Flying sure is looking less and less desirable every day.

This seems rather typically for a government agency. Perhaps they dont want to seem incompetent because they really are..?

Ah. So a real terrorist would go easy on the TSA and make the bomb not incredibly difficult to find.

@clickertrainer: Beat me to it.

"Oh we're competent, just not good at hard stuff."

Wait, so "the test is designed to be difficult" but they think that terrorists will try to make it EASY for TSA (which stands for "Thousands, Standing Around" by the way) to stop them?

Bullshit.

I cant think of anyone that doesn't simply roll their eyes when they think of something this stupid. So all this waiting in line and taking my shoes off, getting my Pepsi taken away along with some finger nail clippers is supposed to make me feel safe. All that, and the F@#%ing bombs aren't found?
The terrorists have one, we are terrorized.

rofl. Typical. Does the US government do anything right!!??

@rocnrule: Well... We consistently expect the government to screw up. They consistently DO screw up, meeting our expectations. So YES, I'd say they do consistently do SOMETHING right.

Okay everyone, settle down and try to put on your reasonable hats.
Perhaps you would prefer if the TSA wasn't tested?
Seems to me that these tests were designed to expose training weaknesses and vulnerability, which they did.
I'd wager that some of you won't bother to read the article, where it says:
"Davis said security screeners who fail tests must undergo extra training in addition to annual recertification exams.

"These covert tests conducted by security personnel simply augment their training regimen," Davis said. "

In other words, these tests were designed to illustrate failures and weaknesses. The results end up helping the TSA better train their agents.
While I agree that the failure rate seems too high, it isn't beyond repair.
I, for one, am glad that the results came back so bad.
In the restaurant biz, we used to fork out good money to have secret shoppers come in to help us evaluate our staff. Of the 100 or so reports I saw, 99 of them indicated a problem. We reviewed each one and designed individual trainings to address unique issues and broad trainings to correct sweeping issues.
And no, all this waiting in line, removing your shoes, and having your liquids confiscated isn't designed to make you feel safe - it is designed to make you safer. Safe - er.
Glad you caught this, TSA. Now make it better.

hey i think they're doing a great job by preventing terrorists from being hydrated. cause that's the point right? don't hydrate the terrorists.

Of course they have to be tested. I would prefer if they were something close to compentent.

If I had test results like that at my job, I wouldn't have one.

While there may or may not be "re-training", the issue is that certainly no one will ever be fired at the TSA for being incompetent and there is no real incentive for them to BE competent. This is the downside of a unionized government workforce with guaranteed jobs.

This workforce is no different than the minimum-wage people that worked security pre-9/11, except that they now get much better benefits and jobs for life.

Come on guys. Now, I'm not defending the TSA, because obviously they screwed up.

But, I would bet this would have happened pre-9/11 also.

One of the major things a teacher said that stuck with me was "You can't let the terrorists run your life. Sure, if they kill someone, they like it, but they get more satisfaction with the aftermath, seeing how many people they scared, and how many lives they changed."

And I agree. So now, I fly. More often than pre-9/11. To send a message: I will NOT back down to terrorists. Sure, I'm just one person, but it's the idea...

There are two confusing aspects of this.

(1) Why did they go to the press with this information?

(2) What is a fake bomb? Do we have any military people reading that can explain this -- I mean, if it's not a bomb then there was no preach

I think people are missing the real problem. It's not that safety threats are getting through the tests. as others have mentioned, that's what the tests are for. The problem is that screeners are confiscating water bottles and other innocuous items that distract their attention. It's a well-known psychological concept that finding/spotting a decoy item will increase the chances of a hidden item/person/action past any kind of screening procedure.

The ban on water and other items undermines our safety.

@nachas101: It'd be one thing if these tests really DID help the TSA improve...but this stuff has been going on for YEARS and still nothing has changed. I'd say that just shows how meaningless all the security theatre is.

@levenhopper: Yes, but it's not like we're givien a choice NOT to be subjected to searches and confiscations.

@nachas101: I think the point is that after six years of this security theater bullshit they still can't perform their primary mission because they're too distracted taking bottled water away from people.
I would prefer that they repeal the ridiculous liquids ban, start screening the catering and cleaning crews, and start profiling (which has worked for El Al for 40 odd years).

Not surprised. I was stopped on one of those "random" security checks back in the summer of 02 when I flew a lot for my internship. My name is middle eastern (though I am not) so I got "randomly" flagged by the computer about 75% of the time!

Once they searched everything and didn't take my small pocket knife which I accidentally still had in my bag. Thanks for wasting my time!

Where else is a failure rate as high as the TSA's acceptable? It's all smoke and mirrors to make idiots feel safer, but really just drains money, resources and passenger's patience.

Perhaps for the next test of TSA, the testers should put in a full water bottle next to a hunting knife, a handgun, a grenade, and cuticle scissors. Which will they confiscate first?

Kip Hawley is a flippin' idiot.

@ancientsociety:
What stuff has been going on for years?
Proof? evidence?
I see this as a way for the TSA to improve performance.
@Pelagius:
And I say that is nonsense.
Why are you and so many others so freaked out about the liquids ban? Let it go. It's just a liquid.
Are you one of those kids who chewed gum in the library even though you knew it wasn't allowed?
However, I agree with you completely about screening the way el-al does. I've experienced that and sure didn't mind it.
The liquids ban doesn't detract them from anything, if anything it provides them a reason to stop someone and interact with them, which is essential to the screening process. It isn't a distraction and it sends a message to would be terrorists - we are looking at everyone.
Don't you think it is more of an excuse to interact with people?
I say profile away.
Not all muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are muslims.
So stop and interact with anyone who might be muslim first and foremost.
Hell, I think the TSA should screen every single person trying to get into an airport. period. I don't mind the idea of having to show up 3 hours early for a flight if it means I will land in my destination city.

YOU CAN'T MAKE T.A.T.P. ON A PLANE!

Not cold enough, not a smooth enough ride to mate the chemicals, you would explode walking with the separated chemicals trying to get on to the plane if they were not transported in dry ice or something else VERY COLD.

This isn't chemistry 101, but its pretty friggin' close!

TSA and the government needed a scapegoat to make it look like they were securing our travel. TATP was that scapegoat.

Basically the TSA reforms only effect is raising revenues at the airport news stands and vending machines because you now have to buy liquids there if you want them.

"We don't discuss the results because they tend to paint an inaccurate picture of the competency of our work force."

Translation:

Ya know, this bomb thing is really hard! Do you know how hard it is to find bombs? Man, it's really hard.

"The tests are designed to be incredibly difficult and TSA does anticipate a fair level of failure."

Translation:

We can't do our jobs. Which is stop stopping bombs. Excuse me, there's a guy trying to bring a Fresca on the plane.

@nachas101:

Sure, it's "just a liquid." But in the times I've flown, since the liquids ban, TSA seems all-consumed with confiscating liquids. In Honolulu, they acted like they just hit bingo when they confiscated my (legal, according to their rules) contact solution.

@nachas101: While a do think it's a good thing that TSA is running these tests, I don't think it will do much good until they hire well paid professional security.

FTFA: "We don't discuss the results because they tend to paint an inaccurate picture of the competency of our work force,"

No, it paints an accurate picture that the screener's are in fact incompetent. Look at the "myth-busters" video that they displayed to discredit the dangerous water-wielding mother. You can clearly see a lack of composure and professionalism by TSA screeners.

Maybe it's now part of American culture to act like a slacker with attitude while poorly performing your job. I definitely packing my parachute to get out of this country when it implodes.

Nachas, I was going to reply until I read your bon mott "Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims."

Even Dubya, as dense as he is, would call you an idiot.

@nachas101: "Not all muslims are terrorists, by all terrorists are muslim."

Oh, really? So Tim McVeigh was a muslim? And those members of the IRA that were bombing people, they were muslim, too?

@levenhopper: I worked airport security before 9/11 (way before) and if a test bomb got past the checkpoint, disciplinary action was taken against the person who let it by. Alternately, if you caught it, you received a small bonus.

I know this because I caught one, and got the bonus. Back in '85 it was $100.

Ironically, I also caught someone (a real bad guy, not the test guys) trying to sneak a gun through security. I didn't get any bonus.

Pre-TSA they were still underpaid and undertrained but at least then management instilled the attitude that failure wasn't acceptable.

The problem with the current administration is that when failures like this are shown, they

- get rid of the people who found the failures
- get rid of the procedures that found the failures
- discredit the people who found the failures
- reward people who lie to your face and say "that never happened"

what i want to know is how the mystery shoppers who snuck the bombs past security managed not to get disappeared.

"congratulations, you missed the fake bomb i just passed through the checkpoint! no, really, i'm an official government agent! this was only a test, it's not a REAL bomb- hey, where are you taking me?"

Next time I'll just have to remember to hide my water IN the bomb, that way I can take it out after I get through security and have a drink while I wait due to a 6 hour delay. That'll save $4 or whatever insane price they want to charge for something to drink after you get through security.

@nachas101:

Okay everyone, settle down and try to put on your reasonable hats.
Perhaps you would prefer if the TSA wasn't tested?

Um, okay, let's put on the reasonable hat.

Let's say these kinds of tests result in better testing of passengers and their carry-ons.

What's the point of competently screening for the bomb OR the water bottle, when the cargo hold is being held to much laxer standards.

We keep hearing about the amateurs and wanna-bes who have something in their shoe that won't light, whatever? Wouldn't an intelligent terrorists love to keep us fixated on airline passengers? There's the hold, there's ports of entry and cargo containers, there's all sorts of stuff.

It's reassuring I guess that more people are onto the TSA's dog-and-pony show. But some think there's more, having everything to do with keeping the public a little scared and a lot unquestioning/obedient ain't exactly a stretch either. You can certainly argue that this is political paranoia, but a governmental mandate to condition societal behavior in that direction is one of the few explanations that could make TSA policies conform to some kind of logic.

Of course they didn't spot the bombs, they weren't sticks of dynamite wired to a huge, wind-up alarm clock or a mysterious metal cylinder in a briefcase with a red digital display counting down to zero. That and there was a bottle of Squirt next to them.

I guess they didn't get the memo that "opposite day" was not a real holiday

@nachas101: oh, and you seem to be overstating the TSA's responsiveness here. In what other field can you fail crucial security screening tasks at this rate? and then complain that the random checks are just "really difficult"?

maybe it's because airport screening is designed to make us feel less safe, not more. just like those dumbass color-coded threat levels that will be elevated from now until forever.

earlier this year, my husband and i flew to colorado from texas. my husband forgot his pocket knife was still in his pocket - it's not small either - we live in *texas*. we decided to sit it out since we were close to the front of the security line. in addition his keys and change, he took the knife out of his pocket and put it in the little container they give you when you walk through the metal detector...

and they didn't say a word...

he went through the detector, stuck it back in his pocket...

and they pulled me aside because i took too long removing my 12 hole black boots. "code orange", the said.

my husband just sat there and laughed while i was searched.

-_-

If y'all spent as much time complaining to your elected representative as you do to each other maybe things would change.

@nachas101:

Not all muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are muslims.

Uh... Timothy McVeigh? The Unabomber? Eric Rudolph?

I'm glad I take the train.

SHADEWALKER AT 03:05 PM
hey i think they're doing a great job by preventing terrorists from being hydrated. cause that's the point right? don't hydrate the terrorists.

As a kid, I always thought that Seamonkeys were awfully suspicious, say maybe...

 
 
FTA: "We don't discuss the results because they tend to paint an inaccurate picture of the competency of our work force," she said. "The tests are designed to be incredibly difficult and TSA does anticipate a fair level of failure."

I liked the translations above, but I have another one.

Translation: "The bombs did not resemble marketing items for a cartoon."

@jamesBrauer66: some of us have - i've written my representatives on all levels...take a wild guess how successful the campaign was?

@nachas101:

Well the liquid bomb (hidden in a contact lens fluid bottle) did kill one person and ripped a hole next the to fuselage of a Boeing 747 in 1994

[en.wikipedia.org]

The bomber was an Al Queda bomber responsible for the first World Trade Center bombing.

The Liquid bombs that went off in Phillippine Airlines Flight 434 was a test run by Al Queda in a plot to detonate 7 to 10 commercial jets.

Sorry you feel you don't think liquid bombs are a potential threat. They are.

They spend so much time and energy training these TSA goons to ferret out moisture that they have less time to spend ferreting out items that actually might be dangerous. Flying just makes me angry these days.

@memphis9:

The reason why a cargo hold bomb is impractical is because the bomber has no control WHERE the bomb can be placed. The choice for the potential terrorist is precision control where the bomb can be placed due to the small amount of explosives a bomber can reasonably use to take down a plane. Duh.

bombs in check-in luggage allows the criminal a level of control and stealth by ASSEMBLING a device from harmless looking components.

Ironchef: Of course there are explosive liquids and they should never be carried onboard. Solution: if an official is suspicious, open the container to inspect.

The problem isn't really that they failed A test, it's that they keep failing these tests over, and over, and over again. I can't count how many of these articles I've read. We've identified that there's massive room for improvement, but nobody's taking the steps to enact it.

@nachas101: There's a difference between a bomb on a plane and McDonalds accidentally giving you medium fries when you ordered large. There's no excuse for this at all. Last time I checked, hundreds of lives weren't on the line when someone didn't get enough fries.

The fact that anyone is paying even the slightest bit of attention to nachas is letting the terrorists win.