Anyone flying soon?

[burk48237]

So you know for a fact that not one terrorist has avoided getting on a plane because of security measures?

How?


As far as us being in a war being irrelevant, you have lots of company in that mindset. No need for heightened security during wartime/conflict-time. And certainly don't inconvenience people not directly involved.


Again, the "molesting" terminology is pure drama queen and certainly doesn't help the point you're trying to make.

Brad, In this day where the media reports every threat, do you honestly believe that if the TSA would have caught a terrorist trying to board a plane or interrupted a terrorist plot they would have reported it? Please link to one story that shows that the TSA has stopped a terrorist? You can guess that their measures have prevented action, but the burden of proof is on you, prove it. Ten years, Brad, not one case. That's a pretty sad track record.

You can't because it hasn't happened. The FBI has caught some, custom officers have caught some in the act, Civillian Airline passengers have stopped two plots. But the TSAstill hasn't caught one terrorist in the act of boarding a plane.

As far as the war being irrelevent, wether or not a tactic works is most certainly relevent. Not only are they irrelevent they are moronic, we pull a terrorist of a plane we read him his rights and Lawyer him up, but an ordinary citizen can't board a plane with a set of nail clippers.

This is especially the case when you're flushing the constitution down the toilet. Nothing in the Constitution says that the fourth amendment is eliminated when we are at war. Jeffery Rosen in Todays WA. Post says much the same thing.

In a 2006 opinion for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, then-Judge Samuel Alito stressed that screening procedures must be both "minimally intrusive" and "effective" - in other words, they must be "well-tailored to protect personal privacy," and they must deliver on their promise of discovering serious threats. Alito upheld the practices at an airport checkpoint where passengers were first screened with walk-through magnetometers and then, if they set off an alarm, with hand-held wands. He wrote that airport searches are reasonable if they escalate "in invasiveness only after a lower level of screening disclose a reason to conduct a more probing search."

As currently used in U.S. airports, the new full-body scanners fail all of Alito's tests. First, as European regulators have recognized, they could be much less intrusive without sacrificing effectiveness. For example, Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport, the European airport that employs body-scanning machines most extensively, has incorporated crucial privacy and safety protections. Rejecting the "backscatter" machines used in the United States, which produce revealing images of the body and have raised concerns about radiation, the Dutch use scanners known as ProVision ATD, which employ radio waves with far lower frequencies than those used in common hand-held devices. If the software detects contraband or suspicious material under a passenger's clothing, it projects an outline of that area of the body onto a gender-neutral, blob-like human image, instead of generating a virtually naked image of the passenger. The passenger can then be taken aside for secondary screenin

Invalid Link Removed

 

[NateS]

Cool. Such as...?

I havent want to college and studied these things. The people have the right to complain, not the duty to do the expert's job. Which, given the tsa's track record, civilians have been. Again, I ask why The heightened security now? 9 years later?

 

[NateS]

You didn't have to go to college to know what you don't like but you'd need to go to have an idea what would be okay with you?

Okay.

Why the heightened security? Beats me.

i mean to say that i don't know the technology available. Ideally there would be wifi-like devices that watch the entrances of the airport lobby, setting off alarms in the control room and alerting authorities. Is there such a thing? prolly not.

and no, i don't have to have high education to know that i would feel violated. that's why they are rights, we don't have to unlock them.

 

[Brad Johnson]

i mean to say that i don't know the technology available. Ideally there would be wifi-like devices that watch the entrances of the airport lobby, setting off alarms in the control room and alerting authorities. Is there such a thing? prolly not.

and no, i don't have to have high education to know that i would feel violated. that's why they are rights, we don't have to unlock them.

Setting off alarms based on what?

Sounds like the right to go anywhere someone else mentioned, which frankly is full of holes. It's a right you only think you have.

 

[Bob Lee (QSC)]

Please link to one story that shows that the TSA has stopped a terrorist?

Maybe you can point to a terrorist attack that slipped past TSA?

but an ordinary citizen can't board a plane with a set of nail clippers.

I must be an extraordinary citizen then? I've boarded many flights with nail clippers. I once had to give up my little Swiss Army knife at security because I forgot to drop it into my checked bags. But nail clippers haven't been a problem except in the florid imaginations of some persons.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Maybe you can point to a terrorist attack that slipped past TSA?

I don't think that part of the equation is registering, Bob.

I must be an extraordinary citizen then? I've boarded many flights with nail clippers. I once had to give up my little Swiss Army knife at security because I forgot to drop it into my checked bags. But nail clippers haven't been a problem except in the florid imaginations of some persons.

 

[jp58]

Maybe you can point to a terrorist attack that slipped past TSA?

The Whitey-Tighties Bomber?

 

[Bob Lee (QSC)]

The Whitey-Tighties Bomber?

Can you name one who slipped past TSA?

 

[burk48237]

Do you not understand the point I made? What record would there be of someone who decided not to do something because of the measures in place?

I don't have to prove anything, you said the current TSA tactics haven't prevented one terrorist attack. Unless you disagree that what I described would be preventing an attack, prove it didn't.

I knew a quote was a comin'.

Silly Me, I keep forgetting what an authority Brad Johnson is on Constitutional law and Airport Security.

We've been damn lucky, That terrorist haven't slipped thru with another attack but the fact is the TSA is no better then the Keystone cops. At least the Keystone cops had thorough background checks before they were hired.

A few more quotes:

Screeners at Los Angeles International Airport missed about 75% of simulated explosives and bomb parts that Transportation Security Administration testers hid under their clothes or in carry-on bags at checkpoints, the TSA report shows.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

Undercover tests of aviation screening operations revealed widespread problems, raising concerns that explosives and weapons could get into airport sterile areas and checked baggage systems, the Homeland Security Department's inspector general said Wednesday.
Covert tests of the Transportation Security Administration's screeners and equipment were conducted at hundreds of airports across the country from July to November 2003. The bulk of the report remains classified, but an eight-page summary was released Wednesday. The report is based on interviews with employees and officials at relevant agencies, direct observations and document reviews.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

“Assessing the security risks of our various modes of transportation is essential to determining how best to deploy our limited resources,” Mica said. “TSA’s failure to complete these critical risk assessments further demonstrates this bloated bureaucracy’s inability to respond effectively to the nation’s transportation security demands. Even with more than 7,000 supervisors and administrative staff across the country and over 1,000 more in Washington, GAO confirms they can’t seem to get it right.

Link Removed

Sources told 9NEWS the Red Team was able to sneak about 90 percent of simulated weapons past checkpoint screeners in Denver. In the baggage area, screeners caught one explosive device that was packed in a suitcase. However later, screeners in the baggage area missed a book bomb, according to sources.
"There's very little substance to security," said former Red Team leader Bogdan Dzakovic. "It literally is all window dressing that we're doing. It's big theater on TV and when you go to the airport. It's just security theater."
Dzakovic was a Red Team leader from 1995 until September 11, 2001. After the terrorist attacks, Dzakovic became a federally protected whistleblower and alleged that thousands of people died needlessly. He testified before the 9/11 Commission and the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the US that the Red Team "breached security with ridiculous ease up to 90 percent of the time," and said the FAA "knew how vulnerable aviation security was."
Dzakovic, who is currently a TSA inspector, said security is no better today.

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/04/another_tsa_fai.html

The TSA is window dressing, it's designed to make us feel safer not to make us safer. For you this is apparently all about feelings since you can't produce evidence of one terrorist attack the TSA has stopped.

But they are starting to respect privacy in some cases. Here's a case of a TSA worker previously convicted of nine counts of stalking who abducted and assaulted a women in the Atlanta area. The TSA is keeping his information private. I wonder how many other people with misdemeanor harassment and stalking convictions are keeping the country safe at airports

ATLANTA -- Channel 2 Action News has learned a TSA security worker accused of abducting and sexually assaulting a woman had previously been convicted of misdemeanor harassment and stalking.

http://blog.nj.com/njv_paul_mulshine/2010/11/the_tsa_finally_gets_around_to.html

 

[jp58]

Can you name one who slipped past TSA?

He ignited his crotch on a plane. I'm not sure if he slipped past the TSA or not.


Edit: Nevermind. He got on in Amsterdam. No TSA in other countries that I'm aware of yet.

 

[jmattbassplaya]

He ignited his crotch on a plane. I'm not sure if he slipped past the TSA or not.


Edit: Nevermind. He got on in Amsterdam. No TSA in other countries that I'm aware of yet.

Actually, that raises a very valid point. We can do everything we want to in order to protect us from domestic flights and hijackings in our country, but that doesn't mean international flights coming into our country are as equally protected.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Silly Me, I keep forgetting what an authority Brad Johnson is on Constitutional law and Airport Security.

Yes indeed, silly you. To twist what I said into this would indeed take a very silly person.


You're the authority on this stuff and no doubt you can post an avalanche of links to "support" this.

We've been damn lucky, That terrorist haven't slipped thru with another attack but the fact is the TSA is no better then the Keystone cops. At least the Keystone cops had thorough background checks before they were hired.

So you think that fictional characters back in the heyday of Hollywood had thorough background checks and you take no exception to it but cry like a baby because you will be scrutinized at an airport?

Sweet. The terrorist haven't slipped through with another attack and you KNOW FOR A FACT THAT IS DESPITE THE TSA? LOL.

This is great stuff, Steve.

A few more quotes:

Oh gawd, save us from the LinkBeast.

The TSA is window dressing, it's designed to make us feel safer not to make us safer. For you this is apparently all about feelings since you can't produce evidence of one terrorist attack the TSA has stopped.

I'll offer this recent quote from Steve Burke (granted, it may not rise to the level of evidence you'd accept):

"We've been damn lucky, That terrorist haven't slipped thru with another attack but the fact is the TSA is no better then the Keystone cops".

According to this guy, there has not been another terrorist attack. Since Steve can only offer opinion on why this is true, he can't unequivocably state that the TSA had zero to do with this result.


Thanks, Steve.

But they are starting to respect privacy in some cases. Here's a case of a TSA worker previously convicted of nine counts of stalking who abducted and assaulted a women in the Atlanta area. The TSA is keeping his information private. I wonder how many other people with misdemeanor harassment and stalking convictions are keeping the country safe at airports

http://blog.nj.com/njv_paul_mulshine/2010/11/the_tsa_finally_gets_around_to.html

This is classic you. They have privacy rules in place, of course you have a problem with that and if you were an employee couldn't care less if they waived them regarding you. Right?

Brilliant. I particularly enjoy how one example is all it takes to get people like you and the twit who wrote that blog piece off to the races.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Actually, that raises a very valid point. We can do everything we want to in order to protect us from domestic flights and hijackings in our country, but that doesn't mean international flights coming into our country are as equally protected.

This is true. Yet as we just saw people even blame the TSA for that.

 

[Brad Johnson]

I find the blanket idea that the TSA is not a deterrent to be pretty amusing. Here's a question in that regard: For something to be a DETERRENT, would it actually have to capture someone?

I'm honestly wondering what some folk's definition of "deterrent" is?

 

[aborgman]

Police action, war, no difference.

Yes, big legal difference.

Regardless of what the politicians in DC call it, when rounds are flying down range at each other for an extended period of time, that's all war in my book,

...but it isn't in the eyes of the law.

A declared war requires certain things of the government, and provides the government certain leeway with regards to civil liberties.

A "police action" doesn't have the same requirements of the government, and thus provides significantly less leeway with regards to civil liberties.

Government don't get the benefit (leeway on civil liberties) without the cost (the oversight and legal requirements placed on them by a declared war).

 

[jmattbassplaya]

This is true. Yet as we just saw people even blame the TSA for that.

Maybe. Maybe not. I'm in no position to judge another person's knowledge on the facts. However, this still doesn't excuse the TSA's inability to stop practice runs that government agencies and news medias have done (I believe Burk sourced a few of them).

 

[MakiSupaStar]

I'm flying to Japan in April. I'm going to put lube inside my underwear's waistband. That way it won't hurt as much on the way in.

 

[aborgman]

I find the blanket idea that the TSA is not a deterrent to be pretty amusing.

We don't know if TSA is a deterrent. We have no evidence either way.

TSA is like my elephant prevention device. I bought this block of wood 6 years ago, and I've never once seen an elephant while carrying it. It's apparently a 100% successful elephant prevention device.

 

[aborgman]

How is the wounding, dying, etc. different?

How is the dying any different between legitimate self defense and murder?

Legal justification.

 

[rockstarbassist]

I fly to MO this coming Sunday afternoon.
Should be interesting. I hope to be able to pass a wet fart on the TSA worker as they attempt at groping RSB.