Posted on 12/23/2010 7:15:55 PM PST by Mad Dawgg
An airline pilot is being disciplined by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) for posting video on YouTube pointing out what he believes are serious flaws in airport security.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.tv ...
Still sucking on the Gubbament Bong, I see. Are you aware that security at nuclear plants is different?
The tunnels have no possible security, due to the speed of the traffic?
Bridges are hardly cases where detailed searches are possible.
Or, are you arguing that we should have a member of TSA’s Body Cavity Exploration Corps “check” each person going through a tunnel or across a bridge?
A simple “Yes” or “No” will suffice.
I’m wondering if people doing surveillance at these places is a concern, if they make their vulnerabiliy assessments public. Y/N?
This has nothing to do with getting your yarbles squeezed when going through the Sepulveda tunnel at LAX. I don’t think getting squeezed at the airport helps anything at all.
“What the pilot put on the Internet is common knowledge”
And lots of it was wrong, too. When he claimed that the carts were not screened before they approach the plane, for one thing.
What he put on that “common knowledge” is the authority of the insider.
As for what happened to him, yeah, over the top. If I had an employee that I caught conducting surveillance ops at my company (without my permission, I’d fire him and call the cops, saying I had an employee conducting some sort of surveillance on my property, and maybe he was up to something.
You invoke Godwin’s Rule again; don’t forget Stalin- this is much more Stalinist than it is National Socialist.
“comes up with generalized responses to specific threats”
Yes, that’s a better description, thanks!
“Equally clearly, in this case, public whistleblowing is appropriate. “
And having made it public, who’s going to take action first? Not the TSA or the airport, we’ve seen that. Now many, many more people know about it.
“As such we must celebrate and support the pilot in this case.”
Well, clearly we disagree on this one, bvw, I think he made us less safe, mostly because TSA still won’t do anything.
Thank you for the discussion, I’m sure we’ll chat again.
Bingo!
People seem to think our enemies need us to expose security flaws. They don't. Any terrorist planner worth a teaspoon of camel crap would notice such flaws--they'd stick out like a sore thumb amidst all the theater for the sheep.
Our nemeses are not stupid, despite the fact that a number of their tactical elements have proven inept (How many suicide bombers show up for practice?).
The planners are waay sharper, and they also recognize that whether an individual operation is a 'booming' success or not, it will cause the targeted population to change its behaviour--precisely the objective, more so than death and destruction, the reaction to a threat will be enough.
Since 9/11, the amount of ridiculous violation of the Rights of the average American is stunning. They don't have to destroy America, our 'protectors' and their apologists are doing it for them.
I read somewhere that the particular incident you describe gave an “ancient and honored society” its popular name by way of an acronym from a rallying cry.....
Morte Alla Francia Italia Anelo!
(Death to the French is Italy’s Cry)
It is entirely unnecessary from Al Qaeda's point of view to damage one more aircraft.
All they need to is show a new failed "tactic" every year or two, so that the TSA adds another thick, complex coat of icing to the rococo wedding cake of "security procedures".
The cost, in dollars, productivity, and liberty lost, of Security Theater's ten-year run on the American stage has succeeded beyond the terrorists' wildest dreams.
Just because your enemy can figure things out on their own does not support actively pointing out flaws and helping them.
SOmeone apparently has to point out the obvious to the people entrusted with doing something to address those flaws, or it is guaranteed that they will be exploited by an astute enemy. If working within the system will not get those flaws addressed, then ripping the lid off can. Otherwise, the flaws will continue to exist, and as I pointed out, will be obvious to any enemy professional, whether the amatuers at TSA are willing to admit they exist or not.
The current circus theater being called "security", could be a lot less invasive and more effective if it were oriented toward security and not politicized to the point of ineffectiveness. At best, every security measure has been a reactive one, closing the barn door behind the vanishing horses.
If you aren't thinking ahead of your enemy, he is thinking ahead of you. At least someone had the stones to point that out in a way which might have embarassed some people, but might close some windows of opportunity before they are used against the public. YMMV, but as I mentioned, the planners, the professionals on the other side would be able to spot the flaws without any help.
None of what you say addresses the main point - one should NEVER willingly provide an enemy with security information - EVER. So your attempted points make no sense unless you hate the TSA worse than Al Qaeda.
First off, you are making the ludicrous assumption that AlQaida is solely composed of ignorant camel-jockies or something. Get a clue, they aren't--and the assumption that they can't spot security loopholes is patently stupid.
Pointing out the glaringly obvious to the public is handing Al Qaida the glaringly obvious--IOW nothing.
Okay, shame on him for saving them cab fare to check it out in person (assuming that has not been done already).
As for what I think of the TSA, who has run roughshod over the 4th Amendment Rights of Americans--up to and including groping children in a fashion that would have anyone else but a medical practitioner with good reason arrested for child molestation?
All theater.
The methods they are searching to prevent have already been used. Our enemies are more adaptable than that.
At least Al Qaida just kills and maims people, they don't daily humiliate and violate tens of thousands of our own people in what otherwise would be a violation of our laws--for what amounts to be theater--Why theater? Because the profile groups which should be scrutinized are hiding behind Islam and their rights, while everyone else can be scanned or groped. What a Farce, and an expensive one at that!
How many stories have we heard of the onerous TSA measures actually stopping a terror plot? (crickets chirping). They are reactive, closing the barn door after the horses are long gone.
To fail to address security flaws which exist means those flaws will, on the enemy's sweet time, be exploited.
Then we can have a new charade.
The most insidious enemy is not the one waving the knife or gun in your face, it is the one who robs you while pretending to befriend you. If the TSA is not willing to address the glaring problems in security, they aren't our 'friends' either.
Walt Kelly once said, "We have met the enemy and he is us."
If anyone thinks the feelgood farce is actually doing something, well, I'm happy for them. It seems they equate the degree of inconvenience and personal violation with effectiveness. In the meantime, while they are feeling good, security remains as impervious as a set of fishnet overalls at a fire ant convention.
Blah blah blah. Anyone that gives anything to the enemy should be summarily shot.
“Any terrorist planner worth a teaspoon of camel crap would notice such flaws” once they buy a ticket, go through “security” (lol) and then study what’s there from a pending operations POV. Without getting sussed as a terrorist doing surveillance.
If they have a guy on the inside who can do surveillance in TSA’s “sanitized zone” and get it out, they don’t need to buy a ticket to get in.
And if they have a whistleblower sending it out risk-free, so much the better! And a pilot at that!
On the down side for us, though, now TSA will be looking at US even closer to be sure we are not sending “critical information” out of the “sanitized zone”, now that this guy has posted his YouTube vid. What do you think they’ll do to us in response?
As an aside, I got a lot of extra attention when flying out of Orlando. I casually asked, is that a Nomadics FIDO? I had only seen them in presentations and in a lab and had not seen them deployed. Shoe wipe, hand wipe, bag check, bag wipe and a pat down was my reward for asking. Good thing BP was all I had been handling! Well, BP and Cremora.
Yeah. For pete's sake, don't tell them water is wet, the sky is blue, or that the sun shines in the daytime. Especially when our own people deny it.
Start with the New York Times, willya? Sheesh!
I think that's probably an urban legend. Small knives were permitted in carry-on prior to 9/11.
You’re confusing two separate things. He did give security information to the terrorists. That’s a known fact. You are then speculating that the terrorists may have already known the information but you have no proof of that. That’s a separate issue. By that twisted logic then we should not have classified information because foreign spies probably already have the info anyway. Or heck why lock up your house because a determined thief will just find a way to break in anyway?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.