TSA Slammed in Times OPED

It's reassuring to know that more people than ever are becoming aware of just what a sham TSA really is. Here's a recent OPED piece in the NYT taking TSA to task for its ludicrous liquids ban.

Screening Dreams

If you are someone who suspects that what is billed as “aviation security” is often more show than substance, you are not alone. In fact, you are part of what Nixon aides used to call the “silent majority.” The security bureaucracy seems to think that as long as it is seen as doing something, and so long as another terror attack does not occur, the public will at least feel secure enough not to insist that it do whatever needs to be done actually to make us secure.


The author is not just a frustrated traveler. He is part of the Homeland Security industry:

Clark Kent Ervin was the first inspector general of the United States Department of Homeland Security, where he served from January, 2003 to December, 2004. He is the Director of the Aspen Institute’s Homeland Security Program and the author of “Open Target: Where America is Vulnerable to Attack.” He lives in Washington.

And remember -- the "attack" that started this whole liquids fiasco never would have succeeded, anyway. I ranted about that last year.

If TSA really thought those liquids were dangerous and explosive, then maybe, just maybe, asking all passenger to dispose of their liquids in a trash can in the middle of a crowded security screening area isn't such a good idea.

If they're dangerous, don't pile them all up together in the middle of a crowd. That's stupid. If they're not dangerous, then let me take my Mountain Dew through security. And quit confiscating the gel insoles from my shoes.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I've often pointed out that if the security measures that were in place on 9/11 had actually been Followed the attacks on that date would have been foiled. Since then they have turned boarding an airplane into an experience slightly more de-humanizing and unpleasant than being booked into jail and no one seems willing to acknowledge that none of this has made us any safer than if we had merely begun following the policies and procedures that were in place pre-9/11.