Can we all just admit the airports aren’t any safer than they were before 9/11? The whole nonsense with the 3.4 ounces of liquid in bottles toted in a quart ziploc bag is nonsense, but when you have the Transportation Safety Administration allowing disposable butane lighters and refillable lighters back on board as of August 4, it’s time to hang it up and call bullsh*t.
This is the reason for lifting the lighter ban:
“Explosives remain the most significant threat to aviation,” said TSA administrator Kip Hawley. “By enabling our officers to focus on the greatest threats, we are using our officers’ time and energy more effectively and increasing security for passengers.”Oh, it costs money to get rid of the Bics, and they TSA screeners are being distracted because of purging all the lighters. Every time I fly I see more oversized toiletries being confiscated than lighters — why are these items still banned if money is an issue!?Lighters are the leading item seized at airport checkpoints, at an average of more than 22,000 a day. It costs TSA $4 million a year to dispose of them because they contain hazardous materials.
Now I seem to recall that Richard Reid was caught trying to light his shoe with a match to blow up an airplane — an actual terrorist attempt, and lighters were banned because he may have succeeded if he had had one.
Wouldn’t you think a bottle of shampoo presents less of a risk to flight safety than a lighter, for god’s sake?
***
And for a kicker, how about this story out of Arizona, from ABC15.com, about Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport.
It’s what we discovered in the middle of the night - TSA agents going away, and security guards taking over. It’s 4.5 hours - every night - when an employee badge becomes an all-access pass.Night after night, our hidden cameras captured what security experts tell us is a disaster waiting to happen. The X-ray machines were off, the metal detectors were closed, and bags with unknown contents were carried to the secure side of the airport where the planes are.
We watched as a security guard let people with purses, coolers and suitcases walk right through - bags unchecked. Even more surprising, some of the people you trust to keep you safe planned it this way.
Larry Wansley is widely regarded as one of the nation’s top airline security experts. “It’s a frightening situation, I’ve just simply never seen anything like it,” he said. “I really honestly have not.”
A commenter with TSA wrote:
It makes no difference whether the lighters are or aren’t banned. Current TSA policy allows up to 4 books of matches to fly in carry-on items. The terrorists can always use the matches to light their s**t up. And matches are nearly impossible to detect, which is probably why THEY’RE not banned. It would take dumping every single bag and patting down every passenger to nail the matches.As far as cost goes, the lighters have to be disposed of as Hazmat items, where the toiletries do not.
I agree that the song-and-dance with the 1-quart baggie is a load of BS. So do most other serving TSA officers. To truly ensure no liquid explosives (or elements used to make same) get on a plane, it would make more sense to ban ALL liquids from carry-on items. I reserve comment on the fortitude or intelligence of Kip Hawley on this (or any other) issue, at least until after I leave TSA. (I don’t who, BTW, claims that lighters are the #1 prohib being detected. I’d put water bottles in first place.)
I can say from the other side of the X-ray that more gets stopped or deterred than we’re usually given credit for. But it’s not a perfect defense, and no one is more aware of (and frustrated by) that fact than the people who play defense every day in that game.
28 Responses to “Homeland airport insecurity”
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
The next time someone prattles on about how the free market is the best way to get things done, ask them why the fuck the de-regulated airlines haven’t gotten their heads out of their collective asses and made quick and efficient security a selling point.
You know, I don’t think these people could make airline travel any less appealing if they were actively trying to kill the industry.
I guess homeland security knows that you can mix cheap shampoo and (non-”pH balanced”) cheap soap and get ammonia?
Not enough to make a person sick even in a plane, but enough to make people think that someone, somewhere is cleaning something … and you can’t have people thinking about cleanliness … that’s just un-American?
They *are* actively trying to kill the industry. If you read industry news, more and more corporate travel is done on private planes or charter flights. That’s where the real money is, and they (surprise) aren’t even taxed the way airlines are. Thus, the TSA crap is trying to push poor people back into their cars or the bus and richer people into charter service. I’m fairly certain private jet owners and charter clients are not forced to take their shoes off in a filthy airport or show their toiletries to strangers.
Of course, the other reason for TSA, as a whole is to further train the American people to accept any indignity out of fear. We are a passive, gutless, accepting people and they want us even more so.
The next time someone prattles on about how the free market is the best way to get things done, ask them why the fuck the de-regulated airlines haven’t gotten their heads out of their collective asses and made quick and efficient security a selling point.
Or quick and efficient anything.
I’m old enough to remember when flying was a pleasure. Now it’s an ordeal to be dreaded.
Hmph. It’s not like anyone’s going to be able to hijack a damned plane ever again, anyway. What’s that aphorism about governments always being ready to fight the last war just in time for the next one? Replace ‘war’ with ‘terrorist tactic’ and it fits pretty well here.
I have taken a dozen flights since 911 and have gotten thru security every time with 1 or more lighters in my carry-on bags. scary!
the whole rationale for these security measures from a year ago were so flimsy to begin with. it was never about security. it was about looking busy and justifying the company line that bush was protecting us.
i wrote about this briefly a week or so ago and linked to a couple of articles debunking the notion that liquid explosives could be mixed on a plane by terrorists.
if you’re interested, the web address is copied and pasted below.
http://theburningcouch.wordpress.com/2007/07/17/shampoo-nail-polish-soda-and-other-dangerous-items/
“What’s that aphorism about governments always being ready to fight the last war just in time for the next one? Replace ‘war’ with ‘terrorist tactic’ and it fits pretty well here”
Actually, replace “Terrorism” with “Communism” and you get a perfect fit. The republicans have been treating this like the Cold War. And I don’t mean tactics, I mean they still think the hippies and commies are the real problem.
Buncha fucktards.
4 1/2 hours with no Xray and no metal detectors? Lighters are cool?
But let’s be sure we stop the children whose names resemble one on the no fly list. And goddamn, don’t let that feeble old woman on the plane with her knitting needles! THOSE TWO WILL BE THE DEATH OF US, I TELL YOU.
I dunno Tom, I’d say Republicans are pretty wedded to Cold War tactics too, remember a couple post down, “WND Turning On Bush” and the nuts were all like “use the nukes two seconds before they do XC” That’s near-MAD. MAD requires the nuclear belligerents unload entire arsenals and not just one, but its in the spirit of MAD.
I’m one of the people whose said it before and will say it again: nude airlines. They’re letting lighters back on to cut costs? Are they freakin’ kidding? Whatever happened to making the necessary sacrifices for victory?
I think the aphorism goes like “The generals are still fighting the last war, but the soldiers are fighting the next war.” Wish I could attribute it.
Yeah, they let me bring my culinary torch with me on a flight back from St. Louis. It was in cargo but still …
anyone else see this poll on consumerist.com?
http://consumerist.com/consumer/polls/whats-a-greater-threat-to-airline-security-279438.php
the industry is broken.
meanwhile consumerist has a great & on-going round-up on the state of airlines & flying.
I traveled just recently and realized only after I got off the plane that I’d forgotten to take my nail clippers and pocket knife our of my purse before boarding. My “weapons” got through security without being noticed.
I’ve also traveled with a child and they never look at children’s IDs or boarding passes carefully. They don’t even read them at all. It scares me because it proves how easily a child could be kidnapped and flown out of state or country.
I don’t think the free market is the panacea for all ills, but the airline industry, especially regarding security regulations, is very far from a free market. Airlines and airports run according to regulations set by the TSA and FAA, as is very clear above. These agencies are run based on political motivation, not any profit motive. So millions are spent each year on marginal or worse security improvements while gaping flaws get overlooked. Given that a hijacking is pretty unlikely now, I think this is not really necessary. Since external costs should be minimal in the case of an attack, maybe it would be better to let passengers decide whether its worth the security risk to have airports screen for shampoo bottles. If you’re worried that airlines will overlook passenger safety w/o federal oversight, I suppose that could be a concern, but the cost in reputation of a disaster you would think would help prevent that.
From Michael Moore (edited slightly for brevity)
http://www.michaelmoore.com/books-films/stupidwhitemen/onlinechapters/part01.php
“My simple question was this: If all smoking is prohibited on all flights, then why does ANYONE need their lighters and matches at 30,000 feet — while I am up there with them?!
I began asking this question in front of audiences on my book tour. And it was on a dark and rainy night in Arlington, Virginia, at the Ollsson’s Bookstore a couple miles from the Pentagon that I got my answer. After asking my Bic lighter question in my talk to the audience, I sat down to sign the books for the people in line. A young man walks up to the table, introduces himself, and lowering his voice so no one can hear, tells me the following:
‘I work on the Hill. The butane lighters were on the original list prepared by the FAA and sent to the White House for approval. The tobacco industry lobbied the Bush administration to have the lighters and matches removed from the banned list. Their customers (addicts) naturally are desperate to light up as soon as they land, and why should they be punished just so the skies can be safe?’”
Instead of disposing of all those lighters airports could easily institute a lighter swap where lighters confiscated at one destination are made available upon arrival to persons who had theirs taken at another airport.
These people don’t even bother to check the no-fly list until the plane has already taken off. The whole thing is a joke.
Damn right. The whole thing is just to look like they’re doing something, airline security is fallible, it’s not going to stop a determined terrorist anyway - that’s what MI5 is for. Sure, scan for bombs and guns, and don’t allow lighters or flammable materials - but the massive increase in visible security personnel after, say, the Glasgow attack is to make people feel safer. That’s all. I have a friend who works airline security. After the arrest of the people planning the attack with liquid explosives he said that if they had made it to the check in desk, they probably wouldn’t have been suspected. They didn’t tick the boxes, they probably wouldn’t have been searched, and the security checks wouldn’t therefore have stopped them.
And sam- that’s an excellent idea! Can’t see it happening though, far too sensible
Not to mention the fact that if the TSA is really worried about explosive or instable liquids, is the safest way to dispose of suspected substances really to dump them all together in one big trash can?
A lot of people claim that TSA rules are designed to make people feel safer more than anything else, but does anyone think it works? Does anyone feel safer? Everyone I know just feels annoyed and harassed.
I remember working security at a bank. I was there as eye candy. I had no weapons, just a pen an a notebook and the orders to comply but be observant.
The bank I was at was one that had been robbed quite frequently recently, and I was there to make staff feel safer. That’s it.
And so it is with these stupid regulations for air travel. It’s to put on the appearance of doing something without actually having to to do something useful. Because, as I can vouch for (being a government employee) the government is all about doing anything except that which is useful.
Lighter - okay
Bottle of contact lens solution - enough for a 1 week trip - not okay
Gotcha.
Oh, and does anybody remember how many flights have been downed by lavatory fires caused by careless smoking?
Hm.
It sounds like there’s some TSA review under way.
They recently started allowing pumped breast milk (in amounts greater than 3oz, when baby is not present) to be carried on board again.
Sara no H- I went from Kansas City to Glasgow this past winter: SWORDS were okay- one just had to check them in.
Ms. Kate, well the obvious solution is to put your contact lens solution into a refillable lighter.
Lost a half-empty 4-oz tube of toothpaste today. Apparently if the container can hold more than 3.4 ounces, it doesn’t matter how much is in it. But the frozen gel pack weighing almost a pound went through without a hitch.
Anonymous Traveler may be comforted by the fact the the TSA is telling folks that children and infants down to one day old will have to go down to their local DMV to get government issued picture ID as of september. The rest of us probably have mixed feelings…
Not really on topic, but in the old place this post was ‘posted by Pam S’. Are Pam and Sheelzebub the same person?