Slashdot Mirror
TSA Wants You To Keep Your Seat, and Your Hands In Sight
An anonymous reader excerpts from an AP story as carried by Yahoo News about changes stemming from yesterday's foiled bombing attempt of a Northwest Airlines flight: "Some airlines were telling passengers on Saturday that new government security regulations prohibit them from leaving their seats beginning an hour before landing. The regulations are a response to a suspected terrorism incident on Christmas Day. Air Canada said in a statement that new rules imposed by the Transportation Security Administration limit on-board activities by passengers and crew in US airspace. ... Flight attendants on some domestic flights are informing passengers of similar rules. Passengers on a flight from New York to Tampa Saturday morning were also told they must remain in their seats and couldn't have items in their laps, including laptops and pillows." The TSA's list of prohibited items doesn't seem to have changed in the last day, though.
Another reason for me not to fly. And another Al Qaeda success in disrupting the US economy and society beyond their wildest dreams.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
How ridiculous can flying become? Just say "F**K YOU" to terrorists, and fly as if nothing had happened. Otherwise they've won.
I have to agree with you. An hour? There's a lot of flights where I'd never have a chance to visit the lavatory.
And we wonder why the airlines are having so much trouble making a profit today?
I've been avoiding flying because of the TSA for ages now. First you have to go through massive amounts of trouble at the checkpoints, worry about your luggage, now you're even going to be interfered with on the flight itself.
My fear that eventually travelers will all have to fly wearing issued paper-tissue gowns and be sedated during the flight approaches...
I don't read AC A human right
Impacting our day to day to lives = terrorism has succeeded.
Its psychological warfare. The mind is infinitely more powerful than any bomb.
I've canceled my vacation. Not because I'm afraid of terrorists-- I'm not, at all. We're talking at about 1 death per 4 million passengers.
No, it's that in response to this sliver of a threat, you're guaranteeing that I'll spend twice the time in line, and the flight will be as miserable as you can make it. This will cost literally billions of dollars (at 300 million hours, about 450 lifetimes) of productive passenger time per year. And all because some twat might set his crotch on fire-- good thing you don't allow us to have water anymore.
Alright. Fine. Let the airlines go out of business; this nation of cowards deserves it. I suppose we'll need another bailout, to pay the airlines to leave their aircraft on the tarmac.
Those who would sacrifice essential liberty for imaginary security are assholes.
To keep the rule makers employed.
"On every second Tuesday, you will strap a sausage to your nose, hope on one foot and shout 'I am a pretty wittle princess!'"
"But why? How will this rule solve anything?"
"Silence! Are you on the side of the drug smugglers/pedophiles/terrorists! Submit to us, and demonstrate it by quacking like a duck."
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
You beat terrorists by raising a middle finger in their direction, mocking them mercilessly and accepting casualties once in a while. You kiss terrorist arse when you pull this kind of crap. What's next, handcuff passengers to their seats and have police strutting up and down the aisles during flights? Give me an effin' break!
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
STOP GIVING THEM IDEAS!!!!!
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
I can understand where you're coming from but it's neither the fault of the flight attendants nor the cleaning crew that your country has such shitty regulations, but they're the only people who will suffer from your protest...
That's the "they are just doing their job" cop-out. If they aren't happy with the consequences of working for an organization that denies people their basic human dignities, then they should be looking for a new job. To give them a pass because they are just little people in the machinery of a big faceless organization is to give the big faceless organization a pass.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
It's stupid not because it's exaggerated, but because it's ineffective. It's BS. I went to a conference in the US at the end of November, and was reminded just how bad it is to fly to and from the US. I have also flown to and from Israel, a country very much in the crosshairs of terrorists, and the security procedure was MUCH more humane, both on the flights and at boarding. (in fact, I didn't even need a visa for Israel, while I need to go through an incredibly complicated and expensive procedure to get a US visa... but this is a different story (or is it?)) The Israelis do have some security processes in place, but they are mostly stealth and unobtrusive. Well, in any case, they must be doing something right, because there has not been a hijacked or otherwise terror-affected flight to or from Israel in decades now.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
Make every passenger from Nigeria go out through security in Amsterdam, then back in.
Amsterdam already does this, not just for Nigeria, but for every passenger arriving from every country.
You have clearly never been to the Amsterdam airport. The security checkpoints in Amsterdam are at the departure gates, not at the terminal entrance. Every single departure gate has an individual security checkpoint, with metal detector and x-ray machine. Every passenger boarding the flight is screened, regardless of their point of origin.
My first reaction upon seeing this setup was that it was a waste of resources for every gate to have a separate checkpoint. But it makes sense in a lot of ways. It prevents long lines from building up in any single checkpoint (important if you're concerned about terrorists setting off bombs while waiting in a densely packed line). Also, unlike US airports, if a passenger escapes through the checkpoint, it's very easy to find him afterward, since there's nowhere to go beyond the checkpoint except onto the plane. Hence you never see the entire airport closing down because one passenger ran through the checkpoint the wrong way. My guess is that the cost saved by avoiding 2-3 security related airport closures in this way makes up for the cost of the extra hardware.
Go "BOO" enough times and the US will spend itself into financial ruin. Wait -- that's happening NOW!
Ruby Neural Evolution of Augmenting Topologies
I work in Aviation Security Management (Not in the US, please don't murder me, I'm not responsible for that sack of shit) and I devise, operate and review various Transport Security Programs for various Industry Participants such as Regular Public Transport and Freight Operations and I absolutely agree within this. Once a prohibited item, such as explosives, gets past screening the battle is lost, that said even an explosion during screening would also be just as damaging for the purposes of terrorism. The TSA is one of the most ineffective Transport Security Agencies in the world, I've seen more risks managed better in Vietnam than I have anywhere else in the US when it comes to flight operations. They fail to identify risks and vulnerabilities before a threat exploits them and apply risk treatments after the fact where they are the least effective. Communication between Security Staff and Security Management is atrocious with a lack of proper reporting and review mechanisms for policy failures and issues. These issues have steadily degraded effective and consistent security awareness amongst security staff and created a poor security culture in general which extends far outside of security operations.
Elsewhere in the world the focus is steadily shifting to protecting of IT resources both in the air and on the ground for flight operations and administration, ensuring Business Continuity and Recovery Plans are up to code and auditing processes are proper and functioning and yet in the US they can't even handle the basic preventative measures during the screening process and even terminal logistics. I went to LAX last year and I saw regular breaches of baggage quarantine, lack of functioning access control mechanisms allowing access to restricted airside operations and various other absurdities. Now I'm sure some fool here is going to yell "Don't give the terrorists ideas!", unless these terrorists are blind in both eyes these problems are immediately apparent and those in charge of devising policy consistently ignore the experts advising them not only about these issues but what treatments are available. What are people like me to do? In the US people like me are ignored when we take the proper routes and if we go public we are immediately shunned and treated like criminals for "exposing weaknesses and threatening national security". The whole thing is a joke and in my experience the current state of the saga which is called "aviation security" originates in the US.
I've been to Israel only once -- earlier this year; beautiful and interesting place to visit! -- and while I agree with you that their procedures seemed more humane, I wouldn't say that they (speaking only of the visible parts) were any less visible / overt than in the U.S., but rather the opposite.
My demographic (perhaps the same as yours, I don't know) I'm sure contributed to the scrutiny I received on both sides of my 3-week trip -- I didn't *notice* any extra attention paid to me during my actual time in the country, which doesn't prove there wasn't any. (That is, as male under 40, traveling alone with no checked baggage, and no strong connections to Israel in the form of family, culture, previous visits, etc.)
I was approached and questioned (not unpleasant -- agent was cute) even on arrival, right on the stairs leading from the plane to the hallway to the main terminal, who called me out by name. Was it partly because I was taking the stairs (two at a time) instead of the escalator, or blind chance? I dunno. All visitors (there are separate lines for Israeli passport holders, and I'm not sure how they're treated) on arrival must clear passport control with a small interview about the purpose of the visit, schedule, etc. I have visited a handful of countries overall (8, I think), but it was by far the most thoroughly and frankly I ever remember being examined. Very different from most of my experiences with TSA in the US, and seemed to be more thoughtful / alert even than what I found in German and American airports when I flew to Berlin from the U.S. in October, 2001 -- a pretty tense time to fly.
On departure from Israel, was engaged in pointed conversation by three different security people in the initial line at the airport, too, before even checking in for my flight, and that's before I reached the two X-ray stations, pat-down station, and chemical sniffer. Asked to spell the names, and give the address, of the friends with whom I had stayed in Jerusalem, to name and describe the place I'd stayed in Haifa, to describe in detail (more than once) the purpose of my trip, my itinerary, etc, and prompted to agree -- again, more than once -- that perhaps someone had supplied me with a package to carry on my flight, etc. "No, this is all my own luggage, and I have had control of it the whole time. Yes, I packed it. Correct, this is my luggage for the entire trip. Yes, I visited Jordan for one day, to visit Petra. No, I don't know anyone in Jordan. Yes, I met some interesting people while I've been in Israel, but No, none of them asked me to carry anything in my luggage. I was in Haifa to give a small talk and to see the city." (etc.) Thought it was a bit much even given my expectations of hard-nosed vigilance, it was all fairly polite and respectful* -- just insistent. It also buoyed my confidence that people who seemed competent and thoughtful were visibly involved, and actually enjoyed it as an interesting cultural experience. If I flew there every month, I might feel a lot differently about it.
This is not to say that I am aware of all the security stuff going on in the background, there or in the U.S. -- I figure (and hope) that there's more to it than what I see ;)
Cheers,
timothy
* This is certainly not my experience with TSA, though I'm sure some of their agents are competent, polite, and alert. I've just seen, or at least taken note of, more of the other kind. My horror stories aren't even campfire ghost stories compared to the people who've really gotten screwed over by TSA, and so aren't worth recounting at this time of night, so I'll just leave it at that.
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
If he had set it off in the toilet, then the restrictions introduced would probably be worse. They would probably have banned the use of the toilet on planes.
Either way, "the terrorists win."
Terrorists are just spoiled children. They throw very big and dangerous tantrums for attention. Their acts and our responses are all attention.
Terrorists, like spoiled children, are best discouraged by ignoring them. Will there always be spoiled children? Yes. It's a fact of life. Can't stop life.
So he will do this much earlier. Or is there some physics that makes an explosion 30 minutes before landing more dangerous then 1 hour and 30 minutes?
People smuggle drugs on planes all the time. (They put in in places where some people keep their watch.) One stick and two matches should be enough. And I am sure that they will be able to put the match on the stick. It is not that they need a fuse. That is only there for safety.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
You're right - dismantling your own democracy as a response to terrorists is definitely not the right response. Particularly when the countermeasures are so stupid. Worth noting that there *is* an effective way of combating terrorists however. Remove their community support. They don't come from nowhere and they don't arrange all these plans and have these beliefs without some friends and neighbours wondering. But a people that see occupations of their countries or US support for regimes like the Saudis are a people that are angry enough that they become less willing to stop such individuals themselves. And these communities are the best defense against terrorists.
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
Firstly, the Saudi's have a great deal of influence over world oil prices which affects the US economy greatly. Secondly, the Saudis are an ally of the US in the Middle East (at least the ruling regime is, the people are a different matter). For example, the Saudi's are fighting an on-off proxy war with Iran in Yemen (a small country on the Southern border of Saudi). They fly US supplied F-15s. The US navy has intervened at their request to carry out bombings. Up until 2003, (i.e. post 9/11) the US had around 4,500 troops stationed in the country. I hate to pull out Wikipedia as its often used as a lazy way to find facts that support ones case out of context, but in this case I'm going to post a link: US & Saudi Relations. Note that the US provided both training and modern weaponry to the Saudi military in order to "combat shiite extremism". Extremism of course means revolutionaries that you don't like. Bahrain isn't legally part of Saudi Arabia, but I think you'll forgive me if I roll them in together given their indivisible strategic and military circumstances and united political positions. The US Fifth Fleet is based there (normally). If you think those forces wouldn't (and haven't) got involved in putting down any revolutionary efforts, you're mistaken.
I think that demonstrates US support for the Saudi regime. The US wants a strong presence in the Middle East and the Saudi regime is happy to be their loyal ally and base of operations at the expense of the people. It's a fucking monarchy for fucks sake. As regards your statement that Al Quaeda being "a big baby using the excuse of "OMG they stepped on our sand, get em'", Bin Laden himself stated that their one of their main motivations was US presence in Saudi. Why should that be false? Al Quaeda wanted to overthrow the Saudi regime. The US protects the Saudi regime. What is your reason for disputing their given motivations? It's a piss-poor sort of terrorist that goes about striking terror for causes other than their own.
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
WTF?!? The people I worked with on the 97th floor of 1 WTC were working stiffs like you & me, not "some of the wealthiest people on the planet". So were the people on 96, 95, 94, 93, 98, and 99. There were no "multi-millionaires" among them. (The multi-millionaires in the firm I worked for then stayed in the Midtown Manhattan office. WTC was for back office staff only.)
Don't talk about things you have no knowledge of.