Slashdot Mirror


TSA Investigates... People Who Complain About TSA

Hugh Pickens writes "CNN has obtained a list of roughly 70 'behavioral indicators' that TSA behavior detection officers use to identify potentially 'high risk' passengers at the nation's airports, and report that arrogant complaining about airport security is one indicator TSA officers consider when looking for possible criminals and terrorists. When combined with other behavioral indicators, it could result in a traveler facing additional scrutiny. 'Expressing your contempt about airport procedures — that's a First Amendment-protected right,' says Michael German, a former FBI agent who now works as legal counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. 'It's circular reasoning where, you know, I'm going to ask someone to surrender their rights; if they refuse, that's evidence that I need to take their rights away from them. And it's simply inappropriate.' Interestingly enough, some experts say terrorists are much more likely to avoid confrontations with authorities, saying an al-Qaeda training manual instructs members to blend in."

15 of 379 comments (clear)

  1. the TSA's purpose is not stopping terrorists... by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...and it's getting boring to have to read things which imply it.

    1. Re:the TSA's purpose is not stopping terrorists... by mwvdlee · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Depends on your point of view.
      Dissident speech instills terror in the minds of authority.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:the TSA's purpose is not stopping terrorists... by judoguy · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is the government attacking it's citizens over their opinions and beliefs, nearly making it an illegal act. That's fascism.

      There's nothing specifically fascist about this. The same could be said for Socialist or Communist. Rather, it's generic totalitarianism.

      I wish people would stop using "Fascist" for "Evil". It's only one of several evil forms of government.

      --
      Peace is easy to achieve, just surrender. Liberty is much harder get/keep.
    3. Re:the TSA's purpose is not stopping terrorists... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 5, Informative

      the TSA's purpose is not stopping terrorists...

      Q: How many terrorists has the TSA caught?
      A: ZERO

      Q: How many terrorist attacks has the TSA stopped?
      A: ZERO

      For proof, the answer is obvious - a terrorist doesn't just decide that airplanes are too well protected so they are going to give up on the idea of causing mayhem, they will just look for easier targets like shopping malls, movie theaters, concerts, etc. Since we have had zero attacks on alternate targets, its clear the TSA isn't protecting airplanes from anyone.

      The worst we've seen have been run-of-the-mill lone gunmen type like the Ft Hood shooter and the DC sniper. Everybody else, like the Times Square bomber have been so incompetent they couldn't even build a working bomb and most of those convicted have been guilty of nothing more than talking trash within the earshot of a snitch looking to get criminal charges dropped in exchange for narcing out someone, anyone.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    4. Re:the TSA's purpose is not stopping terrorists... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Informative

      Fascism is defined as the simultaneous presence of authoritarianism, racism and corporatism.

      Racism is by no means a necessary ingredient. Mussolini was not racist - in fact, he explicitly distanced himself from racism - until shortly after Hitler became dominant in their relationship.

      And "corporatism" is a word that has absolutely nothing with what we call "corporations" today. At the time, the meaning that fascists put into it most closely corresponded to statist syndicalism.

      Consequently, "The form of post-9/11 authoritarianism embodied by the TSA" is not fascism. It's just authoritarian capitalism, business as usual.

  2. Yep... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One could assume from this that the TSA is here to teach us to not talk back to the Authority, rather than to actually catch terrorists.

    1. Re:Yep... by Caradoc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you ask a TSA employee, their job is not catching terrorists. Their job is preventing "dangerous items" from getting onto an aircraft. The problem is that if that really is their job, they're horrifically bad at it. They've missed box cutters, knives, a brick of primers for handloading, multiple handguns, Jamie Hyneman's 12" razor blades, and assorted other items I'd consider far more threatening than the leather bookmarks and silver cake servers they've been confiscating and fining people for. They're awfully quick to claim "success" when they find someone with a doobie tucked into their shorts, though. My guess is that their publicly stated mission of "Transportation Safety" has taken a back seat to their new unstated mission of "drug interdictment." Additionally, looking at pure statistics, in any interaction between the TSA and a single passenger it is almost infinitely more likely that the TSA employee is a thief, rapist, kidnapper, or bully than that the passenger is an actual terrorist bent on mayhem during the flight. They don't actually contribute measurably to "transportation safety." So why should we put up with their theatre?

      --
      Specialization is for insects. - R.A.H.
  3. It's the same circular reasoning as: by Dutchmaan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you're not guilty then you won't have anything to hide. ( which, ironically, I think we should apply generously to politicians/corporations )

  4. Watch this documentary!!! by ticketswapz · · Score: 5, Informative

    Please Remove Your Shoes In this documentary, it shows the agreement between the FAA and airlines industries to put security at a low priority while getting passengers on planes as quickly as possible was the highest priority. A "red team" agent who audits security put a bomb in a suitcase, threw clothes on it and put a water bottle on top of the clothes. The screener detected the bag, opened it up, confiscated the water bottle and allowed the bag to go through. TSA agents complained because he "thought outside the box" and invalidated the test because it was "unfair" to their procedures on how to audit security. This documentary is from ex/current TSA, FAA, and air marshal agents. Did you know the TSA was more interested in having an air marshal dress code than actually "blending in" on the plane? The guy in a suit and tie sitting on the plane to Hawaii was a dead giveaway when everyone else was dressed appropriately.

    --
    ticketswapz.com - Buy, Sell, Trade Sporting Event and Concert Tickets
  5. Well duh? by SomePgmr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Interestingly enough, some experts say terrorists are much more likely to avoid confrontations with authorities, saying an al-Qaeda training manual instructs members to blend in.

    This seems like the most obvious flaw in reasoning, and probably didn't require expert research to predict. What nefarious character is going to draw attention to themselves when trying to get away with something evil? This didn't stand out as a "duh" to the folks crafting this list? That scares me too... assuming the goal of these criteria was to catch the bad guys, of course.

    1. Re:Well duh? by Low+Ranked+Craig · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If I was an alleged terrorist (and for the record, I'M NOT) the alleged terrorist would get a job at the airport as baggage handler, or as a someone who services the planes. Then the alleged terrorist would put a bomb in some luggage, or some C4 into soda cans or something and get them on the plane - the alleged terrorist wouldn't try to get through security, unless his plan was to blow up the security checkpoint, which would also be good from a terror perspective. Then they can move the security check points outside the terminal, then those get blown up. Then move them off property and check all the people before allowing them in to the airport, then car bomb gets that.

      The worst thing we ever did was change our behavior and way of life after the hijackings in the 70's and obviously after 9/11. We showed the people who would do such things that we will modify our behavior in a predicable fashion based on their actions - a very bad idea. We are now in a reactive posture. The thing that's even worse is listening to the morons who travel talk about how the "security" measures make them feel safe. Really? I have a tiger repelling rock I'd like to sell you...

      I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in — and the West in general — into an unbearable hell and a choking life.

      The preceding is a real quote, many of you know who said it, but if not, Google it...

      And for the record, fuck the TSA. By all means, investigate me. I have the ACLU's phone number right here ready to go... I've said as much directly to my congressman and senators

      --
      I still cannot find the droids I am looking for...
  6. Interesting Statistics on CNN by jasonwc · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to CNN, the TSA is actually more ineffective than I initially thought:

    False Positives-

    Members of Congress also expressed concern about the number of "false positives" -- people flagged for additional screening that resulted in nothing being found. For every person correctly identified as a "high risk" traveler by (the behavior detection officers), 86 were misidentified, Willis said. At random screening, for every person correctly identified, 794 were misidentified.

    Effectiveness at detecting terrorists-

    Experts agree that the fact that there is an extremely small number of terrorists makes it hard to evaluate the effectiveness of behavioral observation programs. The Accountability Office said it looked at 23 occasions in which 16 individuals -- people later charged with terrorism-related activities -- passed through high-threat airports. None is known to have been identified. But it is not known if the behavior detection officers were working at the time, the agency said.

    So, in the best case scenario, for every person ultimately charged with a crime (not necessarily convicted) 86 are misidentified. And that is using "trained" behavioral analysts. Most TSA searches are random, which results in one charge for every 794 false positives. Note also that nearly 40% of the charges are immigration related. Most of the rest are probably drug related.

    The TSA can't point to a single incident where its random searches or behavioral analysis actually has prevented a terrorist attack. Despite their utter failure, the TSA plans to spend another $1.2 billion over the course of five years on behavior analysis techniques.

    Source: http://www.cnn.com/2011/TRAVEL/04/15/tsa.screeners.complain/index.html?hpt=C1

  7. Like Chechneya... by Oxford_Comma_Lover · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > Dissident speech instills terror in the minds of authority.

    Not for the most part. Mostly they just find it annoying and respond by being authoritarian because they're pissed off. When reporters report on torture in Chechneya by the local strongman, they get killed because they're a pain to him. Not because the guy who tortures people every day is somehow afraid of them. He *should* be afraid of them. But mostly he's pissed at them. And he runs the apparatus of the state. He's not afraid of them--at most he's afraid that his bosses will replace him if anybody cares about new public knowledge that Russia sponsors terrorism.

    Similarly (and obviously very differently, since most TSA employees are good people who are not actively torturing lots of innocent civilians, but similarly for the point about whether terror is inspired), TSA employees, like cops, are generally not terrified by dissident speech. They are annoyed by it because someone is making their day harder.

    --
    -- IANAL, this isn't legal advice, and definitely isn't legal advice for you. Also, Squee!
    1. Re:Like Chechneya... by element-o.p. · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ...since most TSA employees are good people...

      Well, you're entitled to your opinion, I guess. I just can't see how a "good person" could fondle people in an airport without puking.

      They are annoyed by it because someone is making their day harder.

      Cry me a river. I'm annoyed because even though I'd be one of the first ones up to defend an airliner from someone trying to blow it up, TSA wants to treat me -- and every other law-abiding citizen -- like one of the statistical anomalies who actually *does* want to bring down an airliner. That reaction is so far out of proportion to the scope of the problem that I'm continuously amazed that we are literally throwing billions of dollars at such a farce.

      --
      MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
    2. Re:Like Chechneya... by artor3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The outcome of the Milgram experiment doesn't mean that it's OK to do bad things. It simply shows that a disappointly large percentage of people are immoral and will do immoral things when told to. TSA agents groping little girls fall into that category.