TSA Fail: FBI Guy Explains Why TSA Is Useless
Great blog item at GManCaseFile. An excerpt:
The entire TSA paradigm is flawed. It requires an impossibility for it to succeed. For the TSA model to work, every single possible means of causing danger to an aircraft or its passengers must be eliminated. This is an impossibility. While passengers are being frisked and digitally strip-searched a few dozen yards away, cooks and dish washers at the local concourse "Chili's" are using and cleaning butcher knives.While bomb-sniffing dogs are run past luggage, the beach at the departure end of LAX is largely unpatrolled, and anybody with a shoulder launched missile (you know the ones they regularly shoot down U.S. helicopters with in Afghanistan) could take out any plane of their choice. I am reticent to discuss anything further that would give anybody ideas. However, these two have had wide dissemination in the media but are by NO means the biggest threats.
I sometimes ruminate while standing in line waiting to take off my shoes, remove my belt, laptop, iPad, etc., etc., about the improvised weapons I saw in prisons and how hard they were to find. It's fascinating what weapons prisoners can make out of plastic forks, newspapers and toothbrushes. Ask any prison guard if an inmate can make a weapon out of an everyday item, and how long it would take them. Approximately 99% of what the average traveler carries on a plane would be considered contraband in a maximum security prison, due to the fact that it can easily be converted into a weapon. Toothbrushes, Popsicle sticks, pens, pencils, anything with wire (iPod headset), any metal object which can be sharpened, etc., etc. is a potential weapon. Carried to its logical end, TSA policy would have to require passengers to travel naked or handcuffed. (Handcuffing is the required procedure for U.S. Marshalls transporting prisoners in government aircraft.)
TSA's de facto policy to this point has been to react to the latest thing tried by a terrorist, which is invariably something that Al Qaeda identified as a technique not addressed by current screening. While this narrows Al Qaeda's options, their list of attack ideas remains long and they are imaginative. Therefore, if TSA continues to react to each and every new thing tried, three things are certain:
1. Nothing Al Qaeda tries will be caught the first time because it was designed around gaps in TSA security.
2. It is impossible to eliminate all gaps in airline security.
3. Airline security screening based on eliminating every vulnerability will therefore fail because it is impossible. But it will by necessity become increasingly onerous and invasive on the travelers.
His idea of effective screening is random screening:
Approximately 80% fewer screeners needed, complete unpredictability of the likelihood of a search, and extremely effective searches of those, say 10%, selected. It would not reduce by 1% Al Qaeda's belief that they could get through screening with a weapon. A 1-in-10 chance of a full search is too much of a risk for Al Qaeda. They do not plan their attacks on the "Well, it's got a decent chance" method. They require a sure thing. Putting explosives in a shoe and depending on a 10% chance of failure are odds they will not accept. So rather than ineffective (yet incredibly intrusive) screening of 100% of the passengers, there should be highly effective screening of an unpredictable 10% with a reduced screening requirement for the other 90%, say a magnetometer and bag X-ray, allowing people to wear their shoes, belts and pacemakers through screening.
And check out what congressional investigators said:
"Today, TSA's screening policies are based in theatrics. They are typical, bureaucratic responses to failed security policies meant to assuage the concerns of the traveling public." Translation? TSA doesn't know what it's doing, but is trying to put on a good show to keep the traveling public from catching on. The report, entitled, ""A Decade Later: A Call for TSA Reform" sharply criticized the agency, accusing it of incompetent management. Former DHS Inspector General Richard Skinner dropped this bomb, "The ability of TSA screeners to stop prohibited items from being carried through the sterile areas of the airports fared no better than the performance of screeners prior to September 11, 2001."Frankly, the professional experience I have had with TSA has frightened me. Once, when approaching screening for a flight on official FBI business, I showed my badge as I had done for decades in order to bypass screening. (You can be envious, but remember, I was one less person in line.) I was asked for my form which showed that I was armed. I was unarmed on this flight because my ultimate destination was a foreign country. I was told, "Then you have to be screened." This logic startled me, so I asked, "If I tell you I have a high-powered weapon, you will let me bypass screening, but if I tell you I'm unarmed, then I have to be screened?" The answer? "Yes. Exactly." Another time, I was bypassing screening (again on official FBI business) with my .40 caliber semi-automatic pistol, and a TSA officer noticed the clip of my pocket knife. "You can't bring a knife on board," he said. I looked at him incredulously and asked, "The semi-automatic pistol is okay, but you don't trust me with a knife?" His response was equal parts predictable and frightening, "But knives are not allowed on the planes."
Duh.
Just, duh.
Radwaste at February 16, 2012 2:39 AM
The illogical fallacies behind the TSA is always incredible.
They were screening trained soldiers carrying, nominally, unloaded M-16's for knives and nail clippers. How stupid are you? The soldiers, at the least, have a fairly nice club. Do you think they would resort to a nail clippers?
Jim P. at February 16, 2012 5:50 AM
I fly a lot, my boyfriend lives in San Jose, so I'm on a plane a couple times a month. I go through screening with a lighter in my purse almost every time without a problem. I'm flying tomorrow, better ditch the lighter now that I said that. The fact is, the screening is pointless, and is always way behind what the terrorists are plotting.
sara at February 16, 2012 5:59 AM
Sara: "The fact is, the screening is pointless, and is always way behind what the terrorists are plotting."
You see, that is where you are wrong. We have foiled their plans to start recruiting 7-year olds and octogenarians.
-Jut
JutGory at February 16, 2012 6:33 AM
What they catch me with is always hit or miss.
On the same flight in which my hand cream was confiscated, my husband's 6-inch iron pipe went unnoticed. (He was building an automatic watch-winder.) On another flight, I forgot I had a box cutter in my purse. It went through the x-ray machine with no questions asked. Lesson = hand cream is dangerous, but pipes and knives are OK.
MonicaP at February 16, 2012 6:46 AM
To get an idea of just how much one would _really_ have to do if one wanted to _completely_ eliminate the smuggling of illicit materials onto airplanes google "body packing" (leave the quotes).
David L. Burkhead at February 16, 2012 7:14 AM
TSA logic at work:
My wife and I recently traveled with our infant daughter. We brought some pre-made formula in an 8-oz bottle that did not need refrigeration as a backup. Breast milk and formula for babies are exempt from the 3 oz liquid rule, so we figured that was fine. Apparently not in this specific circumstance - the formula was sealed in an opaque container, and therefore the TSA needed to have it opened (which means it will go bad without refrigeration). However, they said they did not have to open it, as long as either my wife or I got a pat down. They did not care whom. I refrained from trying to explain why this approach did not make sense, lest they end up thinking it was a good idea to pat down the baby.
Christopher at February 16, 2012 7:23 AM
Given that I have arthritic knees due to old injuries, I carry a cane on flights. The cane goes through on the conveyer belt( making sure it has neither sword nor firearm). Of course, with solid tip and brass handle, it is a very deadly weapon. I have to leave my Swiss Army penknife at home. Idiots!
BarSinister at February 16, 2012 7:29 AM
I've gotten through security multiple times with my cubaton, leatherman, ex-husband's pocket knife, etc, in my purse and never had them notice. When ex-husband flies, he always carries a backpack that is lined with removable metal rods, and they've never been noticed.
Meanwhile, my ex-mother-in-law had her tiny little needlework clipper confiscated. My 13-year old nephew's sunny delite was confiscated, and he was snapped at when he innocently offered to drink it right there. His plastic light sabre was a no-go as well. Oh, and one time I saw a wheelchair bound man who had to be at least 90 forced out of his chair, family members trying to hold him up, while the TSA wiped down the wheelchair and throughouly searched him for the WMD that his Taliban daughter had apparently stuffed into his adult diaper.
Meloni at February 16, 2012 7:56 AM
My sister is also a federal agent and had a the same experience with the TSA when she travelled for business - she was carrying her service weapon but was told she had to either dispose of her nailclippers or check her bag! The TSA were not amused when she pointed out that her gun would be far more effective than her nail clippers if she were planning to do something. Thousands Standing Around at their finest.
chml at February 16, 2012 8:09 AM
bbbbbbut, think about the JOBS!!!!
yup, a jobs program it is. Combined with making the sheeple knuckle under...
Combine that with the pernicious idea that it's all OK as long as it's applied to everyone equally...
Basically all this has made it inconvenient enough that I wouldn't fly unless it was long haul... when I go to San Diego via Phoenix, I have a car with me, don't have to wonder if my cameras will be stolen from my luggage, and don't spend an extra 8hours waiting at airports. And? A beautiful drive.
This isn't to say that the extra time spent traveling is best use of time always... But then I've been driving everywhere since the bad old days when air travel was a luxury, and insanely expensive.
SwissArmyD at February 16, 2012 9:08 AM
TSA's screening policies are based in theatrics.
That is it exactly. Billions of dollars to fund a huge new swarm of unionized government employees that accomplish very little, while inconveniencing and disrespecting The People very much.
Nothing to see here, move along. All in a day's work for the Federal Workforce.
I believe they should move back to the basic metal detector thing you walk through and bag xrays, and this does not require a new Uniformed Federal workforce. Local hires could do the job with a standardized training syllabus. Do the screening at the entrances to the airport so everyone who enters needs to be screened, including employees.
On top of that, have highly trained security agents who dress in plain clothes, and are armed, walk around and keep their eyes on people and select some for special attention based upon behavior and profile. Special attention could start with a brief on the spot interview/ID check to see if their story made sense and escalate accordingly.
Among other things, having most of the real security out of sight makes it harder to plan to thwart it.
Old Guy at February 16, 2012 9:12 AM
A bureaucrat has only one fear, that he will seem to allow the same attack twice and be fired. He can suffer any number of different failures without penalty, provided each failure is new. After all, he can't predict the future.
Andrew_M_Garland at February 16, 2012 2:12 PM
9/11 was a one time event as was proven by United Flight 93. It will never happen again. That is why the shoe bomber was tackled by the crowd and the panty bomber is going to do life.
Jim P. at February 16, 2012 9:13 PM
The one worthwhile thing the TSA does is checked-baggage screening. But that was happening before the TSA was created. It doesn't require a frickin' Cabinet-level bureaucracy to X-ray checked bags. And it seems that baggage theft and pilfering has gone up since the TSA has been doing it, although I haven't been able to find any data.
As the FBI guy points out, there are a million attack vectors that the TSA won't think of until after they're used, and even then, the TSA's response will only be a point solution. What has been effective has been the intel efforts to find and break up bombing and hijacking plots before they're executed, plus the efforts overseas to disable terrorist organization leadership and cut off their funding sources. It's unfortunate that the public can't see any of this.
Cousin Dave at February 17, 2012 7:29 AM
The more I think about it, the more I conclude that we should just eliminate the TSA completely, and ditch the security checkpoints.
Let the airlines or airports pay to X-ray the luggage.
Let the passengers pay attention to their surroundings. The likelihood of another 9/11 (hell, even another successful hijacking) is as close to nil as makes no odds.
brian at February 17, 2012 8:22 AM
Leave a comment