InsideFlyer.com [English] United States InsideFlyer.uk [English] United Kingdom InsideFlyer.de [German] Germany InsideFlyer.no [Norwegian] Norway InsideFlyer.se [Swedish] Sweden InsideFlyer.dk [Danish] Denmark InsideFlyer.nl [Dutch] Benelux
Discussion in 'Travel Security' started by USAF_Pride, May 14, 2012.
| Print Topic
This time it was Henry Kissinger
That's too funny. "I told you to empty the pockets! I don't care what kind of top secret clearance your getting a pat down." lol
This is a good thing, everyone should be treated equally.
Aw c'mon-cut the TSO's involved a break....
I mean Kissinger does speak with an accent and was not born in the U.S.A so maybe they did think they had one in their midst .
I'm going to disagree with you here. Everyone is not the same level of risk.
Many of the things the TSA does are not rational, this just is one more data point. Frankly, I'd expect nothing less from them though. They have no incentive to deviate from their programed behaviors.
When I say equally I mean that politicians or other prominent figures don't get special treatment. I am all for any protocols in place to protect air travel including profiling if necessary.
I don't mean to be rude Corey but from a risk analysis perspective, neither of your statements makes sense. Treating everyone equally looks good but, in reality, a Henry Kissinger isn't going to jack the plane. He can do more damage with his cell phone most likely.
When we do silly things to "look good" or be "politically correct" or the dreaded "tough on terror" it makes us all less safe, not more. It's theater, not real.
Here's a nice posting from today pointing out why profiling doesn't make sense either. http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/05/the_trouble_wit.html
Kissinger isn't but being a politician doesn't make you a saint. People do go off their rockers. In regards to profiling I am not suggesting this is ideal means but if the professionals believe it is then I would stand behind them on it.
Yes using highly trained agents to spot people (based on in depth behavior analysis) like the Israeli's do isn't the answer - no, minimum wage robots with no common sense (or no ability to use it if it exists) is the answer. Oh and let's not forget the great screening they do for TSA employee's so that when they are caught stealing or taking bribes the powers that be are just "so surprised"
Kissinger is clearly the most troubled, dangerous person the TSA has ever patted down.
But are we thinking 'equally' in inconvenience here, or 'equally' in preventing risk? Whether you love or hate Dr. Kissinger, his work for Mr. Nixon, on the Vietnam war, etc., it's quite obvious he aint'a gonna hijack an airplane, particularly at age 88!
And the prevention of hijacks and related crimes -- rather than causing equal inconvenience and frustration just to justify a paycheck -- is what is supposed to be the purpose of the T.S.A.
If the T.S.A.'s rules and system have taken over the purpose and goal of the agency, and T.S.A. has lost sight of the latter, just in the name of equality, that is plain wrong.
And yes, it is reasonable to ask the T.S.A. to hire agents, even young ones, educated enough to realize who people like Henry Kissinger are, and thus their (non)risks of being violent passengers.
I wonder what percentage of high school graduates these days would (a) know who Henry Kissinger is and (b) be able to identify him in a photo line-up.
The story in the paper said the agents at LGA had no idea who he was. And by treating everyone equally we discover TSA hardly ever finds guns, knives, explosives, and related bad stuff because they they believe we are all the same. The paper today also quoted some Congressmen as saying, while they are not allowed to talk about the content of confidential briefings from TSA, they are not happy with TSA. I wonder why........
I know what you're saying. There might be "happy mediums," if supervisors would actually stop and think -- like pairing the new h.s. grad in the same line with someone my age. God Knows there are always lots of blue shirts around. Also, when you think about it, knowing famous Americans of the past is the type of thing foreign-born citizen candidates are tested on. So is it easier to hire people who couldn't pass the citizenship test and instead enforce 'equality' gone amok? I'll be honest, I came late to the Bash-The-T.S.A. Party, figuring they were doing their best and the complaints were overblown. But my patience is wearing thin. And I doubt I am alone as a latecomer.
This was my initial thought, but I have since thought about it more.
If the TSA would employ some common sense (stop laughing), maybe they would find more legitimate threats.
A 25% annual turnover rate (possibly higher), recruiting off of pizza boxes, and 90% failure rates in detecting prohibited items. Common sense would say that the TSA should focus on true threats. But then again, common sense and the TSA are mutually exclusive terms.
It's a small thing, but common fairness would indicate that — even if there's no threat — people shouldn't be excused from random searches simply because of their celebrity. Dianne Feinstein or Henry Kissenger are extremely unlikely to be the vector used to get a bomb on board a plane, but when their number comes up they should get the same treatment others do. It's similar to celebrities reporting to jury duty — they're certain not to get seated, but they still need to do their civic duty.
In this particular case, however, it's clear the agents had no idea whatsoever who they were searching. That doesn't speak to any "dumbness" about searching a celebrity who you might feel should be exempt. You could argue that the TSA should only hire people who can identify anyone who's served in a Presidential Cabinet position in the last 40 years, but it doesn't strike me that's an essential qualification.