Talk Back

Aug 1, 2003 12:00 PM

DEAR EDITOR:

In response to your article (Editor's Letter: The Ongoing Saga Of Airport Screeners, June 2003) I would be happy to remind you of why we created the huge government bureaucracy to handle airport screening.

Politics. In response to the events of Sept. 11, the Executive and Legislative branches needed to respond in a “huge” way. Not having a plan for dealing with the faults that allowed the terrorist acts to occur, the biggest thing they could do was create a big new agency.

The new agency employs 55,000 people where we had 28,000. It doles out billions in contracts to identify, test, hire, train, assign and outfit the new screeners who would man screening stations. Let's spend some more contract dollars to recruit managers for the program. And then let's create some shiny new positions for more bureaucrats to deal with a subject that most had no experience with so that we could assign more contracts to train them, too.

Let's try to remember that the stated reason for creating the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) was to create a “world class security program for our domestic airports.” When the bureaucrats and politicians have completed exploiting their new “huge government bureaucracy,” they will turn it back to the private sector to do what needs to be done.
Charles G. Slepian
Portland, Ore.

DEAR EDITOR:

I resigned from the TSA in May. I was a Lead Passenger Screener at LAX (Los Angeles). I have a background in investigation and intelligence work, which immediately made me a threat to the incompetent TSA LAX management, most of whom had come over from either the airlines, through nepotism, cronyism, or the former private company — the same one who used to hire kids off of the California State parolee programs.

I resigned after making protected disclosures to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, Congress, Senate, the FBI, the IRS CID, DOT IG, DHS IG, the media, and others about a myriad of incidents, documented security breaches and violations of TSA policy and regulations. I was able to get the TSA Internal Affairs to come in for all it was worth; days after they left, we had another huge evacuation thanks to a backpack full of fireworks getting through the same Terminal 7 checkpoints that the IA supposedly had just paid a visit to. Until the TSA becomes accountable, you are very right, we are in for the same stuff. All over again.
Brenda M. Negri
San Pedro, Calif.

DEAR EDITOR:

The basic premise of your Editor's Letter is wrong. Although the FAA didn't prohibit box cutters on Sept. 11, the Checkpoint Operator's Guide (COG) — in place at every screening checkpoint — did. Screeners were to notify their supervisor any time a box cutter was discovered.

There was a disconnect between what the FAA allowed and what was actually in the COG guidance at the checkpoints. It's another example of failed and convoluted FAA oversight.
Brian Sullivan
FAA Special Agent (Retired)
Plymouth, Mass.

DEAR EDITOR:

Thank you on behalf of the ex-airport security screeners who have been blamed for Sept. 11.

We live in a great nation that has to put blame on something or someone for any type of incident — from hot coffee in a lap at McDonalds to the terrorist attacks.

The one group of people involved in Sept. 11 that had no money, no political affiliations, no lobbyists or large law firms were the screeners. Who more perfect to blame this on?

Most of them do not have jobs today and have exhausted their unemployment benefits. Find me one FAA officer, airline executive, Customs officer or politician who has gone through anything like this.
Linda DiCiolla
Kansas City, Mo.

DEAR EDITOR:

I wanted to bring up another topic that needs to be spoken out loud: It's absolutely ludicrous to have an airport security force big enough to search every American that flies.

It's either a conspiracy or a judgment breakdown for such a system to forbid an 82-year old Medal of Honor winner to carry his sharp-pointed medal aboard an airplane. Certainly, there are endless examples of the insanity of this particular practice.

The alternative? Identify the threat and put a face on it — to date they have all been illegal aliens. Don't let illegal aliens fly in airplanes — even if they are not carrying box cutters.

Close the borders to prevent more illegal aliens from getting in the country, and hunt down and expel them, with those from Mexico as lowest priority.

Then there would be no need to search Americans who fly. Not only would our skies be safer, but so would our nation.
Hank Ross
Physical Security Officer, U.S. Army Medical Command
Ft Sam Houston, Texas

DEAR EDITOR:

I concur wholeheartedly with the sentiments expressed in your article.

I was an employee of Aviation Defence International, on contract to an American carrier as a passenger profiler for more than two years, and then moved into the training department, where I became conversant not only with the ACSSP (Air Carrier Standard Security Program) but also with the NASP (National Aviation Security Program) — and other wonders such as the Aviation Security Act 1982.

This is relevant, because the Act of ‘82 allows no firearms, explosives or “any other article likely to cause damage or injury.” The final stipulation pretty much includes anything people feel the need to take with them on holiday.

So why before Sept. 11 were these things allowed?

In the U.K., at lower threat levels, these articles were “tolerated,” although strictly speaking it was “naughty” to carry them, nobody was arrested.

At the same time, in the U.S., under the rules of the ACSSP at the time, blades under 3 inches were allowed, and (I am only surmising here) because it is an international industry, the common popular belief was that these articles were allowed everywhere else. Technically, the Sept. 11 terrorists broke no rules until the hijackings started.

The Governments of the world all strive to make the airline industry as safe as possible. We must do all that we can to be reasonably sure that passengers are safe.
Martin Carter
Director of Training, JP International
Aviation Security (U.K.) Ltd
Hertfordshire, U.K.

Your Turn

Have you read an article in AC&SS that has you talking? We want to know what you have to say! E-mail your comments to editor Larry Anderson (landerson@primediabusiness.com) or visit www.securitysolutions.com.

Want to use this article? Click here for options!
© 2012 Penton Media Inc.

This month in Access Control

• Targeting The Customer
• Electronic Pedigrees
• One Hero Among Many
• Who? What? When? Where? Why?
• More from September's issue