The security company that was fired in 2001 also ran security for European airports. They said security was better in Europe because the Europeans requested the security level given terrorism was more common there, and they were willing to pay for it, whereas in the Us the airlines wanted the cheapest level of security possible. That said, from all accounts, the hijackers took over planes with boxcutters that were allowed under FAA regulations, so their asus w1000 battery,asus w1000g battery was no airport security breakdown that allowed 9/11, and no real reason to socialize this industry.

most of the TSA are sick and pathetic people, who know nothing about respect, their level of understanding is nothing higher than an animal because they treat people like animals, they deserve nothing but to be insulted

In these days of wholesale lying and deceit by multiple government agencies about “terrorist events” and “security threats”, nothing would be a surprise. Keeping the public in line by scaring the living daylights out of them is an ancient tactic, used on countless occasions by rogue governments of all stripes: unfortunately for civilization and human advancement, it usually works. Hence the existence of the “Homeland Security Department” and its ugly offspring, the TSA.

Some observations:

The “binary liquid explosives” scare of two years ago was a classic scam, employed by an administration intent on demonizing a section of society, while simultaneously scaring the public by broadcasting bogus threats and falsehoods via a complicit media. Any qualified chemist must have had an attack of laughing hysterics at the idea of someone manufacturing triacetone triperoxide while on a commercial plane! The article on The Register is worth a read, for a welcome reality check.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08/17/flying_toilet_terror_labs/

It’s also strange, that in our capitalist world driven by the need to privatize everything, the privately owned company responsible for airline security lost their airport contract in the wake of the 9/11 disaster, only to be replaced by a large government agency: such are usually labeled by as being far more inefficient by those who favor privatization! (This fact was borne out in the wake of Hurricane Katrina: it is impossible to imagine a more lax “response” to a catastrophe, unless the “lack of response” was deliberate policy, of course).

Two personal recollections of the TSA’s performance within the last 2 years, both at LAX:

(a) on arrival at LAX, I found my (expensive) suitcase had been wrecked (it had not been locked). It arrived at baggage claim swathed in grey duct tape to hold it together, and I only recognized it as mine due to a unique and colorful sticker still visible between the lengths of duct tape. In a rather testy mood, I complained to airline staff, asking where the TSA office was, only to be advised that any display of annoyance to TSA staff could result in my being arrested (!), so I waited until I got home before composing a letter. Did I get any response? (Ha! ha!, silly question!). Did I get reimbursed for my destroyed property? (Ha! Ha!). Incidentally, when I arrived home, I did find a consolation prize, comprising a single, lonesome shoe, not belonging to me, nestling amongst the contents of my suitcase, while some CDs had gone mysteriously missing. Fortunately I hadn’t packed anything of significant value. TSA = Trash your bags, Steal the contents, Assume no responsibility?

(b) on Christmas Eve 2006, while waiting for my connection to Albuquerque, suddenly there was a high pitched, high intensity bleeping/warbling noise coming across the PA system, throughout the entire concourse. The hundreds of waiting passengers put their hands in their ears; the volume was painful. After 5 minutes, I went over to the airline desk to ask what was going on. I was informed that “an unauthorized person” might have entered a secure area. Half expecting a phalanx of airport police, TSA, FBI etc. to arrive en masse, I waited for some action. The bleeping din went on for another 30 minutes; when it ceased, there was a loud spontaneous round of applause from the weary crowd, and not a sign of a single security person in the entire area. It would take far less than a half hour for someone, intent on doing something untoward….. get my drift?

International terrorism is, fortunately, an exceptionally rare occurrence here in the West: the probability of witnessing, or being killed/injured in an attack of such nature is far less than the unlikely event of being struck by lightning, for example. I have no problem with the presence of an efficient screening system to catch the “common or garden” type of nutcase or criminal who might try to pull a stunt on a plane. The really bothersome part however, is knowing full well that the TSA, or any other agencies will have no power to prevent attacks by “privileged” terrorists who can get past the security system because they are either part of that system, or have no accountability to that system. As common sense tells us, those are the kind of attacks that succeed, but we are collectively reticent to admit it.

http://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/layers/secureflight/index.shtm

People should consider that 9/11 was made possible because our airlines did not see the need to have cockpit doors that could be locked, and that the planes were used as weapons that not only kill the occupants of the plane, but orders of magnitide higher (especially if they hit buildings that mysteriously explode 1 hr after impact). What happend in 2001 simply could not happen again, unless it was the pilot who took over the plane from the computers. If someone just wanted to explode a plane, they need not be a passenger, or at least thye do not need to carry it on them and can check it in (not all baggage is screened). And while that is tough for the passengers, airlines and insurance companies involved, such events do not terrorize the population at large unless it happens frequently, and the government can always lie like they did with TWA 800 and say it was not related to terrorism.

The security company that was fired in 2001 also ran security for European airports. They said security was better in Europe because the Europeans requested the security level given terrorism was more common there, and they were willing to pay for it, whereas in the Us the airlines wanted the cheapest level of security possible. That said, from all accounts, the hijackers took over planes with boxcutters that were allowed under FAA regulations, so their was no airport security breakdown that allowed 9/11, and no real reason to socialize this industry.

This liquid and shoe thing is simply to inconvenience you and get you used to following orders and as a reminder that you need to be afraid, very afraid of the cavemen who want to kill us because of who we are and our way of life. We need good security for airline travel, and I am glad we are taking it seriously, assuming we really are. But if a terrorist wants to do some damage, don’t you think they might choose an easier target that has much less security.

Having said that it is also a thankless job. It is yet another example in the US of the dualistic “us against them” syndrome. Divide and conquer at it’s best/worst.

it’s not government RUN healthcare…

it’s government PAID health insurance…

and WE, THE PEOPLE are the government…

and, yes, that’s what i want. and you do to.

Exactly my point zuch, the asses are in Washington screwing up the whole system. Like you I don’t blame the drones at the airport, they are just following orders. But that’s the problem. They have to follow orders from a bunch of incompetent bureaucrats in DC that can’t be fired.

Yes. Like “You’re doing a heck of a job” Brownie. Like Preznitential Medal of Wankerdom winner Paul Bremer. Like the raft of children of Republican bigshots sent to “reconstruct” Iraq in the model of a Very Modern Laissez-Faire Market. Like the Regent University hacks that litter the current maladministration. Like the tons of political hacks that are “rewriting” science for the maladministration (as TP points out pretty much on a weekly basis).

Do you want you health care run the same way?

Do I want Brownie or Bremer there in charge?!?!? Hell, no! So if we can’t hang the corrupt Rethuglicans from lamp-posts in the Latin style, let’s at least ride the crooks out of town on a rail.

I’d note, FWIW, that single-payer (and universal) medical insurance need hardly be any worse that SS, which is a quite well-run (and low overhead) operation. And most people like Medicare, so don’t try this “scare” crapola on us; it just ain’t gonna work….

Cheers,

Comment by Southern Man — February 1, 2008 @ 4:19 pm

well, you can thank your moron deserter-in-chief for that situation.

she was upset with all the hollywood stars at the debate last night…
my argument was that it was THEIR town, their home…
they can’t help what the cameras were showing… blahblahblah…
:-)

(copied from the o’lielly thread, #18)

So Britin is trying to adopt American practices, is what you’re saying, gin? because that’s exactly how people get treated here in the USA, only by the millions. and, of course, it’s the doctors who are objecting to working for a living, unlike here in the USA, where the insurance company bigwigs are the ones who avoid working for a living. Thanks for pointing out the weakness of your own argument!

that was ME!!! “katy in illinois”!!! ME!!!

Buh bye…

Do you want you health care run the same way?

Comment by Gin — February 1, 2008 @ 3:11 pm

that’s under a Republican government. Get rid of Republicans, and that problem is solved.