TSA Rule Change May Have Inadvertently Shut Down Toronto's International Terminal [YYZ]

As much as I'd love to see anything blamed, directly or indirectly, on TSA, the passenger in question appears to have been headed TO the U.S. This incident was simply the failure of Canadian airport security to detect an item that is banned in Canada.

However, this raises another very interesting question: What happens when flights from the U.S. empty into international terminals at foreign airports (e.g. AMS, CDG, SYD), and those countries don't permit knives? Australia, for example, is especially picky about "stickies" in hand luggage -- even prescription meds with hypodermic needles are only allowed by prior arrangement with your airline. Are small knives permitted in the EU?

AMS would be a much less friendly airport if all passengers from the U.S. where shunted directly to customs & security. CDG is never particularly friendly anyway ...

Latinos Post: TSA Rule Change May Have Inadvertently Shut Down Toronto's International Terminal

Toronto's Pearson airport grounded international flights early Saturday morning, after a pocket knife was discovered in a passenger's carry-on luggage. The passenger was likely on his way to the U.S., where the Transportation Security Administration has recently authorized rules that say passengers are allowed to bring such items on the plane in their carry-on bags. ​

 

I can't understand why they grounded flights, rather than just confiscating the pocket knife. Do they never find pocket knives that people forgot were in their bags? Are they not aware of how many they miss on a probably regular basis? Something is crazy about this story.

 

Agreed, especially since the new regulations on knives does not take effect until Apr 25th. Something is just not adding up about the whole storyline.

 

Agreed.
The TSA blame here is their role in PR re: the knife policy (not yet in effect).
The entire knife policy change seems concocted for optimal pavlovian effect, rallying support for confiscation voluntary abandonment. Why was Kip Hawley so excited about it anyway?

I mean, as far as policy change goes, why not start out with allowing cupcakes?

Story about Pervole briefing, with pdf of letter explaining priorities and catastrophic risk (like carrying on Evian??)
Lively discussion on knife policy, Greene op-ed CNN, with the provocative opener:

 

Kip is exited because the shift in direction plays into what he has been stating in the press and in his book -= stop looking for so much minutiae and focus on the things that can bring down the plane. Of late (the last couple of years) he has been saying we can stop looking for small knives, hockey sticks and such because they are a small threat vector, and the change in thought process for the aircrews and passengers can compensate for items like a knife or stick or bat. If you haven't read much of what Kip has been saying lately, I highly recommend you do (all previous dislike of the man and his policies aside), he is pushing a more common sense approach to the process and the prohibs lists. I think that PIstole is now feeling a lot of what Kip faced when he was trying to change some of the protocols toward the end of his tenure - mainly congressional backlash, the combination of public support and backlash for making a basic change to the process (ostensibly to make things somewhat easier on the passengers and by extension the TSOs). I like the idea of letting the knives and such go, I also feel that stopping where they are is a bit short of where they should be, I think letting knives up to 3" blades (locking/non locking, molded/unmolded really doesn't make that much difference) is an easy enough task. I also think that the reality of politics is bogging down much of the meaningful relaxation of the rules, and that this was a "weather balloon" change, maybe to gauge the response from the public and congress.

 

Plays into fear-- images of bleeding 9/11 flight attendants--- and cue the cries, begging for confiscation. His 'bring on the Samarai swords', or some remark to that effect, seemed a little overexcited for a straight policy comment. He sounded giddy.

The choice of trial balloon, vs. a policy change for any number of other items, makes the whole thing smell.
The TSA-provided press-kit for the Toronto story was used too soon. The policy isn't in effect yet. Like the long lines Nappy reported before sequestration started. It's transparently propaganda and lies to sway public opinion.

 

I think Kip is a little giddy, he wanted to change some of the rules towards the end of his tenure, but was roundly shut down by both the leadership at DHS and congress (reportedly - this is all second hand stuff, and things that Kip has said). Kip may have made some decisions that were unpopular, leading to the KHIAI shirts and such, but he is a rather intelligent individual and has some good ideas. Now some of those ideas are politically unworkable in the current climate, and some are wrong in theory - but show me someone that has never made a wrong policy choice or decision and I will show you a fictional character. Personally, I like a lot of what I am hearing from Kip as far as policy changes - I also like a lot of what I am hearing in changes coming from Pistoles office (the relaxation on knives, etc). Whether these changes will be out and in effect soon (or ever in some cases) remains to be seen.

I think the trial balloon approach is the only approach in the current political climate. By putting it out ahead of time, HQ has given the issue time to simmer a bit, and develop momentum towards a public consensus (which appears to be more positive in general - outside of airline unions, some congressional members and of course TSAs own union). The problem with the hierarchy as it is, if Pistole wants to make a major change, it has to be signed off on by DHS, and higher (I would assume) in some cases. Making major changes in an impromptu fashion is a recipe to earn a quick ticket out of town in DC, and that is just the way things are at this point - which is sad.

 

If only, in the case of Pervole and Nappy.

 

Kip Hawley is an idiot. Always has been, always will be. Just like the majority of those who put on the TSA uniform and go to the airport to molest people on a daily basis.

(Majority meaning "not all." But those TSA employees who are not merely idiots are morally and ethically defunct.)