Very similar to "The Things He Carried" by The Atlantic back in 2008. Bruce Schneier shows how worthless the TSA is.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/11/the-thin...
Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA
11–20 of 101 posts
Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA
#12I wish we could get rid of the TSA and spend that resources somewhere else, CIA, FBI, NSA, hell send it to DoE, NSF, maybe fund (more) research in practical(?) renewable energy. But killing the TSA is never going to happen. No career politician is going to commit political harikiri to shut it down. - I do not mind the free hand rubs at the airports though.
I've thought about that and I wonder if it couldn't be gotten rid of by scaling back its activities over time and merging its duties into another organization until it gets swallowed whole.
Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA
#13Fantastic article!
One point I've read elsewhere is that successful Islamic terrorists are a single-use resource, what with their habit of killing themselves during the attack. This means all their terrorism skills are lost with the successful attack, and the pool of competent terrorists shrinks. Not to mention, the wealth of experience and on-the-ground information is lost as well.
Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA
#14I agree with most of the points in this article, but saying that all people who forge boarding passes will use latex gloves seems false. From my point of view the point of multiple screenings is to increase the difficulty and complexity of pulling off a particular attack. Sure, individually you can think of a way to counter each one, but as you add constraints you reduce the pool of people willing and able to pull it…
It's more "all people who forge boarding passes with the intent of using the plane as part of a terroristic plot will use latex gloves if they also have a bomb."
The point was that multiple layers are only useful if they test different thing. I'm more inclined to believe that those two layers are "tantamount to performing the same test twice" because they can both be done before the fact, and planned for.
The problem about multiplying enough 0.95s together is the number of false positives that occur. The article mentions one, where an air marshal killed a deranged passenger in Miami. That's an extreme case. Hidden is the, what, 5 minutes needed for screening * 700 million passengers per year giving over 6,000 extra person-years wasted waiting on security every year.
Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA
#15Why wouldn't terrorists hijack private planes now? Some of them are quite large.
If we want to see the TSA go away, start hassling the billionaires.
But airports are so passe anyway, TSA has moved onto buses, trains and now car searches, journalists are way behind.
Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA
#16Fantastic article! One point I've read elsewhere is that successful Islamic terrorists are a single-use resource, what with their habit of killing themselves during the attack. This means all their terrorism skills are lost with the successful attack, and the pool of competent terrorists shrinks. Not to mention, the wealth of experience and on-the-ground information is lost as well.
The people with the knowledge are the bombmakers etc; the people carrying the bombs need very little knowledge apart from "push the button at the right time".
Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA
#17Fantastic article! One point I've read elsewhere is that successful Islamic terrorists are a single-use resource, what with their habit of killing themselves during the attack. This means all their terrorism skills are lost with the successful attack, and the pool of competent terrorists shrinks. Not to mention, the wealth of experience and on-the-ground information is lost as well.
The people with the knowledge are the bombmakers etc; the people carrying the bombs need very little knowledge apart from "push the button at the right time".
[deleted]
Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA
#18Fantastic article! One point I've read elsewhere is that successful Islamic terrorists are a single-use resource, what with their habit of killing themselves during the attack. This means all their terrorism skills are lost with the successful attack, and the pool of competent terrorists shrinks. Not to mention, the wealth of experience and on-the-ground information is lost as well.
The people with the knowledge are the bombmakers etc; the people carrying the bombs need very little knowledge apart from "push the button at the right time".
[deleted]
Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA
#19I'm afraid most of what the government does is theater - meant to distract us while they line their own pockets.
I'm afraid because I know that's what they're doing, and they know that's what they're doing.
Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA
#20The last time I went through the airport they did the hand wipe thing. I said "You think terrorist are smart enough to wear gloves when working with chemical explosives?" She shrugged and said "All Clear!"
I'm surprised she didnt give you a more thorough screening after the comment.
I'm surprised he was even let through the checkpoint after that comment.