Discussion in 'Aviation Passenger Security in the USA' started by Mike, Aug 26, 2011.
It's your question. You tell me.
The answer is probably "SSI".
In any case, the pizza box and gas pump ads should be pretty indicative of the type of new employee that the TSA thinks is equivalent to their current employees - or they've simply scraped through the bottom of the barrel and have begun to dig in search of new lows that TSA employees can aspire to.
You're making yourself look even more foolish.
I, for one, don't put lawyers up on a pedestal & worship them. They're human and just as smart or stupid as the rest of us. I've tangled with several of them over the years and told a couple of them where to get off. Two people close to me in my younger years (one coworker, one foster sister) are both judges in the Pacific Northwest. If I'd wanted to be an attorney, it would have been easy; I chose not to. At one point I did undertake some graduate work in constitutional law.
Shortly after trying to shake us down for funds for his client (who had altered a document & then refused to give us a copy), one of those attorneys that I told where to get off was arrested, indicted for making movies of underage boys, convicted, jailed, disbarred. His client was a law student at the time she altered the document and is now an attorney practicing in the state of Minnesota. It must be a good honest job. He's now selling real estate. Lucky for us he got his RE license before they started requiring background checks or he might have ended up as one of the gropers-on-call at MSP.
On another occasion ~20 years ago I went head-to-head (only took one phone call after getting some ducks lined up ) to the legal counsel for the National Association of Realtors on an anti-trust issue. You wouldn't believe how quickly the calls went down to the local level to back off & let us know our advertising was legal. The following year NAR's "articles of interpretation" were changed to reflect our point of view.
When someone tries to support something with "so & so's a lawyer, I tend to take that with a grain of salt.
You want to believe that pizza ads are the primary source for recruitment and claim that I look foolish?
Whatever spins your propeller.....
It matters little to me that Pistole is a lawyer, so was Lenin.
Good for you.
For those who claim that Mr. Pistole is conspiring to violate the Constitution, please explain how he passed the BAR exam.
Put up or shut up.
Not too complicated.
Prove that Mr. Pistole gets up every morning to find ways to circumvent the Constitution through TSA policy or that he is patterning his life after Lenin.
Nah. The TSA would never hire such a person to be a groper-on-call.
They'd make him a BDO.
If you believe that passing the Bar exam indicates that someone isn't planning on breaking the law, please explain the case of Frank William Abagnale, Jr.
(It's even on-topic for flight "security.")
C'mon, admit it, your little rhetorical argument is beginning to collapse under its own weight. You're grasping at straws by using a well-known con man to illustrate your example. Can't believe I'm going to post this, but I sure miss PTravel at times like this.
You're the one using the criteria of "passing the Bar exam" as an indicator of character. Looks to me like it's your rhetoric that has no foundation.
Of course I do expect you to simply ignore that, or just come up with further non sequiturs.
Maybe he is. Maybe he isn't. I don't know. Only he can know for certain, and I'm sure he wakes up every morning convinced of his conviction that what he is doing is the right thing. He appears to be on a path to righteousness, and zealotry never has a good outcome. Never.
The fact that he is an attorney is actually instrumental to this discussion. I've actually already answered your question in another thread here.
I highly seriously doubt that Pistole has malicious intent at the heart of his shredding of the Constitution, and frankly I find that fact to make the situation even more dangerous. He's a righteous man, a "good guy", on a mission.
People like Pistole, who also happens to be an attorney, want to see how far they can push the envelope. With his training, he knows exactly how far he can legally push that envelope. He also knows that no court is going to return airport security to pre-9/11 days. He also knows that to get what he really wants he needs to go above and beyond what the current interpretation is, and have the status quo reinterpreted. This is what attorneys do.
That's a complete non sequitur, Bart. Every crooked attorney who's practiced law has passed a bar exam at some point in time. That has absolutely no bearing on whether his future behavior is legal and ethical nor on whether he upholds the Constitution of the United States. Good people go bad, good attorneys go bad, and bad people can become attorneys (usually bad attorneys, I would surmise).
I don't respect people because they are attorneys. I respect attorneys because of what they do in both their official & private capacities.
But there's a difference between representing the client and being the client. An attorney who has himself for a client is usually considered to be poorly represented. Pistole is way out on thin ice given where he's led TSA.
Schneier is level headed and reasonable. Hyperbole isn't his style. That's probably why security cheerleaders don't like him. He has, for instance, long ago come out in favor of random screening, something most people think is a waste of time. But he rationally explained why it made sense. That's one of the rare instances where he agrees with the TSA in principle. He doesn't, however, advocate the stripping, groping, bullying, and harassing so beloved of our airport martinets. Long before the current reign of molestation was a gleam in Pistole's eye, Schneier criticized the theatrical shoe-shedding and shampoo-tossing. He's hardly oblivious to actual threats and actual security. Ditto Stephen M. Lord, Clark Ervin, Richard Roth, Ben Wallace, Rafi Sela, on and on. Rational security experts with rational arguments.
Add to that the groupthink that everything you do is right, and there's a boogeyman behind every tree that is the trademark of this organization, and you have a disaster.
An agency without published rules is precisely the sort of place where insider crime may flourish. So far its been limited to cases of greed, with the occasional off-the-clock (or so it is hoped) pervert
That we know of.
And to this I would add the great lengths the agency and its employees go to protecting themselves from you, their "partner", their fellow citizen. It'd be comical if it weren't so sad.
I recently had a situation that has required me to engage the agency more than I would normally like to. I'm a let-sleeping-dogs-lay sort of guy. When I asked for the names of no fewer than 5 managers who surrounded and harassed me, I was told I was not entitled to this information, even though they demanded my BP, and to take photocopies of my DL. When I asked why it was acceptable for them to take and store all of my personal identifying information, and I couldn't have so much as their name, I was told that I was a criminal suspect and that they were blameless. When I contacted the TSA's FOIA office, I sent the letter Certified Mail. For those who don't know, when a letter is sent via Certified Mail there is a post card form that is attached to the outside of the envelope which provides proof of delivery. On this form is a spot for a signature, which is generally signed by a mail room clerk at the place it is delivered. The TSA FOIA office put an address label sticker in that spot, apparently protecting the identity of any employees who might handle their mail.
What we have here is that TSA publishes a secret rule book. They aggregate names, addresses, birth dates, and social security numbers of dissenters. They are woefully inept at protecting any of this information. And yet they flat out refuse to provide any information about them. It is a recipe for abuse, plain and simple.
Here is the gas pump ad from alysia in the D.C. area:
Separate names with a comma.