• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

The failures of TSA are staggering

DaveT319

Marquez FTW
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Location
Veneta, OR
Moto(s)
None
Name
Dave
BARF perks
AMA #: #1066508
So the pat-downs and body scanners aren't because of new threats, but because TSA just sucks at their job...

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/loade...reeners/story?id=12412458&cid=yahoo_pitchlist

Gaping Holes in Airline Security: Loaded Gun Slips Past TSA Screeners
Secret Tests At LAX, O'Hare, Newark Show TSA Screeners Missed Guns, Bombs


By MATTHEW MOSK, ANGELA HILL and TIMOTHY FLEMING
Dec. 16, 2010

Last fall, as he had done hundreds of times, Iranian-American businessman Farid Seif passed through security at a Houston airport and boarded an international flight.

He didn't realize he had forgotten to remove the loaded snub nose "baby" Glock pistol from his computer bag. But TSA officers never noticed as his bag glided along the belt and was x-rayed. When he got to his hotel after the three-hour flight, he was shocked to discover the gun traveled unnoticed from Houston.

"It's just impossible to miss it, you know. I mean, this is not a small gun," Seif told ABC News. "How can you miss it? You cannot miss it."

But the TSA did miss it, and despite what most people believe about the painstaking effort to screen airline passengers and their luggage before they enter the terminal, it was not that unusual.

Experts tell ABC News that every year since the September 11 terror attacks, federal agencies have conducted random, covert "red team tests," where undercover agents try to see just how much they can get past security checks at major U.S. airports. And while the Department of Homeland Security closely guards the results as classified, those that have leaked in media reports have been shocking.

According to one report, undercover TSA agents testing security at a Newark airport terminal on one day in 2006 found that TSA screeners failed to detect concealed bombs and guns 20 out of 22 times. A 2007 government audit leaked to USA Today revealed that undercover agents were successful slipping simulated explosives and bomb parts through Los Angeles's LAX airport in 50 out of 70 attempts, and at Chicago's O'Hare airport agents made 75 attempts and succeeded in getting through undetected 45 times.

Despite the results, there is no sign that the numbers have changed as the screeners have been tested year after year, former Department of Homeland Security Inspector General Clark Kent Ervin told ABC News.

"Those reports were classified but it's sufficing to say that reports, both classified and unclassified, are concerning. Too often guns and knives and fake explosives get through the checkpoint," Ervin said. "And what is particularly concerning is that nine times out of 10 the checkpoint is the most critical layer of aviation security."

Ervin said a combination of factors is likely to blame for the persistent failures on the part of screeners. Low pay, poor training, and the monotony involved in watching bags pass through x-ray machines are a recipe for trouble, Ervin said.

"To be fair to screeners, it's very difficult work," he said. "After so many hours of seeing things that are innocuous, there's really a limit for the human brain to process something anomalous."

Last month, TSA Chief John Pistole told ABC News that the poor performance during undercover tests helped convince him that airport screening needed to get that much tougher -- and a desire to do better helped give rise to the controversial new regimen that includes enhanced pat-downs and back-scatter machines that can see beneath a traveler's clothing.

"We've had a series of reports actually going back several years from the inspector general, from the General Accounting Office, and our own TSA Office of Inspection, where they do, as you describe, covert testing," Pistole acknowledged to George Stephanopoulos last month during an interview on Good Morning America. "And unfortunately, [undercover testers] have been very successful over the years. And one of the findings is that we have not been thorough enough. And the concern obviously is, if that's an Abdulmutallab -- a Christmas Day bomber -- who is doing it rather than an undercover agent, then that can have catastrophic results."

For Seif, the discovery that he had accidentally carried a handgun on an international flight from Houston came as a shock. Rather than let the incident pass, he told ABC News he felt duty-bound to alert authorities to what he considered a gaping hole in security. When he met with Homeland Security officials upon his return to Houston, he said they appeared eager to remedy the problem.

"They were very embarrassed, you know," Seif said. "And -- and they should be, you know. It's -- we're talking about total failure."

TSA spokesman Greg Soule provided ABC News with a statement saying the agency was aware of the year-old incident and had taken steps to address it.

"We conducted an immediate investigation and remedial training was provided to the security officers involved," the statement said.

While it may seem odd for a traveler to walk into an airport with a gun in his carry-on luggage, Soule noted that it happens more often than most people think. Posted on TSA's web site is a count of handguns confiscated by screeners at security checkpoints each week. During the first week in December, screeners found 14 firearms, the website says.

But the agency will not comment on the performance by screeners in undercover testing. Homeland Security officials have determined that any details on performance at checkpoints could provide a road map for terrorists, said the TSA's Soule.

Sen. Charles Grassley, the Iowa Republican who called on the Government Accountability Office to conduct its own, independent covert tests of airport screening, decried the decision to classify the results as a national security secret.

"Those results aren't going to help terrorists figure out how to better attack us, and they certainly aren't going to give them any more motivation to try than they already have," Grassley said on the senate floor in September. "Keeping the results secret will accomplish one thing, however. It will ensure that the public has no idea how effective our airport screening strategy actually is."
 
They were too busy grabbing cock to look for weapons.
 
lemmie give you a pat down to make sure you arent hiding molded explosives on your body but lets not worry about your bag carrying a glock. those numbers are just showing you how useless TSA is.

why didnt they miss my dive knife when i forgot it in a carry on bag once.....
 
:facepalm ABCnews. That was a stupid news article with a lot of BS.

You dont like ABC news, we get it. Do you dispute content of the article? Are you saying that TSA is on top of things?
 
You sound surprised/shocked/outraged.........Why would that be? You do know that Mega tons of drugs, and illegal to enter the USA people, and counterfeit
products...cross our borders, our air and sea terminals every day, right?

Good point.
 
You dont like ABC news, we get it. Do you dispute content of the article? Are you saying that TSA is on top of things?

Im a former TSA screener, agent, security official, whatever they call them these days. Hated that job more than anything and am finally happy they are getting exposed for all the BS they are doing. But that article has so many unreliable information in it or these reporters are flipping words around that it is just plain silly . Where are they getting these reports and experts from, and who is this Farid Seif guy? Here is an example.

"According to one report, undercover TSA agents testing security at a Newark airport terminal on one day in 2006 found that TSA screeners failed to detect concealed bombs and guns 20 out of 22 times."

Where does this report come from? bombs and guns 20 out of 22 times? Dont you find it funny they grouped guns and bombs together. Bombs can be easily missed in a x-ray because bombs can look like anything. It can be shaped or flatten out or whatever.. So i agree on that. But no way in hell will guns be missed 20 out of 22 times. They are too easy to catch on an x-ray. they might be missed once every 100 or even 500.
 
Where does this report come from? bombs and guns 20 out of 22 times? Dont you find it funny they grouped guns and bombs together. Bombs can be easily missed in a x-ray because bombs can look like anything. It can be shaped or flatten out or whatever.. So i agree on that. But no way in hell will guns be missed 20 out of 22 times. They are too easy to catch on an x-ray. they might be missed once every 100 or even 500.

The man does have a point...

As for the TSA, I think it's funny that USB cables for my external hard drives for my laptop get me pulled out of line to be "randomly selected for additional screening" when I'm in full uniform and on my way back to Iraq...but other times flying with my family on vacation they've missed/let me keep leathermans, knives, large scissors, etc. My uncle forgot a bunch of ammunition in his bag from a competition shoot and flew with it once, another time a couple rounds of .308 were in one of his pockets and they confiscated it. I don't get how a couple bullets in a pocket are caught but an entire box of ammo slips through...
 
...who is this Farid Seif guy?
He's the guy who mistakenly went to the airport with a gun in his bag that TSA didn't catch.
But no way in hell will guns be missed 20 out of 22 times. They are too easy to catch on an x-ray.
Really? They missed Seif's gun one out of one times. And, according to him, there was absolutely nothing else in the bag, because he had removed the laptop according to TSA rules.

Besides, even one out of a thousand times is too many. All it takes is for that one to be a terrorist who will actually use it. And these aren't box cutters or nail files or any of this other stuff. These are fucking GUNS. And the worst part? These "enhanced pat downs" and full-body screeners wouldn't have stopped this case, because it was missed in X-ray, which they have ALWAYS used. So the reasoning for adding these other screening methods is bullshit, because it wasn't on a person. It was in his baggage, being scanned the way it always has.
 
They didn't catch the Glock's since they're "plastic guns" :twofinger

:laughing

Why am I not surprised about this? Not the Glock's, just TSA incompetence.
 
He's the guy who mistakenly went to the airport with a gun in his bag that TSA didn't catch.

Really? They missed Seif's gun one out of one times. And, according to him, there was absolutely nothing else in the bag, because he had removed the laptop according to TSA rules.

Besides, even one out of a thousand times is too many. All it takes is for that one to be a terrorist who will actually use it. And these aren't box cutters or nail files or any of this other stuff. These are fucking GUNS. And the worst part? These "enhanced pat downs" and full-body screeners wouldn't have stopped this case, because it was missed in X-ray, which they have ALWAYS used. So the reasoning for adding these other screening methods is bullshit, because it wasn't on a person. It was in his baggage, being scanned the way it always has.

So this Self guy gets back to his hotel and realizes his gun was in his laptop case. Did you ever think that maybe he never had a gun and that he just didnt like the TSA? Whats a CEO doing with a gun in his laptop? maybe its true, whatever, unreliable source. He could be fake cause it doesnt matter, I was making a point.

And I was never defending TSA or their procedures. What did I say to make you believe that? Yes, all is takes is just one gun or bomb slipping past security and its over. But this is humans doing the screening, not robots. Things WILL get by once in a while, things as in knives and bullets. Cant catch them all. The security check point is not all about catching terrorist. The main objective of the airport security is that its a deterrent to prevent terrorist from taking the risk of getting caught. When was the last time they caught a terrorist at a airport security in the USA? Dont even know really, maybe one, so TSA is doing pretty good if you ask me. So the goal of these added methods of screening is not to catch the terrorist red handed, its to prevent them from attempting to do something.
 
And I was never defending TSA or their procedures. What did I say to make you believe that? Yes, all is takes is just one gun or bomb slipping past security and its over. But this is humans doing the screening, not robots. Things WILL get by once in a while, things as in knives and bullets. Cant catch them all. The security check point is not all about catching terrorist. The main objective of the airport security is that its a deterrent to prevent terrorist from taking the risk of getting caught. When was the last time they caught a terrorist at a airport security in the USA? Dont even know really, maybe one, so TSA is doing pretty good if you ask me. So the goal of these added methods of screening is not to catch the terrorist red handed, its to prevent them from attempting to do something.

It ceases to be a deterrent when it doesn't work. You really think the US is the only one conducting covert tests to see what they can get through checkpoints? Newsflash for you: the 9/11 guys did it too. Guarantee there've been more since then that haven't been caught.
 
What deterrent is it if some - ANY - get through? All Al Qaeda has to do is keep trying, and even if they get caught 20, 50, 100 times, if they get through once they are successful. No amount of failures by TSA is acceptable.

Let me ask you this: why would TSA and the government keep secret the results of their own testing? Probably because the failure rate is so shocking that people would realize that this whole "airport security" is a smokescreen, and that there really ISN'T any security, and that it's only a matter of time before terrorists succeed again.
 
Oh, and I firmly believe that part of the problem with the security is that they DON'T racially profile. Who is it we have to worry about right now? Muslims. So why are they frisking and scanning whites, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and old people? Because - God forbid - they upset the PC Police. If/when any of those groups attack our airlines, THEN go ahead and start screening them with the scanners and pat downs. But until then, stick with the group that has caused this increased security. You think some little old lady in a wheelchair is a threat? If you do, then the terrorists have already won, because they have succeeded in paralyzing us with paranoia. She's not a threat. And if she starts some shit on the plane, I'm pretty sure the other passengers can take her.
 
Back
Top