TSA’s Response to Diane Dimond’s Oct. 4 Op-Ed Piece

http://www.rocklandtimes.com/2012/10/18/tsas-response-to-diane-dimonds-oct-4-op-ed-piece/

Only one comment so far but it's a good one.

BY LISA FARBSTEIN
For someone who lives just 15 miles from what used to be the World Trade Center, Rockland resident/writer Diane Dimond seems to have a short memory. In a recent column, she ranted about TSA because she doesn’t like to take off her shoes at the checkpoint and because TSA dared to open her husband’s carry-on bag to take a peak at what she admittedly defined as containing “specialized” electronic equipment.
She criticized the very security measures that were designed to keep passengers safe —to help ensure that there is not another 9/11 in her back yard – in any back yard for that matter — yet at no time did she ever contact TSA to check her facts. So permit me to do the fact-checking for your readers.............

 

I don't see any comments. Is this a subscriber only site?

 

Comment:

• Anthony Melé · Subscribe · Top Commenter · Norwich University
  Ms. Farbstein:
  
  Granted you are the paid spokesperson for the TSA and this is the best retort you can muster to what millions of air traveler's endure.
  
  However, chiding is unbecoming on such matters as serious as the U.S. Constitution, our blood earned liberties and public safety. We can also do without the scare tactics. No one needs reminding that the Towers were crashed into by our own aircraft because of a multiple failures by the US government, not a security guard.
  
  Aviation security can be achieved without the abuse of our rights or sensibilities. For instance, FACT: Not one single of the measures you described here our passengers endure would have stopped any of the 9-11 hijackers.
  
  As the public may not know, but you should as the TSA spokesperson, pilots were instructed to cooperate with hijackers as we le
  arned throughout the 80's with the rash of AMAL/PLO sky-jackings that became such an epidemic, T.W.A came to mean: Travel With AMAL.
  
  All a hijacker had to do was threaten a passenger, flight attendant or say he planted a bomb and the plane would be diverted to Cuba, Beirut, Entebbe and so on. A coke can, belt or blanket can be lethal in the hands of any well trained person.
  
  The placement of armed Air-Marshals and Sky-Tiger's were soon curtailed after a short time in part because hijackings had subsided and no one could predict what flights posed the greatest risk.
  
  The TSA employee's have a tough job without question, but it is the policy and techniques that are unquestionably egregious, invasive and does not keep anyone any safer. Do not sell us the illusion of safety nor the notion, we as a nation should abandon our freedom for it.
  
  Every procedure you described is a search for explosives, disguised as a snow globe or plastic explosive in the shape of a laptop or laden underneath a person's clothes or in their shoes. A weapon can be countered by armed personnel.
  
  Yet, the reality is a terrorist willing to blow themselves up will do it just as readily on board the aircraft as they would standing on line with literally hundreds of passengers.
  
  An attack perpetrated or even attempted at the check point, which is also a choke point, with hundreds of people will have the same debilitating effect on the industry as it would on board. Flights would be diverted, airports shut down, all over the country.
  
  A TSA employee searching, so routinely for such an explosive device is completely unprepared to cope with it if they find it. The terrorist or literally scores of them with luggage waiting to be checked can wreck havoc in every airport around the world in multiple, coordinated attacks or taking everyone hostages, to include the TSA employees.
  
  At Domodeveo Airport outside Moscow, the terrorist brought their luggage to the arrival area, placed it down, walked away, and detonated it with a cell phone from the safety of their parked car at the drop off area.
  
  The Electronic Strip Search is another intrusive safety illusion for the very same reason. I assure you Ms. Farber, if you spotted a terrorist wearing enough explosives to blow the roof off the building, you would not ask him to step into the hand search area. No one would blame you for succumbing to the instinct of running away.
  
  My Global Security Group, consisting of security experts from every technical field, published a white paper that was submitted to the Committee during the Underwear Bomber hearings. They laid out in intricate detail more than what I have pointed out here.
  
  There are evasive counter -measures for instance a pilot captain could take at their own discretion, such as flight controlled turbulence, employing the laws of aero-dynamics, centrifugal forces and power of gravity, that would incapacitate anyone who is not buckled into their seat, until such time they are subdued.
  
  The establishment of the TSA replacing private security was a blame game. It was not the fault of private security that 9-11 happened. The terrorist plotter's exploited the well known policy of cooperation and surrender that was FAA and US government policy.
  
  Aviation security world wide is achieved by a layered security perimeter approach, intelligence sharing, technology, and among others, profiling and benign interview process employing trade secrets that I will not divulge here.
  
  I applaud Ms. Diane Dimond's piece. Your response to it has ever more solidified my colleagues and I leaning toward the dismantling of the TSA and replace it with effective, professional security and counter-terrorism measures.
  
  The U.S. government should not be in the abrogating the Bill of Rights for the illusion of safety business. Responsible and effective, holistic approach using system techniques to address the issue are available to us, that would do the job just fine.
  Reply · 2 · Unlike · Follow Post · 6 hours ago
  
  

Facebook social plugin

 

Are you using a javascript blocker? You need to allow javacript to see comments on most sites, including this reply from Anthony Melé @ Norwich University to the TSA mouthpiece:

​

Ms. Farbstein:​

​

Granted you are the paid spokesperson for the TSA and this is the best retort you can muster to what millions of air traveler's endure.

However, chiding is unbecoming on such matters as serious as the U.S. Constitution, our blood earned liberties and public safety. We can also do without the scare tactics. No one needs reminding that the Towers were crashed into by our own aircraft because of a multiple failures by the US government, not a security guard.

Aviation security can be achieved without the abuse of our rights or sensibilities. For instance, FACT: Not one single of the measures you described here our passengers endure would have stopped any of the 9-11 hijackers.

As the public may not know, but you should as the TSA spokesperson, pilots were instructed to cooperate with hijackers as we le​

arned throughout the 80's with the rash of AMAL/PLO sky-jackings that became such an epidemic, T.W.A came to mean: Travel With AMAL.

All a hijacker had to do was threaten a passenger, flight attendant or say he planted a bomb and the plane would be diverted to Cuba, Beirut, Entebbe and so on. A coke can, belt or blanket can be lethal in the hands of any well trained person.

The placement of armed Air-Marshals and Sky-Tiger's were soon curtailed after a short time in part because hijackings had subsided and no one could predict what flights posed the greatest risk.

The TSA employee's have a tough job without question, but it is the policy and techniques that are unquestionably egregious, invasive and does not keep anyone any safer. Do not sell us the illusion of safety nor the notion, we as a nation should abandon our freedom for it.

Every procedure you described is a search for explosives, disguised as a snow globe or plastic explosive in the shape of a laptop or laden underneath a person's clothes or in their shoes. A weapon can be countered by armed personnel.

Yet, the reality is a terrorist willing to blow themselves up will do it just as readily on board the aircraft as they would standing on line with literally hundreds of passengers.

An attack perpetrated or even attempted at the check point, which is also a choke point, with hundreds of people will have the same debilitating effect on the industry as it would on board. Flights would be diverted, airports shut down, all over the country.

A TSA employee searching, so routinely for such an explosive device is completely unprepared to cope with it if they find it. The terrorist or literally scores of them with luggage waiting to be checked can wreck havoc in every airport around the world in multiple, coordinated attacks or taking everyone hostages, to include the TSA employees.

At Domodeveo Airport outside Moscow, the terrorist brought their luggage to the arrival area, placed it down, walked away, and detonated it with a cell phone from the safety of their parked car at the drop off area.

The Electronic Strip Search is another intrusive safety illusion for the very same reason. I assure you Ms. Farber, if you spotted a terrorist wearing enough explosives to blow the roof off the building, you would not ask him to step into the hand search area. No one would blame you for succumbing to the instinct of running away.

My Global Security Group, consisting of security experts from every technical field, published a white paper that was submitted to the Committee during the Underwear Bomber hearings. They laid out in intricate detail more than what I have pointed out here.

There are evasive counter -measures for instance a pilot captain could take at their own discretion, such as flight controlled turbulence, employing the laws of aero-dynamics, centrifugal forces and power of gravity, that would incapacitate anyone who is not buckled into their seat, until such time they are subdued.

The establishment of the TSA replacing private security was a blame game. It was not the fault of private security that 9-11 happened. The terrorist plotter's exploited the well known policy of cooperation and surrender that was FAA and US government policy.

Aviation security world wide is achieved by a layered security perimeter approach, intelligence sharing, technology, and among others, profiling and benign interview process employing trade secrets that I will not divulge here.

I applaud Ms. Diane Dimond's piece. Your response to it has ever more solidified my colleagues and I leaning toward the dismantling of the TSA and replace it with effective, professional security and counter-terrorism measures.

The U.S. government should not be in the abrogating the Bill of Rights for the illusion of safety business. Responsible and effective, holistic approach using system techniques to address the issue are available to us, that would do the job just fine.​

 

Posted one of my own.

 

x1,000 Awesome, CW...simply AWESOME!!! (as was Anthony's)

 

Javascript is not blocked on my computer and I can't see it.

A great response, as usual, CW!

ETA:

One thing that caught my eye about Farbstein's reply was that she referred to the original writer as "Diane" and not Ms. Dimond. That's so condescending - but what else can one expect from the TSA?

 

It really says all we need to know that Lisa Farbstein, paid shill for the TSA, is so stupid she doesn't know the difference between "peak" and "peek."

 

Yes, awesome comments!

 

You're too kind.

 

Maybe that's why Anthony Melé referred to her as "Ms. Farber" about halfway through his comment.

 

Little Ms. Faberstein let her real feelings slip here. Gone is the veil of institutional indifference -- "We're sorry you feel you've had a bad experience, but proper procedures were followed..." blah, blah, blah. With this one, she gets catty and accusatory. I'll bet this is more representative of the culture inside the TSA -- absolute (expletive deleted) talk about the pax, absolute backing up of every assault or dick move performed by a screener.

 

Hang around the TSA employees' designated smoking area (usually shared with passengers) just out of sight and eavesdrop a bit.

I have. As long as they think there aren't any actual peons around, they're remarkably candid about how they feel about their "job," the passengers, and each other.

 

From what you have heard, do they seem to really believe they are protecting the skies from terrorists? I can guess what they fell about passengers and each other.

 

I've never overheard a TSA employee so much as mention "terrorists" in their conversations with each other. Nor "explosives."

But their behavior at the checkpoint indicates that they know just how rarely they will ever actually come into contact with "the real thing," or they would be refusing to perform the silly "Code Bravo," "back room gropes," etc.

"Hey, we think this guy might have a bomb on him, so I'm going to take him into a back room and grope him by myself, despite not being qualified to tell the difference between my (expletive deleted) and my elbow - maybe I'll find some pot or cocaine on him, too! That'd be AWESOME!"

 

As Mr. Mele suggested in his response, if any of them ever found a bomb, they'd be out of that checkpoint as fast as their fat bodies can move, peeing their pants while they waddle.

 

I've always thought that sometime, somewhere, some fat-assed TSA employee is going to come to the wrong conclusion, scream "BOMB! SAVE YOURSELVES" and leap on a six-year-old girl, crushing them to death.

 

Uh-oh, we got a butthurt former smurf-clerk trying to defend his poor widdle TSA from the mean ol' pax.

Gave him a well-deserved lambasting too:

 

You done good. He's a very angry person - so typical of TSA employees.

According to his FB page, married in 2010, separated in 2011.

 

I tried posting a comment there to Joseph Shithouse but either the comments are tied up waiting moderation or just didn't go. Someone ask this guy how he could have a 100% service connected disability and still meet the physical qualifications for TSA employment.