OMG--TSA's New Rules Actually Make Sense

[thud...]

OK, picking myself up off the floor--I agree that these new policies do seem both reasonable and reasonably likely to be effective. Credit where credit is due.

Just waiting for someone at TSA to come out and say, "Just kidding!!!"

But this new procedure does make sense though.

It's about time they look at the actual potential problems instead of being so politically correct that we all suffer. There is a time for "racial profiling" and I think this is it. Why do they hassle people who are obviously not terrorists?

The government's answer to racial profiling....the Oklahoma City bomber was white.

And as someone pointed out on another board....some U.S. citizen who is a descendent of one of the countries mentioned and who will be given the extra screening, will sue that his civil rights have been abused. It should be interesting to see.

FYI--if you travel through or from any of the following countries, you will get extra screening on flights to the U.S.:

Afghanistan (don't know about U.S. soldiers)
Algeria
Cuba
Iran
Iraq
Lebanon
Liechtenstein (just kidding, wanted to see if you were paying attention)
Libya
Nigeria
Pakistan
Saudia Arabia
Somalia
Sudan
Syria
Yemen

It may make sense, but it doesn't quite seem to address the fact that at least one of these would-be terrorists was not a citizen of any of those countries nor was flying from any of those countries. Unfortunately, I do think it's the time for racial profiling and think people (the government and governments around the world, included) are too concerned about being PC and not offending people. There is an easy response to the OK City bombing thing - there are one-off crazies everywhere. We can't stop them. The Unabomber was also caucasian and american and a sort of terrorist, as are people who shoot up abortion clinics and on and on and on, but there is only one group of people, a small fundamentalist subset of which has a narrow goal to kill members of the Western World by using terrorist means. Then again it's entirely possible they are secretly already engaging in racial profiling and pulling over Grandma in the wheelchair just to maintain the look of randomness.

Hate to be negative, but these new rules don't make me feel any safer. Still way too many ways around these new rules.

There was a security breach at Newark airport on Sunday night. Terminal C (Continental airline's hub) had to be completely evacuated and everybody re-screened. The process of course took hours, I thought this video of the waiting around was cool:

http://videotodaynews.com/index2.php?p=lg2&vid=HQeG1kaddsw&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Frank II,

In reading over the somewhat brief description of the new regulations, they do make some sense. I have to wonder why they didn't adopt these measures before? I don't perceive these as "racial profiling" but rather profiling on the basis of "country of origin". A citizen of (for example) Yemen could be caucasian or other ethnic origin, but they would both be subject to the enhanced screening.

I wonder if this means "normal" carry-on items will once again be allowed and the secondary screening at the gate discontinued?

It's all fun and games until the Nigerian foreign secretary gets patted down at the airport during an unofficial visit to the US. Then the media reaction will call for not unfairly "targeting" people from those countries and we'll be back to where we're at.

I'm wondering if a pat down would have caught the underwear bomber. The location of the explosives isn't a place that's normally "patted".

Even the scanners aren't likely to catch explosives in that location.

Pat this, baby. Yeah, I just saw an article recently about TSA agents being unwilling to get too frisky as they frisk. The crotch is usually skipped.

Pat downs would not have found the device the Xmas day bomber had because normally pat downs don't cover that area.

An interesting article at MSNBC's website (originally from the Washington Post) about full body scanners.

The article stated a few things:

1) TSA now admits that the machines are capable of saving images but that feature is "turned off." Presumably, it could be turned on. How soon before we see images on the internet?

2) The machines won't detect a bomber carrying anything in a body cavity.

3) Just how much of our liberty are we supposed to give up in the name of Homeland Security?

Here's the article if you're interested:

Full Body Scanners

There is no 100% fool proof way of catching terrorists. However, much of the work needs to be done way before any of us gets to the airport.

"There is no 100% fool proof way of catching terrorists. However, much of the work needs to be done way before any of us gets to the airport."

Exactly, Frank II!!!

I too agree with Frank II. I was hoping that someone could clarify my understanding of the new "rule" (the TSA statement is rather poorly written). Would the enhanced security measures be for travel through/within the mentioned countries, or would it also be for folks with any connection to these countries (i.e., US citizens of ancestry from these countries). The first criterion does not make any sense if implemented alone.

And for the proponents of profiling, although I am not completely in disagreement about that point, I hope there is a realization that it is an utterly embarrassing, inconvenient, and demoralizing process for those who are targeted. It is more than random pat-downs and luggage searches that most will endure, but includes a Q&A prior to being able to check in, an inability to use some of the services (e.g., checking-in at a kiosks, seat assignments, etc.), being pulled aside for 15-minutes when checking-in while someone on the other end of a phone call clears you, and always having the red slash across your check-in stub meaning additional searches. This process was at its height for the couple of years after 9/11 and then it calmed down. I am not looking forward to having to go through it again every time I fly. But, I guess it must be done.

They make sense??? REALLY!

Gee, a terrorist would NEVER fly from someplace NOT on the list like Amsterdam would they?

Gee, a terrorist would NEVER be a citizen of a country other then those listed would they? (Exactly WHICH of the countries was Richard Reid from????)

Gee, a terrorist would never have dual nationality, a new passport without "offending stamps" etc...?

They may sense if you think like the TSA. The terrorist will present at the airport as a 'terrorist' WAIT... didn't the last guys father WARN the US the kid was up to no good... and what happened when he presented to come to the US???

TSA- Thousands Standing Around wasting your tax $$$$

Ok, Carol....then what's your solution?

Here's my solution: EVERY passenger and EVERY piece of luggage gets cleared by a bomb-sniffer dog in addition to the regular screening.

In order to do that, each airport would need hundreds of dogs on-hand. Even the most highly trained dogs tire out very quickly, and are only effective for about one hour's worth of duty a day.

And a lot of pooper scoopers....

I don't know that I have a solution, but I mointor controls for a living...

Good controls are PREVENTATIVE not "OMG something happened PANIC"

The problem on 12/25 was that the CONTROLS we should have had in place did NOT work. What's the purpose of the "no fly list"? Apparently to harrass Americans because we let folks who are KNOWN to us as a danger just fly at will....

Are we safer know then prior to 9/11? Sure. Is ANY of it due to the Thousands Standing Around? IMHO NO! But next time you fly if your passport shows a "bad stamp" you will be presumed GUILTY! (Did these guys even read the Constitution?)

The cargo on your plane probably won't have been checked, but YOU will have been frisked... The people that work for the airport/airline are not subject to the liquid "ban" but who was a plotter in the liquid bomb plot??? An airport employee!

What we have now is "doing something so that folks will think we are effective" Of course since we have PRESS RELEASES on everything (Or just publish the "secret" policies and procedures on the net) I would think a half witted terrorist could figure out some way around these "controls"

I think Carol's absolutely right. As I said in the previous TSA thread, every person should go through a body scanner (scanners can detect explosives, but not in body cavities), every piece of luggage should be x-ray'd (can they scan luggage too?) and they should have El Al level security. It won't be 100%, nothing can be, but we'd be a lot safer than we are now.

Susan...how much are you willing to pay for all the extra security and how far in advance are you willing to get to the airport to get through that type of security?

I'm guessing you don't fly often.

Hi Frank, I'd be willing to spend several hundred dollars extra pp to be as safe as possible. And you're right, I don't fly often, every two yrs to Europe. But I'd get to the airport any amount of hours early to be as safe as possible.