Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

TSA Admits In Leaked Doc: No Evidence of Terrorist Plots Against Aviation in US

tsaoutofourpants.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 129 posts

Re: TSA Admits In Leaked Doc: No Evidence of Terrorist Plots Against Aviation in US

#101

Post by growupkids »

jstalin wrote: post #59

The GAO regularly audits the TSA by trying to get firearms and other contraband through security. They consistently get a lot through without the TSA noticing: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/loaded-gun-slips-past-tsa-scre...

This is all deplorable, but the solution to incompetence isn't to stop doing something altogether if it could be better. The solution is to get better people, methods and equipment. There's a big difference between what may work but isn't being done well, and what can't possibly work.

Re: TSA Admits In Leaked Doc: No Evidence of Terrorist Plots Against Aviation in US

#102

Post by growupkids »

Amadou wrote: post #95
ethomson wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read years ago (and can't now find the article) that the TSA screeners didn't really care about catching these guns. The TSA tested them by slipping one (or a few) fake guns into luggage. If I recall, a screener said something along the lines of "we don't have to catch all guns. We only have to catch those guns." Sigh.

He's right. When there is no real threat, it doesn't matter how incompetent they are. As long as nothing bad happens you can't tell the difference between effective security and incompetence. You can tell on the micro-scale like those test weapons, but not on the macro scale where budgeting and oversight decisions are made.

I'm sorry, there's no real threat? Lack of intelligence supporting a specific threat is very different from a general threat. Is the supposition here that because we don't know if anyone is currently targeting aviation that we shouldn't defend against those threats? Even if those threats existed in the near past?

I guess I'm not tracking the conclusion that there is no real threat. So there's no current intelligence showing any specific plots exist. That's good. Have there been plots in the past? Yes. Why did they stop? Does this mean there won't be any in the future?

Perhaps because airliners are a pITa to target? Is the threat actor really gone? Are they targeting something else?

I guess I find it hard to believe that the kind of wackjob so we've seen out there are suddenly kicking back and have retired from the terrorist scene. If the threat actor is still there, and previously target aviation, why did they stop?

Re: TSA Admits In Leaked Doc: No Evidence of Terrorist Plots Against Aviation in US

#103

Post by growupkids »

tokenizer wrote: post #92
zzzeek wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Airports should have security. Every country has security in their airports but wait, in your response to me you said that the line people wait on for security checks is just as big a terrorist hazard as the plane itself. How are you not contradicting yourself here? Which is it, we wait on lines for metal detectors or not ?

Security doesn't have to mean inspection lines or profiling. It could mean guards walking around, like in an apartment complex or mall. It could mean people watching CCTV. This could all be done by the airline. They don't want bombings just as much as you or I. The only difference is they don't have an incentive to create a regulation that forces people to subject themselves to embarrassment or harassment. Where is t…

But airlines provided the security before 9/11 and failed at that job miserably.

Re: TSA Admits In Leaked Doc: No Evidence of Terrorist Plots Against Aviation in US

#104

Post by growupkids »

Amadou wrote: post #97
k2enemy wrote: post #15

I'm a huge critic of the TSA and would be thrilled to see it dismantled, but I always find these kinds of arguments a little intellectually dishonest. It could be that “terrorist threat groups present in the Homeland are not known to be actively plotting against civil aviation targets or airports” because we have scanners in place that deter that kind of threat. Now, I don't believe this is the case, as plenty of res…

the "no active threat" argument by itself doesn't get us very far. By that logic, we should remove security at Fort Knox because it never gets robbed. Security needs to be proportional to the risk. We know there are plenty of people who would make off with the gold in Fort Knox if they could because hold-ups and bank-robberies happen all the time. We do know the level of risk that the TSA is defending against is minu…

That doesn't follow. The TSA may be deterring terrorists for airlines, or they may not.

But the fact that they don't protect other things, like malls, doesn't change that possibility. You are right terrorists can target softer targets, and have recently done just that. And it may be because because of heightened security at other places that they are starting to choose softer targets. If you want to kill a lot of people and get a lot of attention, go where lots of people are that will have a big media reaction and where the security sucks.

Re: TSA Admits In Leaked Doc: No Evidence of Terrorist Plots Against Aviation in US

#105

Post by Retric »

growupkids wrote: post #102
Amadou wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's right. When there is no real threat, it doesn't matter how incompetent they are. As long as nothing bad happens you can't tell the difference between effective security and incompetence. You can tell on the micro-scale like those test weapons, but not on the macro scale where budgeting and oversight decisions are made.

I'm sorry, there's no real threat? Lack of intelligence supporting a specific threat is very different from a general threat. Is the supposition here that because we don't know if anyone is currently targeting aviation that we shouldn't defend against those threats? Even if those threats existed in the near past? I guess I'm not tracking the conclusion that there is no real threat. So there's no current intelligence…

We have no evidence to suggest invisible dragons are about to attack. But, that's no reason to avoid my multi-billion dollar anto dragon defense system now is there?

9/11 was a mild success but there is little reason to think it would work again simply because of reinforced cockpit doors.

Re: TSA Admits In Leaked Doc: No Evidence of Terrorist Plots Against Aviation in US

#106

Post by mikeash »

Retric wrote: post #105
growupkids wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, there's no real threat? Lack of intelligence supporting a specific threat is very different from a general threat. Is the supposition here that because we don't know if anyone is currently targeting aviation that we shouldn't defend against those threats? Even if those threats existed in the near past? I guess I'm not tracking the conclusion that there is no real threat. So there's no current intelligence…

We have no evidence to suggest invisible dragons are about to attack. But, that's no reason to avoid my multi-billion dollar anto dragon defense system now is there? 9/11 was a mild success but there is little reason to think it would work again simply because of reinforced cockpit doors.

Reinforced cockpit doors, and certain knowledge by passengers that they will die if they don't fight back against hijackers. Those are huge security improvements as a result of 9/11, and arguably the only security improvements. Everything else is a smokescreen and a giant waste of money, but those are effective, would stop another shot at a 9/11-style attack, and have stopped several attacks already.

Re: TSA Admits In Leaked Doc: No Evidence of Terrorist Plots Against Aviation in US

#107

Post by DanBC »

Retric wrote: post #105
growupkids wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, there's no real threat? Lack of intelligence supporting a specific threat is very different from a general threat. Is the supposition here that because we don't know if anyone is currently targeting aviation that we shouldn't defend against those threats? Even if those threats existed in the near past? I guess I'm not tracking the conclusion that there is no real threat. So there's no current intelligence…

We have no evidence to suggest invisible dragons are about to attack. But, that's no reason to avoid my multi-billion dollar anto dragon defense system now is there? 9/11 was a mild success but there is little reason to think it would work again simply because of reinforced cockpit doors.

> 9/11 was a mild success

9/11 caused billions of dollars of economic damage, and we are still suffering the (stupid, self-imposed) effects - shuffling through airport security without our shoes, mass fingerprint surveillance, longer travel times, etc.

9/11 caused two wars, killing many thousands of soldiers, and maiming very many more, and those people now need expensive medical treatment and rehabilitation and benefits and etc.

Re: TSA Admits In Leaked Doc: No Evidence of Terrorist Plots Against Aviation in US

#108

Post by DannyBee »

tedunangst wrote: post #45
DannyBee wrote: post #6

Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol must be working like a charm.

Why not say "Not a bear in sight. Bears must not exist."?

It's a reference to the simpsons, the episode "Much Apu about nothing". http://www.snpp.com/episodes/3F20.html

Search for "not a bear in sight"

Re: TSA Admits In Leaked Doc: No Evidence of Terrorist Plots Against Aviation in US

#109

Post by chrismcb »

growupkids wrote: post #101
jstalin wrote: post #59

The GAO regularly audits the TSA by trying to get firearms and other contraband through security. They consistently get a lot through without the TSA noticing: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/loaded-gun-slips-past-tsa-scre...

This is all deplorable, but the solution to incompetence isn't to stop doing something altogether if it could be better. The solution is to get better people, methods and equipment. There's a big difference between what may work but isn't being done well, and what can't possibly work.

You are assuming that something needs to be done, that something "needs to work." In reality we would be just as safer (actually safer) if we did away with TSA, than we are now.

Re: TSA Admits In Leaked Doc: No Evidence of Terrorist Plots Against Aviation in US

#110

Post by chrismcb »

tokenizer wrote: post #32
k2enemy wrote: post #15

I'm a huge critic of the TSA and would be thrilled to see it dismantled, but I always find these kinds of arguments a little intellectually dishonest. It could be that “terrorist threat groups present in the Homeland are not known to be actively plotting against civil aviation targets or airports” because we have scanners in place that deter that kind of threat. Now, I don't believe this is the case, as plenty of res…

> By that logic, we should remove security at Fort Knox because it never gets robbed. Airports should have security. Every country has security in their airports. Where it crosses the line are when you have the security preemptively treat you like a criminal, and violate your personhood without justification other than a blanket statement of "terrorists". Security ! always have to = Neo-Fascism. But many people feel…

Why should airports have security? Just because other countries have security, doesn't mean the airport needs security. I don't know of any other transportation that requires airport like security, why are airports so special? I've seen bomb sniffing dogs at train stations, and cops patrolling, but no patdowns, or forced searches.
Post reply on HN