Aviation Security Debate: Bruce Schneier V. Kip Hawley (Former TSA Boss)

Fluffeh writes "A nice summary at TechDirt brings word that Bruce Schneier has been debating Kip Hawley, former boss of the TSA, over at the Economist. Bruce has been providing facts, analysis and some amazing statistics throughout the debate, and it makes for very educational reading. Because of the format, the former TSA administrator is compelled to respond. Quoting: 'He wants us to trust that a 400-ml bottle of liquid is dangerous, but transferring it to four 100-ml bottles magically makes it safe. He wants us to trust that the butter knives given to first-class passengers are nevertheless too dangerous to be taken through a security checkpoint. He wants us to trust that there's a reason to confiscate a cupcake (Las Vegas), a 3-inch plastic toy gun (London Gatwick), a purse with an embroidered gun on it (Norfolk, VA), a T-shirt with a picture of a gun on it (London Heathrow) and a plastic lightsaber that's really a flashlight with a long cone on top (Dallas/Fort Worth).""

Comments

Bruce is a Comedian ........

[Anonymous Coward]

This is too funny ....

-1 Not Funny
+1 Sad

On the other hand

[overshoot]

There's no limit to the amoung of thermite you can carry on, and no limit to the amount of calcium carbide.

Just to name two.

Re:On the other hand

[ae1294]

There's no limit to the amoung of thermite you can carry on, and no limit to the amount of calcium carbide.

Thermite makes a wonderful toothpaste...

Re:On the other hand

[Anonymous Coward]

"The Terrorists" aren't even trying. There are so many things I can think of to wreak havoc on an airplane flight, I can't even begin to count them. And why the obsession with airplanes, when travel is the least of the things that could be disrupted?

The only answer is that these people lack will, intelligence, or both. Because if they really wanted to, they could turn the USA upside down a different way every day of the year. Such is the leverage that any average citizen has over the forces of Nature these days.

We should be grateful, since very few of us in the so-called Land of the Free are really prepared to do what it takes to remain free as an everyday civil effort. You can see that by the simple fact that the TSA is little less than a Terrorists Surrogate Army - doing more to affect our freedoms than all the hijackers al-qaeda could manage to recruit.

Speaking of leverage.

Re:On the other hand

[Man On Pink Corner]

Or mercury, which would really do a number on a plane.

Re:On the other hand

[Anonymous Coward]

"The Terrorists" aren't even trying.

They don't have to anymore, they've already "won".

Re:On the other hand

[AK Marc]

If I were a terrorist, I'd set a bomb off in security (one of the large, dense open ones, like Denver). Then, one week later, set off a bomb at crowded check-in lines. Then 6 days later, check a bag through and set that off on a 15 minute timer ( no casualties, but will shut down most airports as they can't move baggage without the machinery that would be damaged by it). Then, 4 days after that, set off a car bomb in 5 airports at once in the drop-off or pick-up areas.

That should just about shut down all large airports in the US, and those that jump when they think the US might ask them at some point in the future to jump (UK/OZ, I'm looking at you). Modify the plan as reactions happen (i.e. delay the schedule if all airports are shut down). That would bankrupt all US airlines other than Southwest and Alaska, unless the government moves itself closer to bankruptcy with bailouts.

The US is pretty delicate, more delicate than Americans would acknowledge, and so it would work because they wouldn't see the results from it coming.

Re:On the other hand

[Nethead]

You mean bankrupt all airlines other than ARA, maybe Kenmore (Seattle - Victoria).

A quick side note, the last time I flew Alaska out of ANC on a milk run, you know, mostly cargo and a half cabin, a woman that just got off a processor sitting next to me realized that she still had her set of fillet knives in her carry on. It might have been that same flight that while waiting at Ted Stevens a TSA kid came up to me and asked, yes asked if I would mind having a more extensive screening. He said that he had to find two people that flight to do it and everyone else was turning him down.

I gotta say, I love flying in AK.

And I totally agree with your last line.

Re:On the other hand

[chrismcb]

There's no limit to the amoung of thermite you can carry on, and no limit to the amount of calcium carbide.

Just to name two.

You are limited to somewhere in the neighborhood of about 25 lbs. Of course my carry on has only been weighed once.

Re:On the other hand

[AK Marc]

Flying intrastate out of Stevens will generally be done out of Terminal A, and there are reduced security in that terminal. It wasn't for years after 9/11 until TSA was used for the flights in (having TSA agents living in small towns working on or maybe 2 flights per day is silly, but that's what they do now. Taking a set of knives isn't a problem going out to Dillingham or Iliamna on a Saab prop plane that can't reach anything outside Alaska (well, not anything American, anyway).

Alaska Airlines would survive because even with no passengers, they would still be profitable (they have guaranteed mail contracts and such).

Re:On the other hand

[Nethead]

Yeah, this was back when ACS was trying to VoIP the state and university phone system, back in about 2003ish. My wife, son and I were contract engineers up for a year. (Email me and I'll share stories about that FUBAR.) I do like the "we live here and know if you're a weirdo" method they seem to take in Alaska.

Re:On the other hand

[Anonymous Coward]

well your plan is useless now because they will just read your slashdot post

Re:On the other hand

[AK Marc]

You may have heard of Papa Pilgrim, as he was illegally bulldozing state parks back then. He moved to Alaska so he could rape his children in peace, raising his grandchildren he was also the father of. The number one state for felons on the run is Alaska. Weirdos and creeps move to Alaska in large numbers. Remember, someone like Palin can be governor in Alaska, so the "we know if you are a weirdo" meter is broken for Alaskans...

Re:On the other hand

[AK Marc]

Doesn't mater, nothing has been done that would affect the plan. I could publish the plan in the NYT and still successfully implement it (so long as I didn't name specific locations and times).

Re:On the other hand

[digitig]

There's no limit to the amoung of thermite you can carry on, and no limit to the amount of calcium carbide.

Just to name two.

Yes there is! It has to fit within that measuring gauge by the check-in, and you have to be able to lift it into an overhead locker.

Re:On the other hand

[Anonymous Coward]

The US is pretty delicate, more delicate than Americans would acknowledge, and so it would work because they wouldn't see the results from it coming.

No we're not. The fact is that the government has sold a lie to the world about how "critical" air travel is, in order to get the political support needed to continually bail out airlines and enact ridiculous security measures. Most of the critical air services are not passenger flights, and would be able to continue without much fuss at all.

Re:On the other hand

[AK Marc]

The US is running a massive debt and massive deficit. The complete and total collapse of the US government is one day away, if tomorrow nobody steps up to buy millions of dollars of bonds tomorrow. That day may not be tomorrow, but it will be some day's tomorrow, so the US is always one day away from complete and total governmental collapse. That's "delicate".

You are lost on something about that sentence being about air travel. Read it again, as you quoted it, and please point out where I mentioned air travel.

This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[DCFusor]

For congress, and they were, as usual, too spineless to tell the TSA to take a hike. After all, it's congress who spent all that money to line Chertoff's pockets (guess who makes the useless scanners now), and they didn't want to look bad for it - hearings are just photo-ops for the next election, to give the appearance of "doing something" when of course, the only thing going on is bribes and blackmail. Ever notice how DHS gets every excessive dime they ask for? Well, I know if I had warrantess wiretaps and all that kind of thing, the first thing I'd do is get the dirt on congress for future blackmail. This would occur to any bureaucrat in a few seconds. So you have to assume that's why these agencies never get seriously questioned about their ridiculous antics and waste, eh?

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[Anonymous Coward]

They are creating fear in order to gain more power. People are willing to give-up their rights to any politician claiming to protect them.

Fear is the mindkiller.

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[Anonymous Coward]

Congress is NOT SPINELESS!! And neither is the president..

They are corrupt. It's a big difference. But regardless of what they are, they are a perfect reflection of the voting public.

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[steelfood]

I guess somebody took a play out of Hoover's book. It took the disgracing of Nixon to break that cycle of power grab and blackmail the last time around. If only people actually could get a clue from history...

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[spasm]

No congresscritter or international equivalent wants to be Michael Dukakis and have her or his arse handed to them in the next election when a single Willie Horton (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willie_Horton) makes it onto a plane and does something Bad.

It's politically far safer to support any level of nonsense security theater and be able to say "I supported every effort to prevent this tragedy" after the inevitable next Bad Thing than stand up and actively support even the sanest reductions in security theater because the inevitable next Bad Thing will still happen and your political enemies will have no problem turning it into your fault.

For the non-Americans, Michael Dukakis was a governor of Massachusetts who stuck his neck out and supported a fairly common-sense program for giving prisoners coming up to the end of their sentence short periods of furlough as part of efforts to support reintegration into society. Willie Horton was a prisoner who absconded while on furlough and later raped someone. When Dukakis ran for President in 1988, Republicans ran attack ads against Dukakis featuring Horton and his crimes as a consequence of Dukakis' 'soft on crime' approach.

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[DCFusor]

You are correct in this - and it was part of Bruce's earlier arguments as well. It's CYA politics at its finest.

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[Anonymous Coward]

This would occur to any bureaucrat in a few seconds.

Only if the bureaucrat thought the congress-critter more dishonest than himself. While congresscritters are greedy, dumb, gullible patsies, they are being honest in 'making you safe'. Politicians believe their own cleverness until they (Sharon Cissna, Mark Begich) experience their good deeds first-hand.

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[Anonymous Coward]

Amen. Our "leaders" have balls of steel when it comes to many things. Lying, hoarding power, etc. They are most certainly not spineless, they just want to appear that way to the public. Behind closed doors they know exactly what they are doing, they know it is against our wishes and wrong, and do not give a flying fuck.

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[Anonymous Coward]

a fairly common-sense program for giving prisoners coming up to the end of their sentence

Did you read your linked wiki page?
Horton was serving a life sentence w/o parole.

William R. "Willie" Horton (born August 12, 1951) is an American convicted felon who, while serving a life sentence for murder, without the possibility of parole, was the beneficiary of a Massachusetts weekend furlough program. He did not return from his furlough, and ultimately he committed assault, armed robbery and rape.

Further, on that same wiki page:
After the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that this right extended to first-degree murderers, the Massachusetts legislature quickly passed a bill prohibiting furloughs for such inmates. However, in 1976, Dukakis vetoed this bill.

Even more:
The first person to mention the Massachusetts furlough program in the 1988 presidential campaign was Al Gore.

So, not only did Dukakis screw this up massively, the first person to call him on it was Al Gore?
Definitely sounds like an evil Republican conspiracy to me...

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[spasm]

No, I didn't read my linked wikipedia page. Are you new here? Anyway, I'll be back as soon as I finish editing the wikipedia page..

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[10101001 10101001]

I like to think of it this way. America likes to think of itself like it's Charlie Brown*. In reality it's Peppermint Patty**.

*As much as Charlie Brown is treated as a punching bag and is self-deprecating, it appears the world is set against him. He is the underdog who is too worried at times about going too far and hence is wishy-washy, but in a crisis he'll rise up as the natural leader and do the right thing.

**Peppermint Patty is obnoxious, self-centered, and quick to lay blame upon others. Yea, everyone is in love with you, even when they don't even know you exist or love someone else. Golly, you're bossing people around all the time towards your own ends, but why does it seem like some people think you finally deciding to hold yourself back a bit is too little, too late? Oh, sure, you can be the leader, but if things get tough, you want to push the actual responsibility, concerns, etc on someone else. Or you can just ignore that there's any sort of connection between your orders and the implication that they'd actually deal with a problem by actually effecting it in a positive way.

PS - Yea, yea, I've watched too many Peanut specials. I still like them though. I just don't like the idea of living them.

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[AK Marc]

Without following the issue as it happened, the history is recorded with great bias. What was in the vetoed bill? Was it a one-line bill that prohibited such furloughs, or was it like much of the federal Congress passes and it was an anti-abortion (or something like that) bill with a rider that stopped the furloughs? Or would it have essentially ended all furloughs, and only now is being reported as "would have blocked such inmates" because that is the part most find interesting after a violation.

Unrelated to whether such programs are good or bad is the question of why weren't such temporary releases tracked better? That's the most important question, and one that needs solving for more than just that one incident, though if it were solved, it would have worked in this case as well. But solving such issues is "soft on crime" even if it's a move to essentially lengthen sentences for those who deserve it.

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[Anonymous Coward]

The definition of spineless, at least the one I use, is willing to stand up for what you believe in despite significant opposition.

So for example, have you noted many senators willing to go out on a political limb to support those that bribed them? Because as a general rule I'd say they're as corrupt as they are spineless.

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[Anonymous Coward]

Excellent post. You've given a lot of new insight into the Peanuts characters.

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[Anonymous Coward]

When Dukakis ran for President in 1988, Republicans ran attack ads against Dukakis featuring Horton and his crimes as a consequence of Dukakis' 'soft on crime' approach.

A more complete description would mention that Democrat Al Gore had brought up the furlough program while they were still campaigning for the nomination.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willie_Horton

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[Anonymous Coward]

The way to be a successful politician in the U.S. is to cut taxes to zero, use deficit spending to sponsor the most useless but politically favorable projects, and then take a break for 4/6 years while your opponent is left with the staggering debt and fallout from misguided projects, then win in a landslide for another 4/6 years. Repeat until hired by a large multinational corporation.

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[spasm]

A more complete description would have also mentioned that the furlough program was signed into law by the previous Republican governor.

I'm beginning to regret using the Horton case as an example - I was trying to talk about the idea of political risk and black swan events, not get bogged down in the partisan nitty-gritty of an exemplar that no-one outside the US will care about..

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[gmhowell]

Would the UK be Marcy, our lesbian hanger on, always seeking our affection?

Ok, for class assignment, explain how the US is actually Lucy, and Israel is Schroeder. (Extra credit if you can work in that Palestine is Pig Pen or France is Sally)

(There goes that karma...)

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[digitig]

If I were to ask which country is Snoopy (living in a constant fantasy world and terrified of the cat next door) I bet most people here would name their own country.

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[digitig]

Is that how Peppermint Patty is portrayed in the TV specials? She's not at all like that in the books. She's practically a perfect match for Charlie Brown, which is why it's such a tragedy that he never sees it.

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[gmhowell]

If I were to ask which country is Snoopy (living in a constant fantasy world and terrified of the cat next door) I bet most people here would name their own country.

Sounds like North Korea to me. Or the USA.

Guess where I live?

Re:This is why TSA kicked him out of testifying

[Anonymous Coward]

Idaho. Alaska...

The Winner:

[Anonymous Coward]

(from http://www.economist.com/debate/days/view/823)

Adam Barnes
March 30, 2012
Adam Barnes

Our debate has now ended and those supporting the motion—that changes made to airport security since 9/11 have done more harm than good—have won handsomely. ...
Voters have roundly declared that the frustrations, the delays, the loss of liberty and the increase in fear that characterize their interactions with airport-security procedures vastly outweigh the good these procedures achieve. For some, indeed, the benefits are essentially non-existent: any sensible terrorist can find a work-around or choose a different point of attack, as Bruce Schneier explains. And so the widely expressed hope is that changes made to security in the (near) future will make the whole regime less reactive, more rational, more flexible and more intelligence-driven. The results of this debate suggest that these changes should be made with some urgency: passengers are angry.

Re:The Winner:

[swalve]

The point is that by plugging the easy holes, you force the terrorists to improvise and cause themselves to be more easily caught, or at least to fail.

Schneier's flaw in reasoning is that to be more intelligence driven, you have to trust your intelligence. This gets into Rumsfeldian unknown-unknowns territory. We can only know what we can know. There are things we can't know.

Schneier

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

Schneier sent the Kipster off, wearing his arse like a hat.

Too bad that the "reality-based community" is attached to persuasive argument, reason and evidence. Those are now the desperate hopes of the powerless.

You see, they'll be doing whatever they want to you, anyways.

Re:Schneier

[siddesu]

To be fair, Kipster never stood a chance in a fact-based argument and probably knows it well. What Schneier says is true - TSA, and the whole security theater is just a CYA operation with some budged to dispose of to friends, and is defended mostly by interested parties to an emotionally involved audience.

But the theater is also there because most of the US public think they can afford it and that it is very visible and looks impressive. In a way, this is similar to the US carrying 25,000 nuclear warheads at the peak of the Cold war, although 3000 were more than enough for adequate retaliation threat. I guess you can call it demonstration of prowess, and it seems it is at least as important as effectiveness to many.

Leave the TSA alone!

[girlintraining]

They're in the business of making passengers feel safe. Passengers like that. They'll gladly suffer through free prostate exams if it means they can sit comfortably on the flight, believing they won't be one of the next set of 9/11 martyrs.

And it's a popular product: Look at how many people fly. If people didn't like the product, they wouldn't buy it. So whenever someone says "Ah! They're taking away their civil liberties!" ... Well, yes, but that's no worse than you forcing your own beliefs on them that they shouldn't be able to buy free prostate exams.

At the end of the day, you can only be responsible for your own behavior: These people aren't being forced to board a plane at gunpoint. They wllingly accept what the TSA is doing, regardless of whether or not it is necessary.

If you want the situation to change: Don't fly. Let the airplanes rust in their hangars. Let the corporations go bankrupt one by one. The TSA is only allowed to live by the patronage of the passengers. No passengers = No TSA.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[girlintraining]

P.S. Yes, I used 'prostate exam' and 'sit comfortably' in the same sentence. The irony is not lost on me.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[icebraining]

Of course, that assumes the TSA will remain restricted to airplanes...

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Skapare]

In the beginning, there was nothing. Then it exploded.

I like your signature. But ... you do have it backwards.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

"Willingly" is a pretty tough argument to make.

If I have to fly to a wedding or for business, I have no choice. Many destinations are reachable by air only, or would involve something like a 48 hour round trip drive.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

They're in the business of making passengers feel safe.

They're in the business of soaking up the employees that the Postal Service used to hire. One shudders to think what the official unemployment numbers would be without them...

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

We no longer visit the United States. Instead, we go to other parts of Canada or to Mexico or to Europe where, each year, we drop 2-3 K dollars for holidays. Grabbing my nutsack and/or pushing me into a microwave oven isn't exactly what I would call laying out the welcome mat. That's why we don't go to the US anymore. Oh well, lots of other places to see in the world.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[element-o.p.]

"Willingly" is a pretty tough argument to make.

If I have to fly to a wedding or for business, I have no choice. Many destinations are reachable by air only, or would involve something like a 48 hour round trip drive.

Pfff...only 48 hours? It would take me at least twice that just to reach Seattle. Anything south or east of there is even more time. Not that I'm bitter about it or anything...

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

--- Hasn't flown since 9/11 - never intend to again. I also never intend to go to Disney as long as they use fingerprint scanners at the entrances.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Chris Burke]

They'll gladly suffer through free prostate exams if it means they can sit comfortably on the flight, believing they won't be one of the next set of 9/11 martyrs.

No, we suffer through it because we want to be able to visit our families and not spend most of what little vacation time we have travelling.

Obviously if my dislike of TSA policies doesn't overcome my love of my family, there must not be a real issue to begin with. That's logic.

Well, yes, but that's no worse than you forcing your own beliefs on them that they shouldn't be able to buy free prostate exams.

You mean my belief that we could have airline flights -- the thing everyone actually wants -- without the prostate exams?

Oh, and on the subject of prostate exams: they aren't that far yet. But after making you take off your shoes after the Shoe Bomber, and making you get your crotch photographed after the Underpants Bomber... You just wait until the Butthole Bomber shows up. Then it'll be put-up or shut-up time.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[0111 1110]

Would you rather drive for 48 hours or be raped? I prefer to only have my knob polished by attractive females, and I prefer not to have my anus or ass crack or even my scalp explored by curious, impatient, eager fingers. I honestly don't understand people who are willing to be sexually violated in order to avoid losing a few hundred dollars or being seriously inconvenienced.

It brings to mind that joke about Winston Churchill and a socialite:

"Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?"
"My goodness, Mr. Churchill... Well, I suppose I would."
"Would you sleep with me for five pounds?"
"Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!"
"Madam, we've already established that. Now we are just haggling about the price."

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[pla]

I prefer not to have my anus or ass crack or even my scalp explored by curious, impatient, eager fingers. I honestly don't understand people who are willing to be sexually violated in order to avoid losing a few hundred dollars or being seriously inconvenienced.

You apparently misunderstand the situation...

You have paid for that "agent" to fondle you. Enjoy it. And try to moan loudly, it makes them feel like they've done a good job.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[pla]

Obviously if my dislike of TSA policies doesn't overcome my love of my family, there must not be a real issue to begin with. That's logic.

Actually, yes. I agree with you completely in spirit, but as long as enough of us keep putting up with it by flying rather than either driving or skipping the trip, we have passively given our personal (and financial) standing ovation to the current security theatre system.

You want to make a difference? Make the process take as long as possible (if you really must fly). Insist on a pat-down over the pornoscanner. Deliberately set the metal detectors off with harmless-but-embarassing (for the agents) personal items... Like nipple rings. Make sure that you can take a later flight and it won't make much difference - And let the government molesters know as much. Bring a variety of items with you (of no real personal value and that technically pass TSA rules) that will confuse the hell out of them as to whether or not you can take them through security (hint - TSA agents know nothing about electronics - Try taking an old video card in your carry-on and watch them twitch).

The problem there, it annoys all the sheep who just want to get hurry up and get groped so they can visit Grandma. If enough people actually cared enough to act, instead of bitch, just 10% of us holding up the screening process could bring commercial aviation in the US to a screeching halt. Instead, the very, very few of us who do care simply get pulled to the side to enjoy the accusatory glares of our fellow travelers.

Baaaa!

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[shutdown -p now]

They're in the business of making passengers feel safe. Passengers like that.

Did you RTFA? 87% of the readers agreed to the motion, which was "This house believes that changes made to airport security since 9/11 have done more harm than good". That's not geeks, that's you average Americans.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[aenigmainc]

"it means they can sit comfortably on the flight" ??? you must not fly much. i suffer through security, then get an uncomfortable seat on a flight. unless i get an upgrade, then i get a slightly less comfortable seat, and free drinks. And it not so much that people like me WANT to fly, its part of the job. i have to be in California for a Monday start, so i fly on Sunday. then i fly home friday night spend saturday with the family, then off to Dallas. So my options are fly and earn a paycheck, or don't fly and try and find a different job. A lot ot us are modifying our behavior by using Webex and the like for conferencing, but in the end sometimes the customer wants a warm body on site, and i'm that warm body.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[retchdog]

i did this once by accident; i had a playstation 2, some miscellaneous electronics and a gallon bottle of liquid soap bundled together in my soft-sided carry-on. it was very old, so the zipper was sticky.

when i picked up my suitcase, i found that it had been razored open, with clothes drooping out of the sides which had been loosely taped back together with official TSA tape.

it's funny in retrospect.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[retchdog]

sorry, tired; i meant checked baggage, not carry-on.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

THIS!

I won't be traveling to the land of the free to eat pink slime burgers any time soon, secretly hoping the TSA gets stricter so I never have to consider going to the USA ever again.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[superdave80]

And it's a popular product: Look at how many people fly.

Um, no we do NOT like the product that the TSA provides (security/screening). But the TSA has a monopoly on airport security, which is required to fly. Trust me, if you could chose between a TSA airport and a non-TSA airport, people would be flocking to the non-TSA airport. And I suspect a lot of people would choose non-screening airports if they knew they could just show up to their flight and walk to the gate with no wait.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[spasm]

It's a popular product because there's few reasonable alternatives for anything other than the shortest trips. I live in Los Angeles; my family lives in Australia. It's a bloody long swim. If air travel to Australia involved a two hour exam and a strip search I'd still grit my teeth and do it every couple of years because the alternative would be to never see my family again.

More pragmatically for most Americans, like many many people I travel between California and various east coast cities on a regular basis for work. My choice is to spend several days driving or sitting on a train vs maybe 7 hours tops flying including all the security theater at the beginning of the flight. It's both more expensive and more time consuming to avoid the security theater, so I fly. (Doing a bit of rummaging on the web, Amtrak rail Los Angeles New York goes for $266 at best and takes 60 hours sitting in a standard seat (a sleeper costs $813). Driving goes for an estimated $280 in my recent model Ford and 50 hours of nonstop driving time (plus the cost of either accommodation or amphetamines..). Random airline goes for $155 per kayak.com and takes 5 hours.). So while I always opt out of the scanners (I do biomedical research - I'm willing to be a guinea pig for something that might improve the health of my fellow humans, but I'm not willing to be a guinea pig for the health impacts of a jammed scanner which provides no benefit whatsoever for my fellow humans), again, I'm basically willing to subject myself to whatever nonsense security game they're playing this week because it hasn't come close to crossing the time/price point of other forms of travel for anything where air travel was competitive in the first place.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Sorthum]

I went to Disneyland last week, will be going again tomorrow; they've never had a fingerprint scanner that I'm aware of...

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[sunderland56]

If you want the situation to change: Don't fly.

If you want the situation to change, hire the guy in charge of security at El-Al. Get rid of the entire TSA, and just do whatever the Israelis do. Air travel can be safe.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[oxdas]

Perhaps I hold a less than optimistic view of the American public, but I doubt readers of the Economist are "average Americans." The Economist is left leaning by U.S. standards and has much higher intellectual standards that most media consumed by the "average American."

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[tqk]

In the beginning, there was nothing. Then it exploded.

I like your signature. But ... you do have it backwards.

So, what was there prior to the Big Bang?

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Xacid]

While I'm sure we agree on the overall issue I think people are heavily over-dramatizing this aspect. I've flown a significant number of times since the implementation of the TSA and have always opted for the pat-downs. While I feel my liberties are being violated I've yet to encounter any conduct that was less than professional. Always back of the hand, always vocalizing what they're doing, and never crossing any lines that I could define the treatment as "rape".

To compare the pat-down to rape is abhorrent in most of the cases. While I understand the issue at hand you're having, pun intended, you're grossly misrepresenting what's going on.

We're not being raped in a physical sense. It's our liberties that are being harmed and they're being murdered.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

While we're on the Churchill quotes: "You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else." - W. Churchill

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[augahyde]

Deliberately set the metal detectors off with harmless-but-embarassing (for the agents) personal items... Like nipple rings.

Nipple rings don't set off alarms. I got mine in '95 and have never set off an alarm in roughly 20 international flights and a handful of domestic flights.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[augahyde]

If you want the situation to change, hire the guy in charge of security at El-Al. Get rid of the entire TSA, and just do whatever the Israelis do. Air travel can be safe.

I would love to have El Al's security here in the states, but I am not sure how well it would scale up. Hell, they only have 42 planes including cargo planes currently flying...

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Fluffeh]

So, what was there prior to the Big Bang?

Using just the signature, it would be more correct to say: Nothing Exploded, then, it was the beginning. The explosion marked the beginning. Before that, as far as anyone can tell, there was nothing at all - though of course nothing is much harder to define when all the laws of physics we use to try to explain things were batshit crazy at that relative time - and at that point, even time didn't exist.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Fluffeh]

Goddamit, I just found my </i>, must have dropped it...

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[DriedClexler]

They'll gladly suffer through free prostate exams if it means they can sit comfortably on the flight,

Um, a prostate exam usually isn't associated with "sitting comfortably"...

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Siridar]

Then it'll be put-up or shut-up time.

I think you mean "Push up or shut-up time."

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

Now, take that subject, put on way too much mascara, grab a web cam and set up a youtube account!

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Cajun Hell]

I don't get the rape comparison. I can see how some people might consider frisking a violation, but a sexual one? You have some strange turn-ons, dude, er, lady, er, my numerically named friend.

But to bring the thread to a more interesting topic, I thought it was W.C. Fields joke. Turns out somebody has tried to figure out who said that though the conclusion isn't satisfying. I can only hope this "Lord Beaverbrook" also had a physical appearance similar to Fields and Churchhill.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[TheGratefulNet]

So, what was there prior to the Big Bang?

Tits.

Turtles In Training.

(its turtles all the way down, you know!)

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Jonner]

I'm not sure if you're simply a troll, but it sounds like it might be serious. If so, you forgot one essential point: the TSA has a government granted monopoly to inflict their inconveniences on anyone with the audacity to fly. Your argument only makes sense if passengers can choose between TSA and non-TSA flights.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[tqk]

So, what was there prior to the Big Bang?

Using just the signature, it would be more correct to say: Nothing Exploded, then, it was the beginning.

I'll grant you that may be more poetic. I'm not sure it's more correct.

In the beginning, there was nothing. Then it exploded.

Splitting hairs, but Hawking would insist there was nothing in our Universe if it existed at all, then * exploded into it creating it (I think).

The explosion marked the beginning.

Hawking (multiverse theory and all that) would disagree (by my reading of Brief History of Time).

[Have I mentioned I'm a dilettante? I only barely keep up with this stuff. If you understand the math, you should be explaining this !@#$ to me. Just sayin'.]

... and at that point, even time didn't exist.

I mean, come on! that's just scary!

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[tqk]

Are you Japanese? Just curious.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

While I feel my liberties are being violated I've yet to encounter any conduct that was less than professional.

Oxymoron. If your liberties are being violated then, by definition, the conduct is not professional. A professional would not violate your liberties.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[thegarbz]

At the end of the day, you can only be responsible for your own behavior: These people aren't being forced to board a plane at gunpoint. They wllingly accept what the TSA is doing, regardless of whether or not it is necessary.

If you want the situation to change: Don't fly. Let the airplanes rust in their hangars. Let the corporations go bankrupt one by one. The TSA is only allowed to live by the patronage of the passengers. No passengers = No TSA.

Yeah I tried to swim from Australia to Hawaii, but I turned around after 200m and swam back realising that I may not actually make the 750000m journey. I then considered taking a boat, but I realised I only get 3 weeks holiday and the trip takes 18 days.

You haven't left me a lot of options have you?

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[thegarbz]

You have paid for that "agent" to fondle you. Enjoy it. And try to moan loudly, it makes them feel like they've done a good job.

Read their name tag on the way in. Don't make the mistake of moaning another agent's name during the exam, they don't like that.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[qwak23]

I've never been able to sit comfortably on a flight regardless of whether or not I've had a prostate exam first.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Xacid]

Scenario - you're in prison for a crime you committed.

Guard A violates you in every manner they see fit. Pick an orifice. They look at you as subhuman. They enjoy this practice.

Guard B treats you with respect is only minimally invasive. They explain what they're doing. They want to see you get out of this place as soon as possible and hope you'll re-enter society without a hitch.

They *are* two different things. Suck is suck, but there are varying degrees.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[HappyEngineer]

The enemy (the TSA and their traitorous allies) are perfectly happy to call us all terrorist lovers for objecting to pat downs and scans. Please don't make their life easier by trying to be reasonable toward them.

It is rape. It is a serious violation of my personal space and it serves no useful purpose other than to scare people into being scanned. Just because they aren't shoving a broomstick up my ass doesn't mean it's not rape.

For my part, I won't fly more than once a year. I've laid down the law with my wife that any vacation we take must be within a reasonable driving distance. Two rapes a year (one each way) at xmas when I go see my parents is more than enough.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[jovius]

Too bad the epidemic is getting global. Last time I went for a domestic flight in Finland I had to hand over my shampoo bottle. The official seemed to be so exhilarated that he forgot to check my boarding documents. It's tragicomic how much they have invested in the high tech machines but use rented (cheap), random and often disgruntled (there's been many strikes in the past) workforce on the actual field handling the actual material coming in and out of the planes.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[reasterling]

I am a bit confused. Are you saying that you used to come here just to eat our pink slime burgers? Really man, we don't even eat those. Must be an acquired taste.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[TheLink]

Careful, or you might make the hoax story real -"gay man arrested after ejaculating while being patted down"...

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[TheLink]

Passengers on private planes don't go through TSA screening right? So would this be a business opportunity?

Hmm googling gives me this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SeaPort_Airlines
http://www.forbes.com/sites/edzitron/2011/06/29/planered/
Looks like it would be hard to get as much economies of scale with 9 passengers though.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[FormOfActionBanana]

Fake.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[blackicye]

If you want the situation to change, hire the guy in charge of security at El-Al. Get rid of the entire TSA, and just do whatever the Israelis do. Air travel can be safe.

I would love to have El Al's security here in the states, but I am not sure how well it would scale up. Hell, they only have 42 planes including cargo planes currently flying...

I've flown Royal Jordanian airlines into Queen Alia International Airport to connect to Israel. They've been doing TSA style patdowns since the late 1980s.First you get sweeped by handheld wands. Then there was an incident during one of these patdowns, when I had a 25ml bottle of eyedrops in my pocket (contact lenses and longhaul flights don't mix so well) I had to empty my pockets and the agent opened and sniffed the bottle. The groping and prodding was quite invasive and they were squeezing the stuff that was in my pocket through my pants, to figure out what it was.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

Comprehension fail.

From GP: "These people aren't being forced to board a plane at gunpoint."

The alternative isn't a non-TSA flight - it's to not fly at all.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[hawkinspeter]

The one in Florida definitely has fingerprint scanners to get in the place.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[chrismcb]

Unfortunately "Don't Fly" isn't really an option. And that is the crux of the matter. People aren't flying because they LIKE a free rectal exam. They do it because it is faster than the alternative.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[quacking duck]

Perhaps I hold a less than optimistic view of the American public, but I doubt readers of the Economist are "average Americans." The Economist is left leaning by U.S. standards and has much higher intellectual standards that most media consumed by the "average American."

That is a sad commentary on how far right America has slid in the last 20 years.

The Economist is regarded as fairly right leaning in Canada, having blasted the previous Liberal prime minister and endorsing the current Conservative one (Harper) for years.

It was big news here when the same publication slammed Harper for shutting down Parliament in 2010 rather than than let an opposition coalition take power.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

You know .. prior to 2009, I used to make the same joke about, "just wait until the crotch bomber happens" .. I honestly thought I was saying something that couldn't really happen .. I mean, I believed the crotch bomber would happen, but I didn't believe that they would start to feel us up after it .. not really .. boy was I wrong .. I think when the buttonhole bomber actually happens I need to quit my job .. (which requires weekly flights ...)

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

Interesting. Disneyworld had them in 2005 when I last visited. I wonder why west-coasters would have less "security."

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Xacid]

No, no, and no.

Read this for crying out loud. You're in effect minimizing what real rape is by trying to lump this into that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape

If it an excessive use of power? Yes. Is it a violation of my personal space? Yes.
Is the agent groping me with one hand with his other on his erect penis? No. Are they penetrating me for their own sexual gratification? No. Are they enjoying it in a sexual nature? No.

When you call it what it isn't it and exaggerate the nature of what's happening you're causing yourself to lose credibility. If you want to have a reasonable discussion then you've got to bring reason to the table otherwise you're going to be dismissed before you even get to the door.

And like I mentioned before - we probably agree on the overarching problem with what's going on - but there's absolutely no need to associate it with rape when it should be enough to associate it with a significant violation of our essential liberties.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

He's talking about the women over there.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Teun]

You are over sensitive towards your 'personal space' and insensitive towards victims of real rape. How ever bad the situation surrounding airport security is a security pat down has absolutely nothing in common with rape.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Teun]

El-Al and many other airlines flying into Israel are using a very time consuming security, every passenger is individually interviewed by at least two security officers and the resulting answers are then held against the light by seasoned specialists.

The question and answer game is so smart once they have established you are allowed on board there is no further reason to resort to physical searches.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

You sure you didn't end up at Knott's instead?

http://allears.net/pl/fingerscan.htm

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[gtall]

Yep, at least until the first plane is taken down from a carry on bomb, then people would be flocking to the TSA airport.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[PCM2]

Travel is a right. If you want to travel anywhere farther than Iowa, you have to fly. There's not much choice. (Unless, perhaps, you're unemployed?)

Saying "if you want to teach the TSA a lesson, don't fly" is kinda like saying "if you want to teach the FDA a lesson, don't buy food."

Not every problem has a market-based solution, particularly where governance is concerned.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[PCM2]

Is the agent groping me with one hand with his other on his erect penis? No. Are they penetrating me for their own sexual gratification? No. Are they enjoying it in a sexual nature? No.

I think you might need to do a little more research there, yourself. A rapist often does not rape someone for his own sexual gratification. There are lots of men walking around out there who are sexually frustrated (I'm looking at you, /.) but they don't rape people. Rape is about power and control, and in some cases pure sadism. It's seldom really about sex.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[PCM2]

The Economist is regarded as fairly right leaning in Canada, having blasted the previous Liberal prime minister and endorsing the current Conservative one (Harper) for years.

All that says is that Canadians are just as prone to partisan bias as Americans. It may just be that the Economist thought Martin was a lousy prime minister and Harper is a good one.

Personally, though I think it's a little bit of a stretch to call the Economist "liberal," its views have little in common with those of American conservatives. It consistently favors relaxed immigration laws, equality for all regardless of social class, universal healthcare, less war, more economic mobility, social justice, etc. Actually, I wouldn't mind at all if some independent panel judged the Economist to be "right leaning" -- because if so, it would expose the shame of the American right.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

Only a fool would think that power and sex are separate.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

With 99 billion served, there's alot of us eating pink slime burgers unfortunately.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

Depending on the airport, you can, since some have kicked out the TSA and instead use their own certified security (which is allowed).

The TSA is a joke - they can't even prevent ordinary citizens from smuggling everything from food to machetes onboard planes, let alone people who would be determined to do harm.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

They won't need a butthole bomber - the TSA is acting on (unsubstantiated) rumor alone now - how brilliantly proactive of them!

A couple years ago there were rumors - the very shadowy and unconfirmed type, which *shockingly* turned out to be false - that women terrorists intended to sew bombs into their breasts to attack us poor Americans suckers - errr.. citizens.

Of course, there never actually was a boobie bomber - but TSA policy now involves inspecting women's breasts to ensure they are "real" and require women with breast-pumps or empty milk-bottles to actually pump milk and prove that their swollen breasts are indeed - you guessed it - filled with milk.

Despite the fact that this is the crudest of 5th grade humor - hey baby, I'm afraid you're going to have to surrender your boobies to me for a security check - it is indeed TSA policy. Just goes to show how far a domesticated public will "bend over", so to speak.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[oxdas]

There have been many articles lately about the effects of wealth concentration and the Economist has repeatedly pointed out things like how the American healthcare system is flawed, etc. This is red meat to the American Right. I see the Economist as conservative American in the vein of William F Buckley, etc (thinking conservatives instead of purely dogmatic conservatives). American Conservatives would be unrecognizable to their ilk even 20 years ago. The Economist has remained fairly consistent, but the right wing of American politics has drifted significantly. I bet even Reagan would be a Democrat if he lived today.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[mundanetechnomancer]

since when are power, control, and sadism unrelated to sex?

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Grishnakh]

Red Herring. Not flying isn't an option for most people. For many, if they refuse to fly, they lose their jobs. It's that simple. When your job requires you to travel across the country to meet with customers, you either do it or you get fired. Taking an alternate mode of travel isn't feasible, because frankly we don't have anything; cars take too long and people can only drive for so long before getting tired, there are no high-speed trains here (certainly not going E-W, just one moderate-speed train traveling the NE Corridor), buses are much slower than cars and loaded with felons, etc.

For vacation travelers, it isn't much better; you might not have to worry about getting fired, but you can't go far from home without flying, because you only get 2 weeks/year, and spending most of that driving would be pretty dumb and certainly not very relaxing. And sitting at home during your time off isn't exactly a "vacation". But regardless, most travel is probably business travel anyway, so that goes back to the people wanting to keep their jobs factor.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[HappyEngineer]

So my personal space doesn't matter? I'm overly sensitive because I feel violated when another man slides his hands over me and slaps my groin several times? (Seriously, in my first rape, one slap of the groin wasn't enough. He had to go up my legs then slap it then go up my legs from behind and slap it twice more.)

What would you call it? Am I allowed to use the word "assault" or do my feelings of violation just not matter at all?

I'll make sure to ask you next time I have an emotional reaction to find out if I'm allowed to feel badly about it or not. I mean, I wouldn't want to have any feelings that are disallowed.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

"Willingly" is a pretty tough argument to make.
If I have to fly to a wedding

You don't.

or for business

You don't.

Many destinations are reachable by air only

Name one. Aside from a few remote locations which are only reachable via dogsled or helicopter/small plane, it's just not true at all. And those few situations almost always involve small airports where there isn't any screening to start with.

or would involve something like a 48 hour round trip drive.

And here we see the real issue. It's SO fucking important for you to be there that you'll let some stranger molest your children or play with your asshole, but you can't be bothered to plan ahead a little bit and spend two days in the car. You'd rather let these assholes grab your teenage daughter's tits than give up a day of your vacation, and you'd rather let them grope your wife than spend one less day on the beach during your honeymoon.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

You're in effect minimizing what real rape is by trying to lump this into that.

Don't cherry-pick one definition of a word just to support your indignation.

Here are some interesting tidbits about Rape which you should pay attention to before claiming this is cheapening anything:
http://articles.cnn.com/2012-01-06/justice/justice_rape-definition-revised_1_definition-oral-penetration-sexual-abuse?_s=PM:JUSTICE
"The crime of rape will be defined as "penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim,"

Dictionary.com defines rape as the following:
"1. the unlawful compelling of a person through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse.
2. any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person.
3. statutory rape.
4. an act of plunder, violent seizure, or abuse; despoliation; violation: the rape of the countryside.
5. Archaic. the act of seizing and carrying off by force.

Even the Wikipedia article you linked to states:
"The act may be carried out by physical force, coercion, abuse of authority or with a person who is incapable of valid consent"
Keep in mind anybody under the age of 16 in the US is not capable of giving consent. Also keep in mind another quote from the page you supplied:
"Some countries such as Germany are now using more inclusive definitions which do not require penetration and the 1998 International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda defines it as "a physical invasion of a sexual nature committed on a person under circumstances which are coercive".[17] In some jurisdictions, the term "rape" has been phased out of legal use in favor of terms such as "sexual assault" or "criminal sexual conduct"."

So yes, the term "rape" is more than appropriate, and no, it does not cheapen the word.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[honkycat]

Disneyland (CA) doesn't as far as I've noticed. Sea World in San Diego has them, and by default they want you to use them to connect yourself with your ticket. However, you can simply ask not to participate and this just means you have to show your ticket again for a repeat entry.

At least, that's how it was a couple years ago when I was there. Not sure about Disneyworld.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[stepho-wrs]

Disneyland Hong Kong uses fingerprint scanners like this to. More of a fraud detection scheme for annual passes than an anti-terrorism thing.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

Then it'll be put-up or shut-up time.

I think you mean "Push up or shut-up time."

I think you both mean "Put out or shut up"

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Anonymous Coward]

This. For further detail look at the documented use of rape by other apes kidnapping females from other tribes as a tool to break their resistance to their captors. That effect is why rape is such a serious crime. See also Stockholm Syndrome for more information on related psychological attacks.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[PCM2]

There have been many articles lately about the effects of wealth concentration and the Economist has repeatedly pointed out things like how the American healthcare system is flawed, etc. This is red meat to the American Right.

Errr... don't you mean the American Left? The Right are the ones who defend wealth concentration as Manifest Destiny and have attacked any and all attempts to reform the American healthcare system.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[oxdas]

The Economist is arguing that wealth concentration in excess is a bad thing, the U.S. free market healthcare system is a bad thing, etc. These are considered left wing policies in the U.S. In other words, the Economist seems to agree with Dems more than Repubs these days.

Re:Leave the TSA alone!

[Coren22]

Kind of creepy, but not quite the physical stature of Churchill:

http://www.firstworldwar.com/bio/beaverbrook.htm

we can't AFFORD the TSA

[Anonymous Coward]

It's clearly ineffective, but never mind that: we don't have the money for it. In case we haven't noticed, we're spending 1 point some odd TRILLION more every year than we take in.

Unfortunately, like most large bureaucracies, the TSA is self sustaining. It work hard to justify itself, despite never having caught a single terrorist in its entire existence. Replicate that to hundreds of other useless federal agencies, and you have a government that far overstepped the bounds of what it's supposed to be for, and now exists to give jobs to the phone sanitizers (RIP, DA) of our country.

Yet Americans will cheerfully keep voting for Republicrats, no matter what they do, so I guess the TSA is what we deserve. You get the government you deserve, they always say.

Re:we can't AFFORD the TSA

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately, like most large bureaucracies, the TSA is self sustaining.

Worse. They're unionized now.

They're not going away anytime soon.

Re:we can't AFFORD the TSA

[Anonymous Coward]

It's clearly ineffective, but never mind that: we don't have the money for it. In case we haven't noticed, we're spending 1 point some odd TRILLION more every year than we take in.

Unfortunately, like most large bureaucracies, the TSA is self sustaining. It work hard to justify itself, despite never having caught a single terrorist in its entire existence. Replicate that to hundreds of other useless federal agencies, and you have a government that far overstepped the bounds of what it's supposed to be for, and now exists to give jobs to the phone sanitizers (RIP, DA) of our country.

Yet Americans will cheerfully keep voting for Republicrats, no matter what they do, so I guess the TSA is what we deserve. You get the government you deserve, they always say.

We've got the best democracy money can buy ;-)

Re:we can't AFFORD the TSA

[jc42]

We've got the best democracy money can buy ;-)

That's a good old joke, but unfortunately, it hasn't been true for some time now. By any measure of how "good" a democratic government is, there are many other countries that score higher on the metric than does the US these days.

The was a recent huge drop in the "quality" of democracy in the US when the Supreme Court legalized unlimited, and largely undocumented campaign spending by corporations a few years back. Before that, we saw the the head of one of the main manufacturers of electronic voting equipment tell the voters in one state (Ohio) that he would deliver their state to the Republicans - and he delivered. And on and on.

If you're a mere citizen, without the wealth or connections to funnel millions of dollars to Congressional campaigns, your vote no longer counts for much at all. The available data says that in Congressional elections, the candidate with the largest campaign budget wins about 90% of the time in the House, and 80% of the time in the Senate. (This statistic was "revealed" yet again this afternoon in an NPR article.) You and I don't matter any more.

The TSA is just one of the very visible bits of evidence for how far the American democratic system has fallen. Yeah, maybe a large majority of passengers think the TSA is worthless. Do you really think this means that our "democratic" government will curtail or cancel its activities during our lifetime? Do you think you'll ever be permitted to vote on the TSA?

Re:we can't AFFORD the TSA

[FSWKU]

...Yet Americans will cheerfully keep voting for Republicrats, no matter what they do, so I guess the TSA is what we deserve. You get the government you deserve, they always say.

Because Obama and the Democrats have done SUCH a good job reigning in the TSA and other useless agencies...

Re:we can't AFFORD the TSA

[Anonymous Coward]

We've got the best democracy money can buy ;-)

We're suppose to have a republic.

Democracy... while it lasts is more bloody than either aristocracy or monarchy. Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide.

John Adams

Re:we can't AFFORD the TSA

[asylumx]

He said "Republicrats" which is an obvious mixture of Republican + Democrat.

Re:we can't AFFORD the TSA

[tqk]

...Yet Americans will cheerfully keep voting for Republicrats ...

Because Obama and the Democrats have done SUCH a good job reigning in the TSA ...

If he'd said "Demopublicans", then would you have got it?

Re:we can't AFFORD the TSA

[AK Marc]

He obviously didn't engage his brain (if any) before his response, so I doubt it would have mattered.

Re:we can't AFFORD the TSA

[Anonymous Coward]

Well I suppose that is true if you don't count the ones that haven't yet.

Re:we can't AFFORD the TSA

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope you realize that all your arguments against having "the best democracy money can buy" are, in fact, demonstrations that representation is bought. ie: if you happen to be a person or organization with a lot of money to spend on democracy, then you will likely feel like your interests are being represented. If you're someone without much money to spend on democracy, you're likely to find your priorities and opinions overlooked. "The best democracy money can buy" is snarky-speak for "plutocracy."

Re:we can't AFFORD the TSA

[jc42]

Well, yeah; the idea was to challenge the "best" in that old joke. That the US "democracy" is for sale to the highest bidders is rather well understood these days. The Supreme Court just made it official.

One of the constant strains in geek humor is to take things obviously intended as humorous, interpret the words literally, and try to generate still more (often rather black) humor from the results.

There's also an ongoing tongue-in-cheek disagreement over whether the US is evolving into a plutocracy or a kleptocracy or some other sort of *-ocracy. There's a lot of potential for fake-serious discussion possible in that topic, based on the style of the language peevery that we see so much of here. Telling someone that they've used the wrong word is so much better than just calling them a dummy ...

I stopped flying.

[OFnow]

I cannot speak for others, but I have stopped flying. Period. Instead we drive where the distance is reasonable and simply don't go many places we once went. So the argument that 'people are flying anyway, the security theater must be ok' is weak as the number flying might be much higher. Not that airports have the capacity for more air travel anyway...

Re:I stopped flying.

[evil_aaronm]

Ditto. I used to fly at least twice a week. Haven't flown in a couple of years, now. Fuck 'em...

Re:I stopped flying.

[Anonymous Coward]

Same here. I use to fly three times a year, but now I haven't flown in years.

Re:I stopped flying.

[Cosgrach]

You know it. It's by rail or by car now for me. Has been fr the last 5 or 6 years now.

Re:I stopped flying.

[Anonymous Coward]

I cannot speak for others, but I have stopped flying. Period. Instead we drive where the distance is reasonable
and simply don't go many places we once went. So the argument that 'people are flying anyway, the security theater must be ok' is
weak as the number flying might be much higher. Not that airports have the capacity for more
air travel anyway...

Actually, one of schneier's points is that this effect has caused some 500 deaths in road accidents per year. I have not read the book he cites as a source for this number...

Re:I stopped flying.

[dkleinsc]

So have I, including being willing to spend about 5 days and a not-insignificant amount of money to travel from Ohio to California by rail. Which I consider to be a small price to pay for not having my rights trampled.

Especially because rail travel is rather fun if you do it right. Sleeper cars are basically moving hotel rooms, meals are included, and you can hide in your room or try chatting in the lounge depending on your willingness to get to know complete strangers. I've met some interesting people on trains, including a nun in a spiritual crisis, a guy who was a well-known campaign adviser in Texas, some ardent Tea Partiers, Boy Scouts heading back from hiking trips, etc. And you also get a real sense of how big the United States really is, and all the variety of landscapes in it - I was thinking of Woodie Guthrie's "This Land is Your Land" along much of the ride.

Of course, the TSA now is trying to get into the business of searching rail passengers and creating highway checkpoints so that those of us who don't want to be searched without probable cause can't avoid it. I don't mind seeing bomb-sniffing dogs in major rail stations, because that makes some sense. But what doesn't make sense is trying to take away any object that could be lethal - as George Carlin pointed out, you probably could beat a guy to death with the Sunday New York Times.

Re:I stopped flying.

[PopeRatzo]

I cannot speak for others, but I have stopped flying.

If it means I get an empty middle seat between me and that fat lady with the perfume, I sincerely thank you.

It is my fond hope that your decision not to fly is taken up by a wide majority of Americans.

Though I do find airport security to be a minor hassle, if it has discouraged you and others from turning airplanes into the Greyhound of the Air, then the TSA is worth every penny.

So the argument that 'people are flying anyway, the security theater must be ok' is weak as the number flying might be much higher.

You mean that without the "security theater there might be more people flying? What a horrible thought.

I'll have to make sure and thank the TSA employees next time I fly.

Re:I stopped flying.

[gamanimatron]

We've taken this route as well. It's not worth the hassle (much less being treated like a criminal) and we've discovered that a lot of the country is really pretty to drive through. I do hope that someday this all gets fixed, but my vote's always been an outlier and I don't expect that to change. I'll charter a flight or drive, and since I can't afford a chartered flight I'm paying for gas and auto maintenance instead of airline tickets.

Re:I stopped flying.

[hawguy]

I cannot speak for others, but I have stopped flying.

If it means I get an empty middle seat between me and that fat lady with the perfume, I sincerely thank you.

It is my fond hope that your decision not to fly is taken up by a wide majority of Americans.

Be careful what you wish for...empty seats are only temporary... If demand decreases, airlines will cut back on scheduled flights (or plane size (or both)) to eliminate as many empty seats as possible.

Unlike a hotel that has a reason to keep occupancy below 100%, an airline is happiest when occupancy is at 100% (and the only way to get there is to sell 105% (or more) of the seats)

Re:I stopped flying.

[Anonymous Coward]

So you're antisocial to the point where you like having an entire 777 to yourself?

How is your mom's basement this time of year?

Re:I stopped flying.

[shadowofwind]

I frequently travel between California and Ohio also, but can't afford the time for a train.

I took a steel mock-up of a bomb on an airplane once, on the way to a data collection at Fort Irwin. TSA didn't even ask to open the bag. But they confiscated one of my drill bits on the return trip.

Re:I stopped flying.

[Anonymous Coward]

"I cannot speak for others, but I have stopped flying. Period"

I haven't been on a plane in almost ten years.

I also don't take the train, for the same reasons (if you think the TSA boys at the airports are going too far, wait until you come across an Amtrak employee that thinks he has the same job description (most do)).

Re:I stopped flying.

[tragedy]

I don't mind seeing bomb-sniffing dogs in major rail stations, because that makes some sense.

It makes sense only in that someone might try to bomb all those people concentrated together in the rail station, but no more sense than in any other place where there are a bunch of people standing around. Preventing bomb attacks on trains (or buses, or any other form of ground transport) by inspecting passengers makes no sense whatsoever. Things that travel on the ground don't need to be attacked from within by passengers. Someone who wants to bomb a train doesn't need to sneak a bomb onto it, they just need to walk up to the tracks when the train is coming and drop the bomb on the tracks. Or they can skip the bomb and derail the train by attacking the tracks with hand tools, etc. If they want to hijack a train to hold everyone hostage, they can force it to stop and board it. Same things apply to buses. Anyone can drive up in front of a bus and drop a bomb from a car, or run the bus off the road with a larger vehicle, or point a gun at the driver and force them to pull over, then board it, etc. Screening passengers makes zero sense in those situations.

For planes, at least it makes some sense. Planes are fast. It's not exactly trivial to catch up to them in mid-air to board or attack them. The pilots can't just pull over and stop anywhere, either. To hijack a plane without being on it when it takes off, you have to have a pretty impressive plane yourself. Hijacking a plane in mid-air from the outside doesn't make any sense anyway since, if you had the resources to do it in the first place, the only thing you'd need would be the passengers and, unless there were specific passengers you were after, you could just start your own airline, load up your own plane, then kidnap those people in mid-air. So, for planes, at least there's some security excuse for screening passengers like that. For ground transportation, it's just stupid.

Re:I stopped flying.

[tragedy]

That's just silly. If there are less people flying, the airlines will just schedule less flights and close down routes, etc. It is unlikely to result in less people on the actual flights.

Re:I stopped flying.

[PopeRatzo]

If demand decreases, airlines will cut back on scheduled flights

You mean it will get quieter at night in the area within 25 miles of O'Hare?

It's starting to sound better and better.

Re:I stopped flying.

[PopeRatzo]

That's just silly. If there are less people flying, the airlines will just schedule less flights and close down routes, etc.

Lowering the demand for jet fuel, bringing down gasoline prices, less congestion on the freeways to and from O'Hare, less jet noise.

And I forgot...what happens to prices when demand goes down?

Re:I stopped flying.

[ATMAvatar]

Interestingly, that would mean that the TSA has indirectly caused more deaths since 9/11 than the terrorists caused during 9/11.

Re:I stopped flying.

[Anonymous Coward]

Some day you'll stop being a pretentious twat.

Re:I stopped flying.

[Jay L]

As George Carlin pointed out, you probably could beat a guy to death with the Sunday New York Times.

What's a New York Times?

Re:I stopped flying.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's unlikely prices will go down. With less flights, there are less economies of scale. Prices would probably rise.

Yes, they may fall in the short term temporarily, but the passengers that are left are going to be those who have to fly, and the airlines are going to have to pay vastly more per passenger to keep operating.

Re:I stopped flying.

[squiggleslash]

I've taken Amtrak from West Palm Beach to Penn Station NY and back four times in the last six. At no point did any Amtrak employee see the need to even look at my luggage, let alone give me a prostate exam.

It may be that the TSA is able to fuck things up on the rails, I know they're trying, but at the moment, no, it's nothing like travelling by air.

Re:I stopped flying.

[thogard]

How many deaths has it cause by helping spread such fun things like Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)?

Re:I stopped flying.

[Anonymous Coward]

you could just start your own airline, load up your own plane, then kidnap those people in mid-air.

Saito must have played Aerobiz a lot as a young man. :D

[Has that game (series) been 'properly' romhacked in REAL LIFE due to the film?]

Re:I stopped flying.

[luther349]

most of this is going to fall apart when are economy finishes crashing.

Re:I stopped flying.

[dkleinsc]

Part of this was the way the dogs were being used - instead of agents pawing through everybody's bag, there were mostly just hanging around waiting to see if the dog reacted to something. In other words, assuming those dogs were trained appropriately, at the very least, they're doing something that is only going to find bombs (or possibly drugs), and not dig into my person, papers, and effects. I grant you, there's no real reason for it, but it's not as stupid, unconstitutional, and expensive as what's going on in airports, and is no less effective.

Re:I stopped flying.

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't kid yourself. They were looking for drugs.

Plus, if they found a suicide bomber, the guy would just detonate himself there.

Re:I stopped flying.

[bigdavex]

Things that travel on the ground don't need to be attacked from within by passengers. Someone who wants to bomb a train doesn't need to sneak a bomb onto it, they just need to walk up to the tracks when the train is coming and drop the bomb on the tracks. Or they can skip the bomb and derail the train by attacking the tracks with hand tools, etc.

That can't be right; that would mean the plot of Under Seige 2 made no sense.

Re:I stopped flying.

[TheGratefulNet]

I have not flown for about 10 years, now.

the last international trip I took, my baggage was busted into by some thugs and the zipper cut with wire cutters. I had a NYLON wire-tie keeping the zipper pull down; yet they just cut right thru my luggage and ruined a brand new bag. a power adapter was missing after they obviously rumaged thru my stuff and repacked it, leaving that needed item, out. thanks, asswipes: I feel MUCH SAFER without my 12v adapter...

I don't fly anymore because of the bullshit. any corporate travel that was offered was turned down by ME. unless it was urgent (it never was) I didn't accept the flight.

there may have been 5-10 trips I could have taken over the last 10 yrs. instead, they got zero from me.

and I know I'm not alone in this. I'm far from alone in this.

REMOVE THE TSA and many of us will return.

Re:I stopped flying.

[Anonymous Coward]

It makes sense only in that someone might try to bomb all those people concentrated together in the rail station

I am just trying to figure out when it will happen in a large airport. I have seen lines waiting to get thru checkpoints of 200+ people.

Re:I stopped flying.

[thegarbz]

and simply don't go many places we once went.

This is the saddest quote of our time. That it has actually come to this is astonishing.

Re:I stopped flying.

[jovius]

Found from the comments of TFA: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2011/RAND_MG1107.pdf page 158

Researchers have estimated that the 9/11 attacks generated nearly 2,200 additional road traffic deaths in the United States through mid-2003 from a relative increase in driving and reduction in flying resulting from fear of additional terrorist attacks and associated reductions in the convenience of flying.

Original source: Garrick Blalock, Vrinda Kadiyali, and Daniel H. Simon, “Driving Fatalities After 9/11: A Hidden Cost of Terrorism,” Applied Economics, Vol. 41, No. 14, 2009, pp. 1717–1729.

Re:I stopped flying.

[AK Marc]

I just moved (fled the US 3 years ago). I fly all the time, security here reminds me of the US in the 80s, and I don't have to deal with TSA or body scanners.

Re:I stopped flying.

[AK Marc]

And I forgot...what happens to prices when demand goes down?

Costs go up, and that makes prices go up as well. Flying will be more expensive if demand drops. Jet fuel is one of many products from crude, so zero jet fuel demand will not have as much effect on the price of gasoline and such.

Re:I stopped flying.

[chrismcb]

So have I, including being willing to spend about 5 days and a not-insignificant amount of money to travel from Ohio to California by rail. Which I consider to be a small price to pay for not having my rights trampled.

It seems like a common theme lately. "If you don't like foo don't participate" Well NOT flying isn't the way to stop the TSA. There are too many people flying. What is worse, is TSA's mandate actually covers more than airlines, they also include Rails. What will you do when they start doing the same thing at the rail station? The time to fight is now.

Re:I stopped flying.

[PopeRatzo]

Costs go up, and that makes prices go up as well.

I'm glad someone else is willing to admit that the "law of supply and demand" is a canard in a corporatized society.

All this stuff we hear about drilling for oil and pipelines will bring down the price of gasoline because of "the law of supply and demand" makes me crazy. I have to constantly explain why with the global marketplace and with a speculative futures market, we are disconnected from any "supply and demand" effect.

Jet fuel is one of many products from crude,so zero jet fuel demand will not have as much effect on the price

Absolutely right. I have to admit I was baiting with this one. That's why I formed it as a question, "What happens to price when demand drops" and all that.

Re:I stopped flying.

[zippthorne]

... but at the moment, no, [rail travel is] nothing like travelling by air.

Unfortunately, neither are the prices...

Re:I stopped flying.

[Anonymous Coward]

It depends, if you live in the united states the prices stagnate when demand by anyone who's not the public goes down. That's perfectly good money to pocket that nobody will notice!

Re:I stopped flying.

[swalve]

How about you explain how speculators in the futures market can change prices?

Re:I stopped flying.

[Anonymous Coward]

"It is my fond hope that your decision not to fly is taken up by a majority of wide Americans."

There fixed that for ya.

Re:I stopped flying.

[Anonymous Coward]

Except that bomb and drug dogs react very well to the "Clever Hans" phenomenon. Testing under interestingly-blinded circumstances (Rooms with boxes, box with bomb marked with red rag, box with bomb unmarked, box with drugs marked with rag, box with drugs unmarked... In every room, a highly-trained(?) dog 'alerted', much more on the boxes with red flags, and yet - in every room there wasn't *any* bombs or drugs...)

AC

Re:I stopped flying.

[AK Marc]

Ah, so you are a liar. Got it.

Re:I stopped flying.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think we have a maxim: centralized government action exacerbates the problems it intends to alleviate.

Re:I stopped flying.

[tragedy]

Imagine that.

Re:I stopped flying.

[tragedy]

The chief use of drug-sniffing dogs seems to be to respond to signals by their handlers, thereby providing justification for a search.

Re:I stopped flying.

[ATMAvatar]

What's even more scary is the sentence after that:

If the new security measures are generating similar, or even smaller, substitutions and the driving risk has grown as hypothesized, the new methods could be contributing to more deaths annually on U.S. roads than have been experienced cumulatively since 9/11 from terrorism against air transportation targets around the world.

In terms of loss of life, it would be better to have 9/11 occur annually than to continue the current security measures o_0

Re:I stopped flying.

[Anonymous Coward]

Something like this happened in Moscow in 2011:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domodedovo_International_Airport_bombing

Good to see my old boss in the news

[ackthpt]

Kip was a decent boss at Skyway, too bad they didn't say 'No' to the jerks who bought out the company and ran it into the ground, while skimming money off the top, every stinking month.

Marvelously versatile

[overshoot]

Thermite makes a wonderful toothpaste...

Actually, by itself it's a powder mix. It's convenient to add a liquid binder to make a paste for easy application but it can also be pressed with any of several other binders into any number of solid forms. Plaques, for instance, to be awarded at a conference. Carry on 20 kg of award plaques and Security might ask to see them but they won't blink at you carrying them on. The rest is obvious to any sophomore engineering student.

And TSA knows about these [1], but since there's no practical way to screen for them they just hope that the Bad Guys are too stupid to bother with a sure-fire way to remove planes from the sky.

[1] And many, many others. Ask a sophomore engineering class to come up with methods and you can have hundreds. Fortunately, Bad Guys are never geeks.

Re:Marvelously versatile

[Anonymous Coward]

Fortunately, Bad Guys are never geeks.

Osama Bin Laden had a degree in Civil Engineering[1]. Al-Zawahiri is a surgeon[2]. The guy who tried to drive into Glasgow airport in a flaming Range Rover was a medical doctor. There are plenty of chemists and engineers who pop up all the time from inside the various Islamist terrorist groups.

[1] Reportedly
[2] Ditto

Re:Marvelously versatile

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Engineers are overrepresented among terrorists. Perhaps you can convince one that he'll get 70 especially attractive virgins if he repairs your sarcasm meter and then achieves martyrdom.

Re:Marvelously versatile

[superdave80]

Osama Bin Laden had a degree in Civil Engineering[1]

Yeah, but the old joke goes:

Q: What is the difference between a civil and aeronautical engineer?

A: An aeronautical engineer builds weapons. A civil engineer builds targets.

Osama was the wrong type of engineer to be a terrorist!

Re:Marvelously versatile

[jc42]

And Mohammed Atta, the leader of the World Trade Center attack team, had a degree in architecture. I've seen this factoid used to explain that the attack wasn't actually an act of terrorism; it was an act of artistic criticism. Atta was destroying what he and many others considered the ugliest blot on the New York City skyline.

Re:Marvelously versatile

[ozmanjusri]

Perhaps you can convince one that he'll get 70 especially attractive virgins if he repairs your sarcasm meter

Virgins on Slashdot? How likely is that?

Nope, still not working.

Re:Marvelously versatile

[maroberts]

Engineers are overrepresented among terrorists. Perhaps you can convince one that he'll get 70 especially attractive virgins if he repairs your sarcasm meter and then achieves martyrdom.

The conclusion appears to be there would be no need for airport security if you can get geeks, nerds and other engineers laid regularly. Maybe we should make it a law for all females between the ages of 17 and 35 to have a Slashdot uid.....

Re:Marvelously versatile

[Vlad_the_Inhaler]

Who said the virgins had to be female?

Re:Marvelously versatile

[David Gerard]

You joke, but this is literally the case. I can't find the link, but a lot of terrorists basically don't have a life, and getting them one actually breaks up the group. This was tried on (IIRC) the Black September group.

Re:Marvelously versatile

[ewanm89]

I'll just quote a great comedian:

Jeff Dunham: [Walter is complaining about suicide bombers] You know, Walter, those guys actually believe that if they martyred themselves like that, there'll be 72 virgins waiting for 'em in paradise.
Walter: Well, April Fool, dumb-ass! If there are virgins waiting for you, there'll be 72 guys just like you! "Oh, no, this is not what Osama said it would be!" Seventy-two virgins? Why not 72 slutty broads who know what the hell they're doing?

Re:Marvelously versatile

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, he made a nice target in the end.

Re:Marvelously versatile

[swalve]

Too soon.

Re:Marvelously versatile

[Anonymous Coward]

2 of them are from the medical field, I do not consider that science.

Physics, Chemistry, Math, and Engineering are the true science fields.

Re:Marvelously versatile

[PCM2]

Too soon.

Over a decade later is too soon? OK, I guess I'll switch to Pearl Harbor jokes.

Re:Marvelously versatile

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, in this case it will be 70 other civil engineering majors.

Re:Marvelously versatile

[Anonymous Coward]

No, no... miscommunication...

It's ONE virgin aged 70...

Re:Marvelously versatile

[Sun]

Please do try to find the link. As far as I know, Black September stopped its operation partly because many of its members (including their founder and chief) were assassinated by Mosad, and the rest because the PLO stopped caring about having a clean image, and thus stopped disassociating itself from terror, making the group unnecessary any more.

Shachar

Re:Marvelously versatile

[Anonymous Coward]

thats a way to see things http://adult-buffets.com

Re:Marvelously versatile

[David Gerard]

Found it! It's from All You Need Is Love: How the terrorists stopped terrorism in The Atlantic. Their own generals wanted to break up Black September, but couldn't come up with a way to get these ridiculously dedicated terrorists to stop:

My host, who was one of Abu Iyad's most trusted deputies, was charged with devising a solution. For months both men thought of various ways to solve the Black September problem, discussing and debating what they could possibly do, short of killing all these young men, to stop them from committing further acts of terror.

        Finally they hit upon an idea. Why not simply marry them off? In other words, why not find a way to give these men -- the most dedicated, competent, and implacable fighters in the entire PLO - a reason to live rather than to die? Having failed to come up with any viable alternatives, the two men put their plan in motion. ...

      So approximately a hundred of these beautiful young women were brought to Beirut. There, in a sort of PLO version of a college mixer, boy met girl, boy fell in love with girl, boy would, it was hoped, marry girl. There was an additional incentive, designed to facilitate not just amorous connections but long-lasting relationships. The hundred or so Black Septemberists were told that if they married these women, they would be paid $3,000; given an apartment in Beirut with a gas stove, a refrigerator, and a television; and employed by the PLO in some nonviolent capacity. Any of these couples that had a baby within a year would be rewarded with an additional $5,000.

        Both Abu Iyad and the future general worried that their scheme would never work. But, as the general recounted, without exception the Black Septemberists fell in love, got married, settled down, and in most cases started a family...the general explained, not one of them would agree to travel abroad, for fear of being arrested and losing all that they had -- that is, being deprived of their wives and children. 'And so', my host told me, 'that is how we shut down Black September and eliminated terrorism. It is the only successful case that I know of.'

That was the view from the inside, dunno how it squares with your knowledge. But that's the source I had, for what it's worth.

Re:Marvelously versatile

[KahabutDieDrake]

I've often laughed about this privately. You see, many years ago, in 8th grade I was in an advanced class called project science. Among many other things, we created contact explosives, a heat seeking missile, laser holography (including forging an existing hologram sticker), a rocket powered RC car capable of ground effect flight at over 150mph, and a dozen different chemical concoctions with various properties.

What makes all this funny is that it was an 8th grade class of school kids and a good teacher. Nothing more. So when people talk about airline security, I always chuckle a little bit. Off the top of my head, and for less than $1k, I could think of a couple ways to down a commercial aircraft. Most of which would not require a suicide bombing at all.

Fortunately, people with the kind of geeky knowledge to do it aren't motivated to do it. And the kind of people with the motivation rarely have the exposure to the tech needed. Which is actually kind of an interesting dynamic.

Re:Marvelously versatile

[Grishnakh]

Well whoever said that (obviously in jest) was right: the WTC was indeed a horribly ugly pair of buildings. From an engineering point-of-view, they were quite impressive, but aesthetically they were butt-ugly. Of course, being built in the early 1970s, I guess that shouldn't be a big surprise: just about everything made during that time was horribly ugly, namely in the architectural and automotive arenas. Somehow, music totally escaped this curse of the 70s, as there's tons of great music from that time. But the US would be better off if every building built in the 70s was demolished or at least "skinned", and every car from the 70s (except maybe the Bricklin) taken off the road and demolished or possibly placed in a museum for "how not to design a car".

Re:Marvelously versatile

[digitig]

Finally they hit upon an idea. Why not simply marry them off? In other words, why not find a way to give these men -- the most dedicated, competent, and implacable fighters in the entire PLO - a reason to live rather than to die?

Written by a single person, surely.

Re:Marvelously versatile

[David Gerard]

Sure, I'd want more verification of the idea than a single anecdote like this, but it's still interesting.

Re:Marvelously versatile

[Anonymous Coward]

Does this explain why amost of my Middle-Eastern Muslim students are in the engineering program? (or perhaps that is because the governments provide scholarships for engineering) Fortunately, they suck at math and science. They can BS up a storm, I mean along with stopping to pray a few times every day.

One thing to consider

[PPH]

a T-shirt with a picture of a gun on it

TSA agents are probably on a level with mall cops. Or lower. Some analyst probably evaluated the possibility of taking over an airliner with a fake gun. One way to slip a fake gun onto an airplane would be to make a cardboard replica that could be folded flat. With a couple of photos of a real gun affixed to the sides, and a terrorist waving it and screaming and the flight crew could be fooled. So a regulation was created to prohibit photos of guns. Now, if you explained that to a logical person, they could easily distinguish between a t-shirt print and a full sized side view of a semi-auto. TSA agents aren't hired for their judgment, but for their ability to follow rules. Simple rules. So the rule 'no pictures of guns' will be interpreted literally. And this will cover everything, including an image of Elmer Fudd with his double barreled shotgun.

Re:One thing to consider

[Anonymous Coward]

You make a decent attempt at a sensible explanation. Unfortunately, you're wrong.

I know something about this incident. It was quite simple. The security guard was pissed off - he had been in an argument with his boss earlier - and was looking to take it out on someone. He picked a teenager with a T shirt which had a picture of 'Optimus Prime' on it, and told him to take it off, simply because it looked flashy to him. There was not even any concern about the fact that all 'Transformer' robots hold a gun initially. The issue about the gun was raised later because the family made a fuss, and they were looking for a retrospective excuse. Of course, at that stage, all the guards stuck together and ordered the family off...

The point here is that, in the West, we have appointed people to 'look after us' and 'tell us what to do' in every conceivable activity in life. And a large portion of the people who apply for these jobs are assertive bullies. You can see it everywhere - people telling us what to eat, how much we should exercise, what kind of sex is legal... And when they run out of sensible things to tell us, they just start to make it up...

Re:One thing to consider

[PopeRatzo]

The point here is that, in the West, we have appointed people to 'look after us' and 'tell us what to do' in every conceivable activity in life.

Yet somehow, I manage to make it through every day with nobody but my wife telling me what to do.

If you think we're over-policed and over-regulated that's fine, but the notion that we've got someone "telling us what to do" in "every conceivable activity in life" is the kind of ridiculous hyperbole that would qualify you for a job as a right-wing AM radio host.

Can you say, "This government has taken away all our freedoms!" for me? And also, "They took our jobs!"?

Re:One thing to consider

[sunwukong]

You fool!

Now he's going to become a shock jock!

Re:One thing to consider

[Anonymous Coward]

is the kind of ridiculous hyperbole that would qualify you for a job as a right-wing AM radio host.

Only if he's interested in telling you what kind of sex is OK.

Re:One thing to consider

[Cosgrach]

A while back I was shopping in Trader Joe's and overhead a woman who was looking at the choices for hot dogs (of all things) exclaim 'So many choices, I wish that someone would tell me what to buy'. I can only make the assumption that she applies the very same logic to all the decisions that she has to make. It's a sad, sad world (or at least country) that we live in.

Re:One thing to consider

[Obfuscant]

Yet somehow, I manage to make it through every day with nobody but my wife telling me what to do.

is the kind of ridiculous hyperbole ...

The truth is, of course, somewhere in the middle. Everytime you stop your car at a stop sign, you are doing so because someone else told you to stop there, and that stop signs mean "stop". If you don't drive, you cross at marked crosswalks (are told to do so, even if you don't) and with the light (ditto).

You go through the checkout at the grocery store because someone told you you had to or else you'd be arrested for shoplifting (or simply can't get anything from the store). You clicked the "submit" button to post your comment because the person who programmed the webpage told you that you had to click the submit button to submit your comment.

There are thousands of pages of laws and rules and regulations telling us what we can and cannot do, whether we obey them or not. Don't blame them if they haven't covered "every conceivable activity in life". They're working as fast as they can to fill in the gaps. Their bosses told them to.

Re:One thing to consider

[0111 1110]

You do realize that not everyone likes the taste of boot sole? Would you be willing to be penetrated anally in order to fly?

Re:One thing to consider

[PopeRatzo]

Would you be willing to be penetrated anally in order to fly?

Are you coming on to me again? I don't want to have to another sexual harassment complaint against you, 0111 1110.

Re:One thing to consider

[slew]

The point here is that, in the West, we have appointed people to 'look after us' and 'tell us what to do' in every conceivable activity in life. And a large portion of the people who apply for these jobs are assertive bullies. You can see it everywhere - people telling us what to eat, how much we should exercise, what kind of sex is legal... And when they run out of sensible things to tell us, they just start to make it up...

Oh yeah, those people in the "east" are all easy going, right? Might want to check out some of the laws in Korea, Japan, China, India, Cambodia, Malaysia, etc... Of course the "middle-east" is even more easy going, right?

This is part of the human condition and why it's important to have democracies where you can get voted out of office (rather than have a civil war say like Syria). Of course many aren't doing their voting part in the "western" democracy very well (otherwize something as unpopular as the TSA would be eliminated long ago)...

Re:One thing to consider

[0111 1110]

He wasn't talking about laws. He was talking about the bully mentality of American LEOs and pseudo-LEOs. Having lived in several of the countries you listed I can tell you first hand that the cops and security personnel in those countries are much less likely to have been schoolyard bullies as children. I couldn't believe it at first, but LEOs outside the US are far more likely to be relatively normal people without any chips on their shoulders and without any violent cravings to bash your head in with their night sticks and torture you with their tasers and pepper spray while laughing joyously about it with their buddies. It has something to do with US culture. It encourages certain kinds of people to admire violence and seek jobs where they have opportunities to beat up people who cannot legally defend themselves against them and who are usually grossly outnumbered in any case.

As far as the US being a democracy, we actually aren't one. If we were a true democracy we would be able to abolish the DHS and TSA via direct popular vote. All we get to do is vote for people who then vote for which dictator we get to have. It's really a silly system. I think this is a perfect example of why a (constitutionally limited) true democracy would be preferable. Here's a situation where the majority is against a new kind of tyranny and yet there is nothing that we can do to stop it.

Re:One thing to consider

[Anonymous Coward]

The point here is that, in the West, we have appointed people to 'look after us' and 'tell us what to do' in every conceivable activity in life.

I am curious to know why you specify "here in the West". What part of the non-West do you have in mind where the people have done something different? Certainly not the authoritarian states like Russia, the communist dictatorships like China and North Korea, the military dictatorships like Myanmar, the theocracies like Iran, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, the absolute monarchies like Thailand, the oppressively conformist Japan and Singapore, ...

Re:One thing to consider

[UpnAtom]

Your story is awesome and somewhat plausible. However, do you have a source?

All I could find is that Megatron is banned because he can transform into a gun.
http://www.tfw2005.com/boards/transformers-news-rumors/343668-tsa-bans-transformers-flights.html

Re:One thing to consider

[Cajun Hell]

Everytime you stop your car at a stop sign, you are doing so because someone else told you to stop there, and that stop signs mean "stop"

There are traffic laws which people obey truly out of fear that authority's force will be used against them if they don't submit, but with stop signs you picked a terrible example.

You follow stop sign protocol not because a court will punish you for "disobeying", but because defecting from the shared convention will probably result in a collision.

You obey speed limit signs because someone tells you to. You obey stop signs because someone taught you to.

Re:One thing to consider

[tqk]

You go through the checkout at the grocery store because someone told you you had to or else you'd be arrested for shoplifting (or simply can't get anything from the store). You clicked the "submit" button to post your comment because the person who programmed the webpage told you that you had to click the submit button to submit your comment.

Some things you're expected to do because that's what makes that system work. Some things you're expected to do by argument from authority; edict.

It's good to distinguish between the two.

Re:One thing to consider

[tqk]

Of course many aren't doing their voting part in the "western" democracy very well (otherwize something as unpopular as the TSA would be eliminated long ago)...

You just keep on tellin' yourself that. "The system still works as it should!" Chyaa, right.

Your vote's worth less than snot.

Re:One thing to consider

[Anonymous Coward]

TSA agents are probably on a level with mall cops. Or lower.

I know for a fact that some TSA agents are former mall cops.
The city in which I live has three agents in the screening and pat-downs section who I know personally. Two of them used to work at a local Mall, one of them worked as a "guard" for a parking lot security company.
One of the three is a notorious horn-dog; all the women who worked with me at the building he patrolled described him as "Weird and creepy" because he followed them around and constantly bothered them for phone numbers. He was asked to resign when it was discovered that he'd been writing down the license plates of the more good-looking ladies, obtaining public records about them, calling them, sending emails, facebook requests, etc.

The USA is on my no-fly list

[Anonymous Coward]

(Not that that list was anything but a mental list, nevertheless)

I live in switzerland, and for the last three years I've traveled to america every year for a conference. This year I decided to go to a european conference instead, for the sole reason of TSA, Security Theater and having to essentially waive all my rights(!) just to be allowed to enter the country.

While I'm only one person, flying only once per year to america, I wonder how many others did the same.

Re:The USA is on my no-fly list

[CrackedButter]

The USA has been on my no-fly list since I was disgusted by the government's lies over Iraq.

Re:The USA is on my no-fly list

[overshoot]

While I'm only one person, flying only once per year to america, I wonder how many others did the same.

Add me to the list. I used to rack up about 50,000 frequent flyer miles a year for conferences and business in general. In the last six years I've flown a total of twice, and if I have to do it again I'll drive or (maybe) take a train. SF is only a long day's drive from Phoenix anyway and I have family at about halfway.

With retirement coming up I may never fly again.

Re:The USA is on my no-fly list

[Surt]

But if not for the TSA, you'd never retire? ;-)

Re:The USA is on my no-fly list

[WaffleMonster]

I live in switzerland, and for the last three years I've traveled to america every year for a conference. This year I decided to go to a european conference instead, for the sole reason of TSA, Security Theater and having to essentially waive all my rights(!) just to be allowed to enter the country.

While I'm only one person, flying only once per year to america, I wonder how many others did the same.

Its been a few years but from what I've seen hoops to get a US visa in the first place seemed to cause more people to abandon their plans than security measures.

This was before body scanning and groping were placed on the TSA menu so I imagine things are worse now.

I hope nobody wants to go the US anymore cause its what we deserve for treating our guests like shit.

Re:The USA is on my no-fly list

[Spliffster]

Also swiss here, I spend roughly $5-10K a year on holidays. I like the USA but, unfortunately, it is also on my no fly list for some years.

As an interesting fact, domestic flights in the US have been increasing up until 2006-2007, since then they are decreasing (per person and per number of flights).

http://www.bts.gov/xml/air_traffic/src/index.xml#CustomizeTable

Cheers,
-S

Re:The USA is on my no-fly list

[Corporate Gadfly]

Also swiss here, I spend roughly $5-10K a year on holidays. I like the USA but, unfortunately, it is also on my no fly list for some years.

As an interesting fact, domestic flights in the US have been increasing up until 2006-2007, since then they are decreasing (per person and per number of flights).

http://www.bts.gov/xml/air_traffic/src/index.xml#CustomizeTable

Cheers,
-S

Canada welcomes your Swiss Francs :-)

Re:The USA is on my no-fly list

[swalve]

1- There was a recession and a very slow recovery. That's going to eliminate a lot of travel.

2- Fuel prices have been going up a lot, and fuel is a big component of the price of an airline ticket.

Maybe some of the decline is due to security fatigue, not I doubt it is very much of it.

Re:The USA is on my no-fly list

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh please... Tell me what country you live in so I can point out a thousand ways it sucks. Douche bag governments are a world wide epidemic, we don't have sole rights to it. We just stand out more, because, well... Our country is literally more important than yours.

The lab called

[overshoot]

Your sarcasmometer is overdue for calibration.

Re:The lab called

[sunwukong]

I belive that's the first sign that terrorists are winning.

Re:The lab called

[Cajun Hell]

Oh, a sarcasmometer, that's a real useful invention!

Re:The lab called

[Anonymous Coward]

"Oh, a sarcasmometer, that's a really useful invention!"

A pedantometer is more useful.

Too Late... well, maybe.

[dfenstrate]

Of course, that assumes the TSA will remain restricted to airplanes...

I present to you the TSA VIPR program.

Note how it consists of some Mall Ninja acronym/name, like the murderous "Fast and the Furious" program put on by the justice department and ATF clowns.

The reason I suggest it might not be too late is because they pissed off Amtrak by molesting train passengers (leaving the train, no less), and were banned from Amtrak property for a while (still?).

So, at least a government-sponsored entity is willing to tell these jack-booted thugs to go pound sand.

Re:Too Late... well, maybe.

[sunwukong]

China, which has a far superior train system, has airport like security at its stations.

For some reason, though, I've found the Chinese security even at airports to be much more reasonable and even helpful compared to the NA variety, e.g.

guard: What's in your pocket?
Me: My hat.
guard (double take): But what's THAT?
Me: A banana.
guard: (laughs and waves me through)

Mind you, it's funnier in Mandarin.

Re:Too Late... well, maybe.

[0111 1110]

China, which has a far superior train system, has airport like security at its stations.

When did this start? I took a few Chinese trains about 12 years ago and there wasn't any security at all.

Re:Too Late... well, maybe.

[Anonymous Coward]

And I flew on an airplane 12 years ago and there was only token security. One would assume the answer to your question is-- Some time in the last twelve years.

Re:Too Late... well, maybe.

[Anonymous Coward]

For some reason, though, I've found the Chinese security even at airports to be much more reasonable

Chinese Security is far less invasive. I was flying from Beijing to DC last summer and I was TOLD to keep on my belt, sunglasses (which had metal frames), ring, watch, shoes, etc. When the metal detector went off, security simply scanned me with one of the metal detector wands and I was all clear.

Re:Too Late... well, maybe.

[Anonymous Coward]

Not sure, but they had it last year in Guangzhou.

Re:Too Late... well, maybe.

[Anonymous Coward]

There's no point making the "safety show" too long when every Chinese New Year at least a hundred million of them travel significant distances to return to their families. They can't slow things down too much.

If a terrorist really wanted to screw things up they could blow stuff up around that time - e.g train tracks, then once the trains are derailed, you blow up the train stations (where many would still be about). That would be a really evil thing to do of course.

It's so easy to destroy. You have to stop/discourage the terrorists before they even get to their targets.

Re:Too Late... well, maybe.

[AK Marc]

I took a train in Guangzhou just over 3 years ago and saw no security.

Re:Too Late... well, maybe.

[KDR_11k]

The Chinese answer may be "don't worry, we arrested the terrorists when they left their homes".

Re:Too Late... well, maybe.

[Ihmhi]

guard: What's in your pocket?
Me: My hat.
guard (double take): But what's THAT?
Me: A banana.
guard: (laughs and waves me through)

Mind you, it's funnier in Mandarin.

haha, no, it's plenty funny in English. Thanks for making my day a little funnier.

What's the defense against body cavity explosives?

[hawguy]

The TSA guy said that by preventing terrorists from using complicated liquid explosives, they have to move to more exotic explosives. Ignoring the very porous security perimeter of an airport (many tons of airline parts and supplies are trucked in every day, there's no way to inspect everything), what's going to keep a dedicated terrorist from using old fashioned C4 explosive hidden in an obvious body cavity. I've seen enough internet porn to know that with proper training and motivation, a quite sizeable chunk of explosives could be hidden within the body. With surgical help and no desire to stay alive for more than 12 hours, I suspect that even larger portions of explosives could be hidden within the body.

Hmm... It's bad, but would it be worse...

[Anonymous Coward]

...if the TSA's security theater operations were stopped today, and instead turned back over to the contractors that did it before 9/11?

How much response or visibility would we have over things if Wackenhut (now known as G4S. The spinoff detentions company is GEO Group), Academi (fka Blackwater, Xe, et al) , and other "security" contractors were doing what the TSA does now? Wasn't the previous way of doing airport security before the TSA with the airports contracting the job out to private security companies pretty much discredited? It did seem like good fodder for the local investigative journalists to "probe" airport security regularly (e.g., get weapons past passenger security check points, etc), in my case it was Seattle TV stations and Sea-Tac International... along with the occasional story of extra searches going off the rails, etc.

And we want to go back to the old way?

Why don't we just acknowledge that airport security is security theater. Maybe the theater is necessary to some degree (keeping honest people honest). But maybe we also need to acknowledge all it has really done is move the previous point of disaster from planes to the security check-ins. And hasn't done anything about security risks at the ticketing area.

Re:Hmm... It's bad, but would it be worse...

[jonwil]

I have no problems with the government (the TSA) in this case running airport security.
What is needed is to undo all the post 9/11 "Security Theater" (liquid ban, body scanners, pat-downs, nail clipper bans, toy guns being confiscated etc) and go back to a sane level of security.

Re:Hmm... It's bad, but would it be worse...

[Anonymous Coward]

What we *need* to do is make the airlines pay for the security. Why should my taxes subsidise an airport? We bailed out the airlines and can barely afford tickets. Then they started charging for baggage. WTF? Stop fucking flying for two months and watch shit change.

VIPR Teams

[Phoenix666]

You have not seen VIPR (Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response) teams in your local subway station. I have. The TSA and Department of Homeland Security are about to metastasize throughout the country in every form of transportation, including your private car. Yes, they're planning to do random traffic stops.

You know, when I was a kid during the Cold War one of the reasons we were the good guys and the Russians weren't was because here you could travel whereever you wanted throughout the land without once being asked, "Show me your papers, Comrade."

There are a lot of Americans who remember those times, too. Many of them are heavily armed. The TSA and Department of Homeland Security had better consider very carefully that they are on the brink of provoking an armed citizen response to their overreach.

Re:VIPR Teams

[Anonymous Coward]

Except most of you Cold War kids decided to raise your own kids to fear terrorists lurking around every corner, telling them that all of these measures are necessary.

With any luck, they'll grow up and turn their youthful fascism into adult progressivism. Kind of like a reverse hippie generation.

Re:VIPR Teams

[Phoenix666]

No, not at all. I was in New York on 9/11. I saw the towers fall. I felt the ground shake. The smoke columns blew right over our heads and bits of burning paper landed everywhere.

But even after all that I adamantly opposed the creation of the TSA and the Department of Homeland Security. "Homeland?" What the hell is a "Homeland?" Certainly has nothing to do with America. Homeland sounds like Fatherland or Motherland, neither of which we want to be associated with. America was, is, and only ever shall be the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.

Bravo, Mr. Schneier.

[jcr]

He's doing a marvelous job of systematically shredding the bullshit that the TSA is trying to sell.

-jcr

Re:What's the defense against body cavity explosiv

[OrigamiMarie]

. . . surgical help and no desire to stay alive for more than 12 hours . . .

There have been a number of stories about TSA getting very curious about fresh surgical scars.

Re:Other favourite quote from Mr C

[Phrogman]

Woman (to Churchill): "Sir, you are drunk!"
Churchill: "Madam, you are ugly! And tomorrow morning, I shall be sober!"

Re:What's the defense against body cavity explosiv

[Anonymous Coward]

I suspect that even larger portions of explosives could be hidden within the body.

Prior art waiting to become reality.

Just one step up from the 'suicide jackets' in use today....

In Australia ..

[Anonymous Coward]

... the airports are federal territory and staffed by state police. That is currently being changed so federal police (USA: think FBI) manage security. And all international airports recently had body scanners installed.

Re:What's the defense against body cavity explosiv

[hawguy]

. . . surgical help and no desire to stay alive for more than 12 hours . . .

There have been a number of stories about TSA getting very curious about fresh surgical scars.

I've never had to disrobe for a TSA scan, how would they even know I have a fresh sugical scar?

Structural solution

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

> more intelligence-driven

An Israeli expert suggested separating risk assessment from implementation. A simple organizational change, but it would mean that the TSA could no longer expand its empire by exaggerating risks.

Don't be a dumbass

[tlambert]

normally would not use the term "dumbass"..

The amount of economic damage from one talcum powder bomb in a chip fab says you are looking at the wrong metrics for what terrorism hopes to accomplish.

-- Terry

Hydra Control Freak

[hcfreak]

We have just launched a brand new low cost product called Hydra Control Freak. After persistent troubles over a few years in and around my property my home evolved system was getting pretty good and I decided it would be great to commercialise it. It's not well known yet as the first production run was finished just before Christmas and we are not a large company. Our focus is on proactive early warning video alerting and then flexible real world responses initiated from your smart phone. The idea is that several sensors placed around your property alert you via SMS (Or E-mail if you refer) with links allowing you to see video of what triggered the sensor (It records before the trigger event to ensure this) and provides for very flexible real world response from smart phone buttons.

We aim to provide extremely fast alert verification (A few seconds of the breaching of a sensor you will already be viewing the video stream [MJPG or a Pseudo MJPG stream for Android and other phones]) and your real world response can be very flexible as we support a flexible range of third party output devices. Currently, we support Phidget 4, 8 and 16 port I/O devices for input and output events and responses as well as the cm15a X10 Controller. We aim to support the RFXCOM transceiver shortly as well which will add support to a wide range of home automation products. For sensor input it's best to use quality professional PIRs. For Europe we support a quality sensor from an Italian company called CST Europa that breaks out it's wireless sensors (Multi tech PIR, Microwave, PIR, curtain and door sensors) into a relay box which you can then wire into the Phidget inputs. These have a great range. If you have enough repeaters you can get some milage out of X10 PIRs such as MS13 as well, but their range is not great. Or you can wire in sensors, this gives you a lot of choice, such as PIRs, trip beams etc. By triggering both home automation devices as well as custom I/O you can do things such as trip flood lights and set off alarms before the intruder has entered your home.

Everything about our device is about flexibility and interoperability. You can create pages of custom buttons and then link up those buttons to any manner of events by the gui driven event processor. Some of the output events can be used to add "state" then affects whether other events can fire or not. This state can also have a time to live so you can create actions that must happen without periods of time. In this way for example by using two PIRs you can easily make an alert that triggers on incoming movement (Approximately) but not out going. You would make the one sensor add some state with a short time to live, that like a firewall allows you to walk past the second sensor without triggering the alert. The other way around would immediately send the alert. That sort of thing is easy to do with HCF

Clustering and video slices : Each device can record approx 3-4 video streams depending on the resolution but they can communicate with each other regarding events recording across multiple devices but registering to the same event to the millisecond. There is a view builder page that allows you to build up views or slices across your freaks that line up events that relate to the same trigger. This is automatic, you add the credentials and details of the other freaks in your cluster and when you build your view it queries the cluster partners to see what cameras it has available and alters the selection gui so you can choose between multiple freaks for your current view (Which can also restrict time of day range and event names).

Full HTTPS: The devices comes with a gui-driven trust manager that supports the generation of self signed certificates or the importing of CA signed certificate chains.

WebM: I think ours is the first security device that supports the open WebM format. Please contact me if you know of another, I've not seen one yet.

Scheduled events: You can setup flexible daily events with the same level of flexibility on what th

Re:Hydra Control Freak

[hcfreak]

Sorry. Accidentally posted to the wrong thread. Sigh... :-(

Re:What's the defense against body cavity explosiv

[lars_stefan_axelsson]

what's going to keep a dedicated terrorist from using old fashioned C4 explosive hidden in an obvious body cavity. I've seen enough internet porn to know that with proper training and motivation, a quite sizeable chunk of explosives could be hidden within the body

Al Queda apparently also watches internet porn. They've already tried this attack against a saudi prince (head of counter terrorism in Saudi).

If the attacker in that case had had the sense to use a lavatory and extract the bomb (or turn the right way) the attack would most likely have been successful.

But you're right. Since there's no reasonable way to defend against this attack, we're all just ignoring it and pretending it doesn't exist. The reason we haven't seen it used against an airliner is that there just aren't enough terrorists to be worth screening for. (Intelligence and god old fashioned police work, yes. Screening at air ports, not so much.

The TSA itself creates the greatest hazard.

[jcr]

Why would a terrorist bent on making bloody mayhem even bother with forging an ID? He could just wander into the crowd of people waiting for the security theater ritual. There's a far higher density of people there than you get on a plane, and it would certainly get just as much press as bringing a plane down.

Of course, there's another thing that Bruce is too polite to mention about the security theater is that its actual purpose is to compel the public to make a conspicuous show of obedience to arbitrary, useless, and idiotic authority figures. They might as well just demand a stiff-arm salute and a heel click in the direction of a photo of the Godlike Leader Whom We All Love Or Else.

-jcr

Re:What's the defense against body cavity explosiv

[chrismcb]

The TSA guy said that by preventing terrorists from using complicated liquid explosives,

Instead the "terrorists" dump their explosives in the garbage can next to the security line.
You either treat that bottle of water as a bomb, and dispose of it properly. Or you let me take it on the plane.

Swiss knife

[Anonymous Coward]

I actually flew with a swiss knife in my handluggage. United flight from Frankfurt, Germany to Washington DC (IAD). I was checked twice in Frankfurt (by Germans and Americans), the knife got entangled in a plastic cover for a notebook .... didnt catch attention (parody). So .... that's about the airport security. Let's not forget the Madrid international, where when you get off an international flight, You can 'squeeze' through into the international departures (outside Schengen Zone) because someone forgot the lock up the automatic door. Regarding that swiss knife thingy .... I actually realized I have it when looking into my backpak for the laptop. Almost felt like taking it out and peeling off the orange. Didnt want to end up on CNN. Anyways, the security business is doing well. Body scanners sell like pancakes and US Taxpayers are made money off. All you have to do is convince ppl about threats on CNN/FOX etc ... Ppl will believe it.

Oooh -- I *LIKE* that one.

[overshoot]

The lovely thing about mercury is that it's slow. The attacker stands an excellent chance of being off the plane and gone before it falls apart in the air on a later flight.

Re:Oooh -- I *LIKE* that one.

[RockDoctor]

The economic cost of the rumour of mercury on it's own would be ... substantial.

Re:Oooh -- I *LIKE* that one.

[Man On Pink Corner]

Yep. If they had reason to believe someone had released mercury in a cargo hold, the outcome would be like the old practical joke where someone releases two pigs in their high school building late at night, with "#1" spray-painted on one of them and "#3" on the other.

They will never find pig #2, but they will take the whole school apart with a screwdriver looking for it.

That's basically the TSA's entire organizational charter: "Find Pig #2."

Recurse you, CH!

[overshoot]

Further deponent sayeth naught.

The Economist

[xbytor]

> The Economist is left leaning by U.S. standards

This may be true; I haven't read it regularly in a couple of years. But I do think it's true that extremists in either US party would find much of what appears in The Economist very uncomfortable. It's probably the most fair and balanced news source around these days and most USians aren't accustomed with that.

Re:The TSA itself creates the greatest hazard.

[swalve]

My question for this position is always: "why?" Why would the government want a bunch of sheep?

Re:What's the defense against body cavity explosiv

[Teun]

You either treat that bottle of water as a bomb, and dispose of it properly. Or you let me take it on the plane.

You tell the security monkey :)

TSA

[HArchH]

TSA stands for Teamsters, Service Workers, and AFL/CIO. It makes work for the otherwise unemployable.

On the one hand, thank god there are some rules to constrain what these morons can do to as a security checkpoints. On the other hand, I want my pocket knife back that these pricks took from me in San Diego, just this week (Swiss Army "Super Tinker" model with its devastatingly dangerous 2.5" blade, $20 on Amazon.COM). (Note that neither of those hands speaks positively about the TSA.) I get so tired of having to be so polite to those people just so I can get through their little power bubble with the least amount of hassle.

I think it was Schneier that said there are only two real improvements to airline security since 9/11:
1. Locking cockpit doors
2. Passengers that fight back

Everything they do at TSA checkpoints is ineffective window dressing.

Re:The TSA itself creates the greatest hazard.

[HArchH]

My question for this position is always: "why?" Why would the government want a bunch of sheep?

Isn't this what every government that ever existed wants/wanted? Governments don't exist FOR the people, they think the people exist FOR them. Sadly, but not surprisingly, the US federal government (as well as those of the other major democracies) lost sight of the real reason it exists long ago.

Re:The TSA itself creates the greatest hazard.

[swalve]

Again, why? Why do they want that?

Re:Other favourite quote from Mr C

[Terrasque]

Lady Astor once said to Churchill, "If you were my husband, I'd poison your tea," to which he responded, "Madam, if you were my wife, I'd drink it!"

Re:What's the defense against body cavity explosiv

[Anonymous Coward]

You are presuming a defense is in place already (recall: zero terrorists stopped thus far). And that a legitimate threat exists in the first place (1 in 3.5 million chance of dying to terrorism).

"what's going to keep a dedicated terrorist from using old fashioned C4 explosive hidden in an obvious body cavity."

The same thing that will keep me from winning the lottery. Statistics.

Re:The TSA itself creates the greatest hazard.

[HArchH]

I believe, but I can't cite the source, that the main goal of any government is to prolong its existence.

Finding new ways to increase the scope of government, beyond its chartered responsibility, is a means to this end. Having citizens object to this expansion, and push back on the expansion of scope, is counter to this direction. If the citizens learn that they can somehow, someway, live without the government being involved in something, it means that people in government will become redundant. And if that starts happening it might snowball. Isn't this the basis of revolution? Instead, if people conform to the will of the government and continue to fund its expansion of scope, then all those in positions of minor power (like TSA stiffs at the airports) are safe. Isn't this the basis of enslavement?

Government is about power, and power is about money. Being required to demonstrate value to maintain your income is something to be avoided, if you can get away it it, no?

“The purpose of government is to enable the people of a nation to live in safety and happiness. Government exists for the interests of the governed, not for the governors.” Thomas Jefferson

Re:The TSA itself creates the greatest hazard.

[jcr]

Why would the government want a bunch of sheep?

Why does a shepherd want a bunch of sheep?

The more docile people are, the more government can take from them.

-jcr