trumpeted by them all over the news. They don't stop anything.
What they do accomplish is creating a concern on the part of the terrorists so that they no longer consider airplanes a soft target and will concentrate on something else. So the bottom line is that the annoyance TSA puts us through probably makes us safer.
Anything that acts as a deterrence is OK by me, But that assumes (and falsely) that we can be successful in our efforts 100% of the time. I hope we are, but I also fear we aren't able to catch everyone.
john_thai, I'm just curious about what you do that might give you information that TSA doesn't stop anything. Glad to see that you agree that TSA probably makes us safer.
I say TSA hasn't actually stopped anything because if they had stopped something they would have been trumpetting it to the heavens. Given the bad PR they always get, one major success would have changed their image dramatically. Since they haven't bragged about stopping one, I think that's good evidence that they haven't.
And I suspect there's more than you or I will ever know about what the TSA has done, good or bad.
Article in USA Today from this morning:
I would say they have summed oit up very well. Thanks for the information.
From the article, "has TSA stopped an repeat of 9-11" or words to that effect...Fact is, there hasn't been a repeat regardless of who or what has been responsible for that.
"Pre check is essentially what we were doing before the terrorists attacked on 9-11" or words to that effect. Fact is, pre check makes no sense whatsoever.
I wondered how long before everyone would get that--and thanks for making it clear, the checks are there pre or not, and the results are the same.
Thanks for posting that article and I'd also agree the writer got it correct.
I think that a form of pre-chack is the way to go. Eliminate those who do not pose a threat and concentrate on those who might be. The key is to be careful on who is eliminated. I know that I am not a threat so when I have precheck, it is not only better for me but everyone else.
You are so correct, that's why when they hooked Pre-Check with Global Entry or similar programs in other countries it made sense for those to get Pre-Check as they've gotten a background check so not sure why the TSA feels a need to have others in Pre-Check other than the $$.
Very true IAH
In the FWIW category regarding both security and logic; I just finished a trip at IAD (Dulles) where I, who have never done anything with TSA PreCheck (I have priority access thru the credit card but nothing more), was redirected from my normal entry way, where I've never had any significant delays, down to the TSA PreCheck (quite enthusiastically by the agent who acted like I had won the lottery). As I arrived from my 100 yard walk, I saw two lines, one TSA which had easily 60 or more folks in it, the other, an essentially ignored line for apparently schlubs. I inquired about the schlub line and the agent said, "sure you can use it, but you have to take your shoes off" (which I of course had already planned on - thus the topsiders and no belt). I looked at the back of the TSA line (who did not have to remove clothing), went thru and easily beat 40 or 50 of those VIPs in the TSA line - go figure.
Confusion reigns at Dulles always when I pass through there--like Congress, lots of noise and light but little action.
That's what this buy into Pre-Check and offering it to others such as yourself has created, longer lines at Pre-Check. Had a similar thing happen to us recently and we took the take off shoe route (never a belt at airports & slip on deck shoes).
I go barefoot and wear a loose fitting sheet, always gets admiring stares from the female and some of the male TSA-ers.
On that comment I'm going to get some of jerrycoin "medication" started. LOL
Watch for me on you tube
Will you be in drag wearing a blonde wig?
Turns out they are laughing
TSA Agent Confession - POLITICO Magazine
Just saw a discussion of this on Morning Joe -- apparently it was common practice for agents while looking at the machine-version naked bodies of people going through machines to laugh or make other salacious comments.
Last November, I made the decision to take up the practice of opting for the pat down in lieu of going through "the naked body machines" whenever pre-check is unavailable. I could care less what any scurrilous TSA agents might think or say about my scanned image, I just refuse to subject my cells to unknown quantities of unknown matter. So far, so good. The agents (all ladies) have been professional, courteous and - careful, and it hasn't taken too long.
this is a strong argument for Pre-check.
I knew that the machines would not show the type of bomb that the underware bomber uses. Did someone profit by putting them in?
They claim the new machines don't use radiation. Is this true?
I'll leave those questions for the experts, though I am not comfortable with the machines (plus when I'm not pre-check I always seem to get pulled aside for additional scrutiny anyway) since I get a ton of xrays and MRIs on a regular basis anyway. I do feel certain that like most contracts, someone had an 'in.' Plus some of the latest types of threat seem to involve surgically implanted explosives. What will we do about that?
I actually forgot to tell my best anti-Schiphol story of the last week, which happened yesterday. At security, through priority lines (the other lines were moving MUCH faster (about x5) even though they don't do reverse pre-check), they x-rayed my purse 4 or 5 times and my suitcase 2 or 3. This was getting a little much but you can't dare antagonize someone with such power. What annoyed me the most was the absolute nothing of interest they found in either but kept whole long lines of priority passengers waiting while non-FF were filling up most of the usable seats.
They could have simply done what they did at the end with my purse (if I told this story yesterday excuse me -- no sleep and sick and communications with others and airlines). They asked if they could look through it. I would have happily taken every single item out and let them turn the whole thing upside down, but no, it had to go through the xray machine 5 times before they asked to examine it, much to the glares of people behind me. And I've gotten so used to Schiphol that I even put all my cords in ziplocs since I know they will make me remove them, which used to mean virtual unpacking of my suitcase.
What we need is common sense, like in Tel Aviv. I'm not talking about ethnic or racial profiling, but behavioral. Look at how someone behaves, if they seem nervous or shifty, if they have a one-way ticket paid with cash, or by contrast if they're a decrepit 61-yr-old very FF like me.
PS -- I forgot to mention that the offensive item in my purse turned out to be my turned-off cell phone.
What I don't understand is why there aren't metal detectors that you have to go through when you go through the doors. TSA has rejected letting TSA people arm themselves. Why weren't all of these weapons detected as they entered the airport terminals?
At most Middle Eastern airports, you go through a metal detector as soon as you enter the airport (Tel Aviv, Istanbul and Cairo are the ones I know about). I think it's a good idea.
There is never going to be a "knee jerk" reaction (as the TSA agent referred to it) that catches everything. Nothing can catch everything. It becomes a game of cat and mouse.
So where does it end? I don't think it does if what we want is "safety" rather than freedom.
And I'll take freedom since TSA agents do not make me feel safer. Now in Tel Aviv, that was another story. I know many disagree with me and I respect your opinions, but I have always felt that TSA is mostly inconvenient window dressing. I think most of the real work that goes on in airports that may detect threats involves roaming behavioral types who look for suspicious behavior as well as trained dogs. And ultimately, in more than a few instances, it has been the people on a given plane that have done the best 'screening' of all.
The stupid thing is that a body scanner can be fooled but yet a metal detector would detect standard pistol every time. It's different technology but not necessarily better.
Wouldn't it have helped at the LAX terminal in Nov., 2013? I realize you can now make guns out of high tech copy machines using plastic and paper, pretty much like fiberglass. Courthouses in small towns like Camden, SC have metal detectors at the doors.
Retrieving data ...