8 uncomfortable truths about the TSA

[DetlefK]

http://www.cracked.com/personal-experiences-1968-we-trade-pictures-your-junk-8-realities-inside-tsa.html

8. It's the easiest way to become a federal officer. Don't have a high-school diploma? Work a few years at the TSA and you can become an FBI-agent! (Not kidding.)

7. 9/11 was committed with box-cutters. The TSA allows you to take box-cutters on board.
The luggage-scanners test the TSA-agents from time to time by faking a bomb. TSA-agents are allowed to fail the test 3 times. The punishment is taking a boring course.
An anonymous TSA-agent voiced her concern that TSA-agents might miss real threats because they are always on the lookout for the fake bombs.

6. If you are a good-looking woman you WILL get "randomly" selected to have your bags searched.

5. Yes, there's a policy against taking photos of the pics a full-body-scanner makes. No, nobody fucking cares about that policy.

4. Horribly few TSA-agents actually try to find bombs n' stuff.

3. The TSA does not have the authority to search for drugs. (Meaning, they cannot give a "reasonable suspicion" as reason in court for looking for drugs.)
The TSA does not have the authority to confiscate something without the traveller's agreement.

2. There are no official rules how the TSA will treat most things. Example:
Frozen pie is good, room-temperature pie is bad.
Frozen reusable ice-pack is good, thawed reusable ice-pack is bad.

1. The TSA has no official policy what to do if they catch an ACTUAL terrrorist armed with an ACTUAL bomb.

[jberryhill]

1. Yet, somehow, 1.73 million people manage to fly in the US every day

[Rex]

2. And yet they managed to fly just fine without the TSA and the DHS.

9/11 changed everything. That wasn't a joke, they meant it.

[frizzled]

5. There have been a surprising number of hijackings, especially during the 1970's

A plane is a very tempting target for criminals, hijackers and - as we learned - makes an extraordinarily powerful weapon, comparable to a nuclear bomb. I'm not exaggerating. If you look at the amount of energy released by the 9/11 attack it's quite similar to a small nuke.

You can't seriously argue there isn't a need for high security on passenger planes.

[Rex]

6. I can argue we didn't need to waste billions creating the TSA or the DHS.

Since we already had high security in place on passenger planes.

[frizzled]

9. High security, which allowed the 9/11 attacks?

Surely there's a need for some kind of security to focus on proven terrorism against the United States.

I think it's easy to get caught up in partisan disagreement. Sure, an awful lot of terrorism is caused by, frankly, plain awful foreign policy. Nonetheless, you can't change the past or undo the fact a lot of people are mad at you, so there isn't a lot of alternative beside trying to prevent terrorism as best you can.

This will really bake your noodle: does anyone else remember when George W. Bush campaigned in 2000 on a platform of making airport security screening less onerous for Arab-Americans?

[Rex]

10. The leaders of our country allowed the 9/11 attacks by ignoring warnings from the CIA

I think we need to stick with the facts here.

[frizzled]

11. "Allowed"? Okay, conversation over.

The plain fact is that Bush and Cheney were far too incompetent to do anything like that deliberately.

[Rex]

13. LOL! Scared of a little truth I see?

Wrong, they ignored intel from the CIA...that is called purposely ignoring facts...that allowed a terrorist attack, like the one that happened on 9/11.

All the security in the world won't help you if your leaders ignore all the red flags...or do you disagree?

[frizzled]

15. Classic hindsight bias. If the attacks hadn't happened, you'd be complaining if they'd done anything

Honestly, I wish Bush and Cheney and co WERE actually imaginative and competent enough to deliberately engineer 9/11 and keep us all in the dark about it. Can you imagine how much organization that would take? I wish we lived in your world where the people in charge are actually smart, even if they're evil.

No, they couldn't even depose a widely hated dictator in Iraq competently. Everything Bush ever touched turned to shit. The truth is that our leaders are much worse than evil - they're stupid.

[Rex]

16. Wrong. I see pointing out facts in history to you is a waste of time.

They are evil...you want to pretend they are stupid to sleep better at night. If that works for you then so be it. Facts are Bush/Cheney let down America by ignoring red flags for a year.

Spin that however you want, but they let their own arrogance get the best of them and we all suffered for it. No security in the world will protect you if your leadership ignores obvious peril.

Again...do you disagree with that statement?

[frizzled]

18. I don't disagree with evil, I just say they're stupid and incompetent as well.

If you aren't saying 9/11 was DELIBERATE on Bush's part, we have no disagreement. I thought you were.

[Rex]

20. We are in agreement.

I used the wrong word when I said 'allowed'...as in gave a green light to an attack (indirectly). I agree they did not mean and plan for 9/11 to happen...even I won't go that far out on a limb.

[zipplewrath]

29. What we have wouldn't prevent the 9/11 again

The TSA and all of this high theater we all go through wouldn't stop another 9/11. They've tested the system over and over and those guys could still get on aircraft armed with just about anything. Nothing the blue shirts are doing will stop it.

The only change that would confront the hijackers would be a very well locked door on the cockpit, and a completely different attitude inside. No one is going to quietly acquiesce to hijackers demands anymore. The air marshal (if there is one) is going to be active. Heck, the passengers have demonstrated a tendency to go "all Rambo" these days.

The fundamental problem is that they are looking for dangerous things, instead of dangerous people. Huge numbers of passengers are (or could be ) "known" the TSA days before they got to the airport. They would require minimal if any screening. They could be treated just like the air crews are treated. The entire reason for the type of screening we have today is because it makes great theater for the traveling public.

[frizzled]

32. So you're saying there should be even more spying and ethnic and religious profiling?

Stop me if I'm reading your comment incorrectly.

[zipplewrath]

36. Stop

Stop, read, think

How would professionals detect a "dangerous person"? More importantly, how would they eliminate a "non dangerous" person?

Think about this level of standard. The flight crews are given "preferential" treatment. So are people in the "TSA-Pre". By the way, so are people flying in private jets (which can be fairly large. Boeing was selling 707's as private jets). So, how could the TSA adjust themselves such that travelers could be sorted in this manner? None of your inflammatory suggestions are part of those existing sorting procedures. What other, non-inflammatory factors can one define which would further reduce the number of travelers that require "extra attention", which still doesn't have to be extremely invasive procedures, but merely attempting to further detect the purpose of their travel. How about anyone traveling on government business? How about federal contractors that are traveling on contract related business? How about military personnel relocating on "orders"?

Would "exempting" these people to treatment on the order of flight crews particularly raise the threat level? Would transferring the focus that these people receive, to other travelers for whom we know little to nothing allow more detailed, and considered "screening" that didn't involve pointless and fruitless searches? Imagine the "tests" that would have to be done in that environment instead of the "fake bomb" test that the TSA keeps failing by double digit percentages. Are the people NOT in this category the luggage you want X-rayed? Are these not the people you want in the "other" line where their ID's are checked by someone other than the "new hire"?

The point is to start looking for dangerous "people" not dangerous THINGS. That has nothing to do with YOUR suggestion of "looking for people who scare me for no good reason".

[ChisolmTrailDem]

8. We know, we know...

bin laden won and some people are just fine with that.

[frizzled]

3. How come people claim guns need to be restricted, but oppose security to stop attacking planes?

None of this means that security screening is not worthwhile. Yes, the TSA is poorly trained, venal, and commits some crime.

Does that mean there should be no screening to stop terrorists attacking planes? That seems crazy.

[KG]

4. security kabuki theatre

[bbgrunt]

7. well, at the very least it helps keep the unemployment figures down even if

it is kabuki theater and makes flying a pain and is ineffective and trains us all to be good little sheep.

[Rex]

12. True it does help keep the unemployment numbers down...so there is that.

Still, if your leadership ignores warnings from their intelligence agencies...no amount of security will keep you safe.

[GummyBearz]

17. Are you stuck in 2001?

Obama is our leader now. The year is 2015. Are you accusing Obama of ignoring warnings from intelligence agencies? Thanks Obama

[Rex]

19. Nice try.

[GummyBearz]

21. Yea

I tried to apply logic and a time line to your CT world. Definitely my bad

[Rex]

22. CT? So 9/11 didn't happen at all?

Please, so waste someone else's time with your mindless drivel. Thanks.

[GummyBearz]

23. Oh you sure got me there

I definitely said that... oh wait, no, I didn't. Major fail

[Rex]

24. My CT world? So 9/11 is a CT?

Yes you failed...try to take it like and adult next time. Seriously, babble seems to suit you well.

[GummyBearz]

27. Haha keep reaching for something

I never denied 9/11, denying it happened is another CT. Your CT world is one in which Bush played an active role in 9/11 (instead of him just being a dumbfounded leader). Now, if Bush was literally the mastermind behind an elaborate plot to take over the world, is Obama also in on it? Because Obama is now our president, the most powerful man in the world, leader of the free world, etc... Bush is currently in Texas shoveling cow turds or something.. I'm sure you have a CT to explain why that is. I am somewhat interested in hearing it. Please continue.

[Rex]

28. That is funny, you losing and now pretending to be able to read my mind.

I said no such thing or believe it, now apologize...I'll wait.

[GummyBearz]

31. Wait,

You don't have a CT to explain that? uhg, that is very disappointing. I didn't read your mind (my mind reading device doesn't cover long ranges yet)... I just took a guess that your CT about Bush being an evil genius mastermind would also have an explanation for how he allowed Obama to be elected as president of the US...

[Rex]

33. Now that is just flat out crazy talk.

Bush was an idiot that ignored warnings from the CIA about a terrorist attack in the United States. I have no idea how this morphed into Obama or his term...but that is what we get from crazy talk.

[librechik]

14. The TSA and Homeland are two corrupt new bureaucracies from the Rape-uplicans

They are as bad as The Patriot Act and Citizens United. We are fucked.

[KentuckyWoman]

25. I get randomly selected EVERY time I fly.

every.... time.

I'm unfortunately "blessed" with an anatomy that makes Dolly Parton look like a beginner. As in my health insurance will pay for reduction if the neck and back pains get unbearable kind of "blessed".

My husband thinks the TSA is either full of creeps or else they just don't believe all of that volume is anatomy.

Thought the new scanner would put an end to getting felt up at the airport but it hasn't.

[Renew Deal]

26. Of course they have an actual policy on how to deal with an armed terrorist

[Travis_0004]

30. Box cutters are legal to bring on a plane? Source?

https://www.tsa.gov/travel/security-screening/prohibited-items

I stopped reading the article at that point. If they can't get that right, then I don't really trust them on other parts.

[Rex]

34. Yeah WTF!? That cannot be true!

No way...not even after all this time can I see boxcutters ever being allowed on a plane!

[MineralMan]

37. No, they're not allowed. It's in that chart.

You can put them in your checked luggage, just as you can knives and unloaded firearms (if you do it right).

You cannot carry on a box cutter. They are prohibited in the plane's cabin.

That one's bullshit.

[Travis_0004]

39. I agree with you

I stopped reading at that point, since if they can't get that point right, then I don't really care what else they have to say.

[KamaAina]

35. 2a. Sealed tray of microwave beef stew is bad.

Srsly! This actually happened to me at the San Jose airport! I had one left over from my visit here to interview for my present job, and didn't want to leave it here, and so threw it in the carry-on. Apparently the gravy counts as more than 3 oz. of liquids.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

38. I wonder how many of these are actually true.

7 has been called out downthread; 6,5, and 4 are all so subjective as to be meaningless.