TSA employees have been working without pay during a partial shutdown of DHS over demands to reform immigration enforcement.
More than 400 Transportation Security Administration workers have quit since a partial government shutdown that began on Feb. 14 left them working without pay, the Department of Homeland Security said.
Funding was shut off to DHS over demands by Democrats for reforms at Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection following alleged abuses and the fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens by federal agents in Minneapolis earlier this year.
There has also been a national callout rate of 10% at TSA on more than half the days of the last week, Lauren Bis, acting assistant secretary for public affairs at DHS, said Saturday in response to questions.
You hear the occasional story, but MILLIONS of people interact with TSA every day, and it goes perfectly smoothly. There is nothing like mind-numbing repetition to create a smooth flow. And when you do hear of a problem, it’s almost always started by the passenger.
TSA workers are just hard-working Americans, doing a job that has to be done. Keep your animosity aimed at those at the top who really deserve it.
And ICE Apes. They really do suck.
Then why doesn’t it need to be done everywhere else? Why did it not need to be done for the first hundred years of commercial aviation?
Hang on, do these TSA kids not just check passports and that?
Nope, immigration checkpoints are handled by a different department.
Does it really have to be done though? The obnoxious security screenings don’t make anybody safer.
https://ourworldindata.org/data-insights/airline-hijackings-once-relatively-common-are-rare-today
Yes, it really has to be done. We live in a world of mass shootings nearly every day. The only reason it hasn’t happened in a plane is because of the post-9/11 security.
People don’t understand that TSA’s biggest impact isn’t in stopping weapons from coming onto planes in the airport. All of that is just theater, and we are unwilling players, like it or not. The impact is at home, when a lunatic who want to kill a lot of people decides to not do it on an airplane because he’ll probably never get through security, so he chooses a path of lesser resistance. Not great for that victim, but at least airport security eliminated against THEM.
Is it working? Who knows what’s on the minds of suicidal terrorists, but after a long period of many hijackings, culminating in the worst in history on 9/11, there have been no major hijacks in America since TSA and enhanced security were implemented in American airports.
Hard to argue with results like that.
You’re conflating TSA with just putting a locked door at the front of the airplane. One of those was effective, and it was it the TSA. The TSA has an over 90% failure rate, by their own metrics.
This may be the stupidest argument I’ve ever had. You people are arguing like MAGAs.
Hundreds of hijackings before TSA, including 9/11. None in the 25 years since TSA and the new protocols. The system isn’t perfect, but it’s clearly worked, and even with it’s imperfections, it’s far better than NOTHING, which seems to be the only alternative suggestion.
I get it, air travel is a pain in the ass, and there is always a bit of a wait for the security screening. So what? We wait everywhere - the bank, the barber, the fast food drive through line, the grocery store, etc. Isn’t spending some time in line worth not getting blown out of the sky?
Do you people actually think air travel will be SAFER without airport security? Because we had security before 9/11, and it still happened. Without any security, we’ll go back to that 4 year period in the 70s when we had over 300 hijackings, more than one per week. That’ll be fun, right?
I only made one point in my short post and you completely failed to address it.
Locked doors have stopped the hijackings, and those are already paid for. So why do we need TSA?
You think that locked cockpit doors are the ONLY thing keeping trouble from happening in the sky? What’s to stop them from killing and torturing passengers, lighting fires, setting off bombs, etc.? All you really need to do is pierce a lithium battery, and you have 1000°C fire that is extremely difficult to extinguish. That will bring down a plane as surely as killing the pilot.
The locked cockpit door is the last line of defense. It’s not a good idea to get rid of every other defense before that. It’s pretty important to keep trouble off the plane in the first place.
But they do prevent hijackings…
They prevent hijackers from getting into the cockpit, but you can hijack or bring down a plane in many other ways.
Luggage still goes through security scans.
Hijackings went down because in the past the protocol was to let the hijacker do what they want since it just ended in a diverted plane with no one harmed. That doesn’t work anymore and it’s not because of the TSA.
I’m arguing with people who have never seen a hijacking, while I lived through all of them in the 60s, 70s, and 80s, AND 9/11, which many people here don’t even remember.
No, that’s not how hijackings work, and not why they decreased. They did not “let the hijackers do what they want,” and anyway, how would that discourage hijacking? If they were letting the hijackers do whatever they want, wouldn’t that ENCOURAGE hijackers?
They decreased because of steady improvement in security, until they had discouraged all but the most froggy terrorist, which is what we got on 9/11. Then they tightened up protocols even more, and we haven’t had any more hijackings.
You guys are arguing with me, but this isn’t me saying this, it is the assessment of literally everyone who has studied it. All of the people in this thread are trying to support their arguments with invented facts that conflict with historical truth.
Yes it was how it used to work, that’s why the planes would end up diverted. When that stopped being standard protocol, the hijackings reduced. You got it on that last sentence in that paragraph but for some reason think I’m arguing changing standard protocol to NOT allow hijackers to do their thing would encourage hijackers. You read my post backwards.
I don’t believe that for a second. If there were regular airline hijackings before 9/11 we would have had that security already. TSA is there to invade people’s privacy and be a jobs program, nothing more.
This data lumps all aircraft together, and across the entire world. It’s a bogus source to support your claim.
“Don’t bother me with facts, my mind is made up.”
Despite a mountain of evidence, easily available with a Google search, you just blurt out one of the stupidest arguments I’ve ever heard.
Are you actually telling me that there were no hijackings before 9/11, and that any reports of hijackings are fabrications? Because that’s an incredibly ignorant statement.
First of all, there WAS baggage inspections before 9/11, and people complained about it all the time. The videos of the 9/11 hijackers on that day ALL come from security cameras trained on the X-ray machines, and you can see plenty of people around them. It looks essentially the same as it does today. The security just wasn’t as strong as it is now.
Pre-9/11, security was handled by private security companies, different ones in every airport in every city, and standards were inconsistent. Post 9/11, the government formed TSA to maintain consistent airport security around the country, and a few private security companies probably went out of business. Also, stricter training and protocols were implemented, and have evolved due to emerging threats like shoe bombs, underwear bombs, and water bottle bombs.
Now let’s get into your primary assertion, which was that weren’t any hijackings before 9/11. According to Wikipedia:
Then we had 9/11, the first time in history that an airplane had been used as a weapon of mass destruction.
So go ahead, Junior, and talk out your ass again how there wasn’t any hijackings or airport security before 9/11.
Those statistics are not realistic. There were not 130 hijackings in four years. Maybe someone stealing a plane, but nothing like 911.
Did you get dropped on your head? When there’s a crazy guy waving a gun, and demanding to go to Cuba (that was really popular for a while, for some reason), NOBODY on the plane is thinking that this is just a guy stealing a plane, nothing to worry about. They are frightened for their very lives, not thinking that this isn’t a “real” hijacking. That’s about the most idiotic take I can imagine.
Yeah, and they were nothing like 9/11, which was the very first time a plane had been used as a weapon of mass destruction before, and they used 4 of them simultaneously. It was really, really serious.
But that doesn’t mean previous hijackings weren’t serious. People died in hijackings and rescues around the world all the time. It doesn’t have to be as big as 9/11, to still be serious.
We dropped 2 atomic bombs at the end of WW2. They were really big, bigger than anything that came before. Does that mean the fire bombing of Tokyo wasn’t serious? The fire-bombing of Dresden into rubble wasn’t serious? How about all the other bombings we did in WW2? Were those not serious, just because something much bigger was in the future? I doubt the victims of the bombings would agree.
And you know what, Einstein? YOU don’t get to determine which statistics are realistic or not. Get another couple of years of education, until you can spell Google, then look up the Wikipedia entry on Hijackings.
Are you old enough to have flown before the security theater of TSA? Do you fly frequently enough to have witnessed the number of knives that get missed and taken on board flights and the number of nail clippers confiscated because they have a pointy file? Are you brown enough to have experienced a “random security screening” on the majority of your trips?
Have you had to deal with agents asking you what’s in your bag and screaming at you not to touch it as if it contained a bomb that you’re doing to activate? Oh no your toothpaste and USB charger overlapped in the x-ray and looked like an IED! Then they shove everything back in your bag so it doesn’t close and tell you to move it so they can deal with the next suspect, and the only place to repack your bag is on a bench 15 feet away?
Have you traveled with children and had to have their water and formula manually checked for explosives? Have you had to disassemble you’re stroller to put it through the x-ray, carrying your tired child while no one assists you, as you take your shoes off just in case you have a bomb in it?
Have you flown internationally and seen just how more convenient and friendly the security procedure is without TSA? Only to be reminded of it w on your return flight when TSA security screening happens at the gate after you go through the airport security? Random checks and luggage ruffling all over again.
Do you feel safer with the TSA “just doing their job”
Maybe these guys just like walking around the airport in their socks with their pants falling down? Don’t forget swabbing down your laptop with the magic Q-tip.
My tax dollars feel so much safer with the TSA.
Yeah, I’ve done ALL of that (well, maybe not traveling while brown), but never so dramatically as you describe, nor have I ever witnessed it. ALL of your situations are greatly exaggerated, or were provoked. Nobody has EVER "screamed"at me about touching my bag, that’s just silly. I’ve never seen anyone scream about anything in a baggage inspection line in my life.
These people are doing an endless busy boring job, and they generally do it standing up all day, so I don’t doubt they don’t have the greatest job satisfaction in the world. I don’t expect them to kiss my ass for the privilege of serving me, just be professional and efficient, and they are always that.
I often travel with specialized equipment in my carryon, and I EXPECT it to be pulled out for inspection. I have definitely been inspected FAR more than most other passengers, and in fact, I am surprised when they don’t. Sometimes I see them all gathered around the screen, peering and pointing, and I’ll call over “You’re probably gonna wanna inspect that,” and they all turn to look at me, and then they pull it off the belt, and bring it over for inspection, but not always. I once asked why NOT one time, and an obviously very experienced agent told me what all the items were just from the X-ray. I told him I was impressed he was so accurate, and he just smiled.
Perhaps your TSA problems aren’t with TSA, they’re with you. They are always polite and understanding when they inspect my bag, and let ME re-pack it right there at the inspection station. Are they smiling? No, they tend to be stiff at first, because they are anticipating a passenger like you, but they relax when they see I hold no animosity for another American worker, just doing their job. I often walk away with both of us smiling, because I give them a rare moment during the day when they aren’t under attack.
These TSA workers are our neighbors, our friends, even our family members. They are doing a difficult job, without a lot of pay, and people like you giving them a hard time all day, every day. If you aren’t getting the TSA experience you think you should have, maybe try a friendlier approach. It also tends to succeed in a lot more circumstances than just airports.
America is in a weird place right now, and these government workers are stuck on the middle. They aren’t responsible for anything, they’re just a cog in the wheel, doing it for a paycheck. They are exactly like the rest of us. Our beef isn’t with them, it’s with the psychopaths at the top. Beating up on our working colleagues doesn’t do anything but drive our collective morale even lower, and it isn’t even satisfying.
Save your animosity for those who deserve it, and support ALL American workers. They’re the Good Guys.
Stop defending authoritarianism
Having a strong security operation to prevent very real threats like 9/11 from happening again is NOT authoritarianism. That’s just dumb.
The TSA has never prevented a single terrorist attack
Your response to describing how I get random security screening the majority of my trips and how I have up take my child out of the stroller and lift it into the x-ray machine belt unassisted is to say the problem is me…
Once again, you aren’t special. I’ve taken kids through airport security many times, and it’s never been through ANY of the ordeal you describe. At least, I didn’t treat it as an ordeal, just a normal trip through an airport. That’s what it is, it’s a different kind of place, and we have to adjust our behavior and expectations, in order to protect ourselves and everyone else.
Too bad if it means a little bit of inconvenience has to intrude on your precious, special existence. You obviously go through life expecting EVERYONE to accommodate to your demands for your life to be smooth as silk with no bumps. I live in the real world, where YOU aren’t the center of my universe, or anyone else’s, and nobody cares about your demands.
I can just picture you going through the line, huffing and puffing, and complaining about how long it is taking, and you don’t have time to wait, yadda-yadda. I’ve seen your type in airports many many times. You ARE the problem, you drama queen.
You’re very combative. I think you’re missing the entire point.
I don’t think I’m special… But when I finish with the TSA experience and reach the airport of a country that doesn’t have that security theater, the difference is stark.
I’ve never had a random security check by non TSA, and when they do inspect my luggage they neatly repack it and close it.
They see that I have a child in a stroller and they direct me to a wider path so I can roll it through, sure I still have to take my child out and walk through the metal scanner, but having someone grab the stroller and pass give it back to me on the other side is an acceptable inconvenience compared to having to also fold and lift the stroller unassisted into the belt.
I don’t think I’m special, do you think TSA agents are special? Do you think security agents at other countries don’t work as hard or don’t deal with exhausted travelers? Do you think there’s a good reason why so many agents across the world are helpful and friendly but the TSA literally has a reputation for screaming at people?
My question is, do you feel safer in American airports because of the added inconvenience relative to other countries?
Wow. I’ve seen that type also, and putting aside that it doesn’t match me at all, are you suggesting only people who huff and puff go through what I described?
Are you suggesting friendly travelers don’t have to take their shoes off (they don’t anymore, after 20 years of theater that hasn’t caught a single person with a bomb in their shoe)? Are you suggesting TSA agents will pack your bag neatly?
And to be clear, I’ve had experiences where they went above and beyond, maybe they’re new and haven’t stopped giving a shit yet, or maybe they’re just rays of sunshine. But it’s not standard practice to be polite and helpful in the most standardized security theater in the world, and that’s a problem.
I’m not special, I don’t think I should receive special treatment or be less inconvenienced than other travelers, I’m asking why you think we should all be extra inconvenienced? Once again, do you feel safer due to the inconvenience?
Do you feel safer having to take your belt off? I wear sweatpants when flying so it doesn’t affect me, but do you feel the very minor inconvenience of taking your belt off is a necessary price to pay?
Why defend an expensive theater because “they’re doing their job”? That money could serve you better.
Stop that. You are trying to sound normal in this post, acting like you are having a perfectly normal experience, but you were super dramatic in your first post, describing TSA agents who were “screaming,” shoving, etc. I wasn’t being combative, I was responding to your over the top descriptions of TSA experiences, that don’t match ANYTHING I’ve ever seen in any airport in America.
For instance, in this post you say:
Very reasonable. But in your original post, you said:
That is in direct conflict with your supposed personal experience, so which is it? If you’ve had normal experiences with TSA, why were you trying to spread nonsense about abusive behavior that you’ve never experienced? And what is wrong with me countering your dramatic first post with my normal experiences, which turn out to mirror your second experience?
And you accuse me of being combative, when you go on some incomprehensible rant where you half agree with me, and half don’t, start interrogating me about feeling safe about my shoes or belt or something, I don’t get it. Like this:
So they’re nice to you sometimes, and not nice to you sometimes. Who cares? They’re doing their job as security, and you’re doing your job as a traveler. Why do they have to live up to some personal standard? They see thousands of people a day. Are they supposed to read everybody’s minds and treat them the way they like? I don’t expect that, I just expect them to do their job, that’s all. They don’t have to smile for me, too, that’s just condescending, and gross.
Do I feel safer? I don’t know, I don’t really think about it, and that answers your question.
Look, it’s real simple: Before the 90s, hijacking were out of control world wide. American security improved until it was pretty good by the 90s. Then 9/11 happened, and they realized that the threat was getting worse, with the rise of Al Qaeda, and they enhanc d their security. The result has been a 25 year hiatus since the last hijacking.
That’s success right there. It’s obviously working, so whatever they have to do, I’m willing to be cooperative about it. My home airports are two of the busiest in the world, and I never have any issues. I show up early, take my time, do my thing at security, help less experienced travelers if they need it, and move on. I have never witnessed these dramatic problems that people have seem to have, despite being in some of the most crowded airports in the world.
The result is that I don’t have die in a hijacking. Isn’t that the ultimate objective? So what’s everybody whining about?
Okay?
I’m describing my average experience with TSA, which involves unhelpful rude agents that bark directions at you, constant random security checks, and unnecessary burden when traveling with children.
I’m still describing them as screaming… I don’t think I ever claimed they were shoving people, and I’ll take etc as the same category of imaginary anger you built up.
I don’t like the TSA and I don’t think they serve a good purpose, their competence has not made me feel safer. They’re very good at catching water bottles but I’ve personally and accidentally flown with a 3" folding pocket knife in my backpack.
“non TSA”. My positive experience was with non TSA. I travel internationally a lot, and while I’ve been asked (way less often) by non TSA to have my bag checked, they ALWAYS handle it very gentle and repack it for me. I’ve had ONE experience I can recall where a TSA agent actually put things back in my bag neatly. Once.
I travel with lots of tech, so my bags are often pulled for secondary screening, but it’s not specialized tech, it’s always a waste of everyone’s time. I’ve had my package rummaged for AA batteries.
You literally attempted to describe me personally in very strong negative words, and dismissed my claims based on your certainty that I’m the problem. You don’t think you’re being combative?
You just can’t read, probably because you’re reading with eagerness to strike back. I’ve been very consistent.
I’ve already explained this. I’m comparing it directly with other countries’ security screeners and how they’re always polite and helpful. I don’t think I’m special and need to be treated well because I’m special, I just don’t think TSA agents are special and should get a free pass to be assholes when the rest of the world doesn’t allow their agents to go that.
I mean some counties do, TSA experience is sometimes as bad as flying through Egypt, where overt corruption and incompetence is on full display, why are you okay with that?
Why are you defending it so much? Why are you bending backwards to praise someone as doing their job when their job explicitly is NOT being rude to you. Do you accept rude waiters or mechanics or hotel staff because they’re dealing with frustrated customers? I doubt it. Why do you think TSA is special?
I reject that they’re doing a job of “security”, I feel like I’m being very clear with my questions “do you feel safer with the security theater”? But you’re somehow choosing to interpret that as personal “interrogation”… I don’t think they do security, I think they make travel inconvenient, and they’re mostly unpleasant on top, and I don’t think that’s a price anyone (not special me and my standards) should pay to not be more secure.
The glass displays they have of confiscated items at some airports tell you so much. Do you feel safer with that many nail clippers confiscated?
I’m literally inviting you to think about it with my “interrogative” questions.
If you’ve flown enough before 9/11, you’d have recognized what really reduced hijackings. Before, the cockpit was open and children were often invited to come to it, it was like a bus. Now, they have reinforced doors that are locked the entire flight, and on planes where it has to be opened the cabin crew block the path with a cart and physically stand in the way. It’s the flight crew that keeps you safe and prevents hijacking, not the TSA taking your water bottle and nail clippers.
The data backs this up, reinforced cockpit doors stop highjacking. TSA security theater does not.
I fly frequently and have never seen any of these scenarios. And wtf…a woman did try and bring an explosive liquid onto a flight in the early 2000s, it’s why they have the liquids rule.
Fuck travellers and their outrage at mild inconvenience. The world is not safe, and if you don’t like safety measures, please stay the fuck home.
But TSA fails at 90-95% of the tests against them. They do nothing to increase safety.
if all the security staff were to quit, nothing would change except flying would get more awful
if you don’t like it, blame the people making the process; not the people doing their best to get you onto your flight
unless you’d also like to be blamed for the decisions of those above you… perhaps you’d like to answer for the decisions of your countries leaders?
i’d guess you probably don’t think a countries citizens should be (entirely) responsible for the actions of its government, so perhaps try blaming the people responsible
TSA are just cops, and all cops are bastards.
But even if we ignore systemic issues with policing under capitalism, the fact remains that no, the job doesn’t have to be done, as evidenced by the fact that TSA fails penetration tests 90-95% of the time. They literally do not do the thing they were put in place to do, and nothing happens because of it. Terrorist attacks on planes are incredibly rare, and TSA does nothing to prevent them anyways. It’s all just theater to normalize law enforcement overreach.
They aren’t cops, any more than the guy at the front gate into your neighborhood is a cop. They aren’t trained, sworn law enforcement officers, they don’t carry weapons, and they don’t have arrest authority. I don’t have a problem with those folks, until they start acting like they have cop authority, but that’s pretty rare. Most of them just want a job where they just stand there.
The inspection system isn’t perfect - NOTHING IS, and criticizing any massive system for not being perfect is disingenuous. Perhaps their presence is mostly theater, but it’s useful theater. A major point of the system isn’t just to catch threats from coming onto the plane, but discourage people from using the airports or airplanes for whatever nonsense they’re planning. In fact, that may be the bigger point. In this era of mass shootings, we can attribute the fact that we haven’t had a maniac shoot up a plane to the presence of TSA, and the entire inspection system, and thank them. Who knows how many incidents they discourage every day?
Finally, YOU said:
And why is that?
This reminds me of Trump whining that we had to abolish the Clean Air & Water Act, because our air and water is perfectly clean, this is just useless regulation. What it doesn’t take into account was that when it started, our air and water quality was terrible due to decades of industrial pollution, leaded gas, and environmental neglect and abuse. That Act cleaned it all up, and had kept it clean. He just sees the successful result, and declares the law that accomplished it to be useless. You’re doing the same thing with TSA.
Look at the number of hijackings before 9/11, compared to the number of hijackings since 9/11:
Airline hijackings, once relatively common, are rare today
Before TSA, hijackings and airport attacks were common, all over the world, finally culminating in 9/11. Since establishing the modern inspection system, we have not had a major incident like that since then. A couple of dipshits tried to light their shoes and underwear on fire, but both passengers and flight crews have adopted a different attitude, and beat the crap out of those guys, and TSA adjusted. Now we take our shoes off, and we get our naughty bits x-rayed. Some guy tried to sneak in water bottles with explosives, so now we can’t have water bottles.
As for tiny shampoos, that has nothing to do with terrorism, just weight. You’re going off for a long weekend, you don’t need a giant bottle of every hair product you own. I don’t want my plane going down because everyone had to bring a full 36 oz bottle of their backup hair conditioner, causing the front to fall off.
The system was planned and implemented, and has evolved to address emerging threats, and the result has been far fewer incidents both in-flight and in the airports, and that is a direct result of TSA and the program that they operate. There is the occasional publicized unpleasant incident, but they are an infinitesimal percentage of the enormous number of people that access air travel on a daily basis.
I don’t worry about flying at all these days, but if TSA were to leave, I don’t think I would fly anymore. I don’t mind driving, I kind of like it, singing along loudly to my favorite music, and looking for little local BBQ joints along the way.
And nothing normalizes law enforcement overreach more than red light and speeding cameras.
While I agree that most TSA workers are just regular americans working a job… some of the replies to this are true. The failure rate is high. The TSA is not very effective at finding things. They surely do have some people power tripping because every organization that size does.
And I would not call TSA operations… smooth most days.
That said, most of the problems are due to management. Dumb things like inconsistent policies between airports, terrible line management, unclear instructions that seem to change back and forth even at the same airport. The general assumption that the passenger should already have all of thier rules and such memorized before they show up.
These are fixable things, but they won’t be fixed. They don’t hire people who think about improvements for management. That would cost too much.
And speaking of pay, are giving access to people’s personal belongings to people they don’t pay very well. Then they wonder why things go missing sometimes.
So, no, it isn’t necessary at the level it is done. Some security sure. But it’s ineffective overkill. That said, it isn’t the individuals. So I don’t don’t wish them any ill will.
Still missing the point that catching threats at the airport is important, but not the biggest goal. The bigger goal is for the enormous baggage inspection bottleneck to intimidate anyone who is thinking about attacking a plane into not doing that.
And the simple fact that there have been no major hijackings since 9/11, proves that this strategy has worked. Now we have people saying that since we have no hijackings anymore, we should get rid of the very mechanism that makes that possible.
If you closed the baggage inspection lanes today, we would have a passenger airliner go down within a week.
So you are saying security theater is the point. I just don’t buy that. The failure rate is very high. People who would plan an attack know that. I mean one test was as bad as 95% failed. If they tried to do 9 11 again. Maybe, just maybe, one person in one group might get stopped by the tsa.
And by your logic, the previous sytem was equally good. Before 911, the last commercial us airline hijacking was in 83. So 18 years. After 911, 2021. So 20 years.
“People who would plan an attack…”
Sure, perhaps it wouldn’t hold up a serious professional terrorist, but those are few and far between. It WILL deter the amateur lone wolf attacker who is looking for the target of least resistance. If it was easy to just walk onto a flight with a gun or bomb, maybe they would, but it is unlikely that an amateur would bother to make the attempt, assuming that the likelihood of failure would be high. So that eliminates 90% of the threat.
As for the other 10%, that’s an issue to be dealt with on a bigger level. I saw one analysis of 9/11 that determined that it wasn’t a failure of TSA, it was a governmental intelligence failure, who had many opportunities to flag these guys, and they never connected the dots, or even tried to. They even arrested one guy on an indirect charge (leaving the plot short by one man), and never connected him to a larger event. All parties needed to be more observant, and they blew it.
As for the history, you are right, we had it dialed in pretty good by the 90s, after dealing with a lot of terrorism in the 70s & 80s, and it was starting to work for us, although hijacking continued around the world. But it was not equally good, as 9/11 proved. Until 9/11, which was the first time that an airplane had been used as a deliberate weapon of mass destruction, and there four of them. Clearly, the appearance of security was an illusion.
If you compare the pre- and post- 9/11 security, they look similar on their faces. They had similar security lines, X-ray machines, etc. But pre-9/11 they used private, contracted security companies, and protocols were fairly loose. Even so, the 9/11 hijackers were forced to use utility knives as weapons, because they didn’t trust trying to smuggle bigger knives, or guns, past security.
The behavior of passengers was an issue as well. Prior to 9/11, passengers knew to sit tight, don’t rile up the hijackers, and eventually the authorities would work it out, one way or another. 9/11, and subsequent attacks like the shoe and underwear bomber, taught passengers that they were responsible for their own safety.
Post 9/11, besides passenger awareness, there was a new professional agency to be responsible for airline security lines, with much stronger protocols, which developed as new threats emerged, like those mentioned before. And the result was no hijackings in 25 years, an impressive record, considering the 20th century’s abysmal record.
You used the term “by my logic,” but here’s my actual logic:
I have made the argument that TSA’s primary objective is to discourage airplane violence when the amateur terrorist is still conceiving his plan, and the 90s, pre-9/11 security protocols seem to have done a good job of that during the 90s.
But then 9/11 happened, and proved that while those 90s protocols might discourage the amateur lone wolf, it won’t discourage the professional organized terrorist. Fighting that enemy requires a more comprehensive strategy combining airport security and intelligence agencies. That’s what would have prevented 9/11, and has prevented any further nonsense since.
So it seems like TSA and the enhanced and improved protocols have been very successful in reaching these twin objectives. It would be extremely counterproductive to get rid of them because you’re pissed off at MAGA, Trump, and ICE. Nobody hates them more than me, but TSA does an effective job in tough circumstances, and we should appreciate them and their work. They aren’t cops, they’re keeping our loved ones alive when traveling to see us, and I’m grateful for that.
That’s a lot of mental gymnastics there. You started by saying that maybe the TSA wouldn’t hold up against professional terrorists, but that they detered the loan wolf. But you also said the 90s security was dialed in and detering the loan wolf. So then the TSA added nothing we didn’t already have?
You also mentioned that 9/11 wasn’t the TSAs fault. Of course not, they didn’t exist yet.
But you correctly pointed out that 9/11 wasn’t a failure of airport security. It was an issue of intelligence sharing, and even more so, and issue of passengers being taught to be passive.
So by your words, the 90s security wasn’t the reason for 9/11. Current TSA security couldn’t stop professional terrorists like those on 9/11. Then what is the point of the TSA. Let’s just go back to 90s security…
Further, you can still have contractors instead of the TSA, SFO does for example. And most likely the reason thier hasn’t been another is because passengers fought back on one plane and won. So future passengers are extremely likely to do the same. Also, the hardened cockpit door would make it extremely tough to pull it off again.
I’ve been writing a lot of answers in this thread, so perhaps I didn’t explain properly in this thread. Coming out of the 80s, increased security protocols discouraged hijacking pretty effectively, and we didn’t have any hijackings in the 90s. They thought they were catching everybody, but 9/11 alerted them to the fact that there were really two types of threats - amateur lone wolves, AND professional terrorists. The existing security had discouraged the amateurs, but not the pros. So after 9/11, it was understood that our current protocols were only partially effective, and we were going to have to get serious about combating the professional terrorists, which we knew were gearing up in the Middle East, primarily Al Qaeda.
I misspoke about it being TSA, instead of normal pre-9/11 private security, but that doesn’t change the fact that I was still correct. And I didn’t say it wasn’t the fault of security, some post 9/11 analyses have said that. I don’t fully agree with that assessment. I believe that it is still TSA’s primary job to stop threats from getting on the plane, just in case intelligence and law enforcement fails.
Those weren’t my words, they were the words of an analysis I read, that has some validity. But the fact that intelligence blew it doesn’t let airport security off the hook. They still have an obligation to stop threats from getting on the plane, because intelligence might blow it. In the case of 9/11, they BOTH blew it. A perfect storm of failure.
We know that passengers will fight back because they have. Not long after 9/11, there were two separate bombing attempts, a shoe bomb and an underwear bomb, that were thwarted by passengers seeing what was going on, and beating the living shit out of those maniacs. I wouldn’t put too much confidence in the cockpit doors. A future hijacker will know they can’t get in there, so they won’t worry about steering the plane, which was crucial to the 9/11 plot. Instead, they’ll just concentrate on causing mayhem by killing the passengers, or perhaps they’ll just create a massive fire with a lithium laptop battery burning at 1000° C. That should bring down a plane without much problem.
But that isn’t the reason why we haven’t had hijackings, and neither are any of the other single variables cited. It is the combination of ALL of them that has formed a failsafe. Intelligence fails, and the shoe bomber makes to the security. TSA fails, and allows him on the plane. Then the passengers notice something weird, and instantly viciously attack the guy. We will never know how many hijackings were thwarted at the lower levels, and never became an issue for the citizens to deal with.
The bottom line is that we need several levels of security working together, so that if one fails, another will pick up the threat. It’s a system that has kept us from having another hijacking, so I see no reason to weaken an effective system.
Security in layers is a strong pattern. But if one layer is only 5% effective, you usually cut that layer out. And as I have said, I am not saying get rid of the TSA. I am saying reduce what they do to the things they are effective at. Which is thwarting the lone wolf. For that, they can dail things back to near 90s levels and still achieve that goal.
I’ve filed a complaint against them. I notice they tend to be bad in specific locations.
Valid. There are a lot of airports, and a lot of agents, there are going to be issues, of course.