It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

TSA shuts door on private airport screening program

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 11:14 AM
link   

TSA shuts door on private airport screening program


www.cnn.com

A program that allows airports to replace government screeners with private screeners is being brought to a standstill, just a month after the Transportation Security Administration said it was "neutral" on the program.

TSA chief John Pistole said Friday he has decided not to expand the program beyond the current 16 airports, saying he does not see any advantage to it.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 11:14 AM
link   
There will be no more "opt out" - from now on airports *must* use TSA for security / screening.

TSA claimed to be "neutral" on if airports used TSA or private firms - but it seems that is not the case.
In the past months the TSA had even been saying the "airports don't have to use us." Now, it seems they do have to use the TSA as private screening companies are no longer allowed.

The 16 airports currently not using the TSA will be allowed to continue - at least for now. Though, you have to figure they will stamp that out sooner or later. The government has to get its grope one way or another it seems.

The announcement came as yet another airport applied to give TSA the boot and was rejected. Along with that came the statement from the TSA head that there would be no more "opt out" - from now on TSA is the only choice



www.cnn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 29-1-2011 by Frogs because: added more info



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 11:50 AM
link   
Well it is good to hear that the program is not getting expanded for now. All the public backlash must be having an effect. It has been so wrong to hear people getting assaulted like that, glad I am not in America. The whole thing sounds like one of the MKUltra programs where you traumatise people and exert control to make them into unquestioning, obedient slaves.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 


Umm - no. I might have not been clear in how I said it. (I'm fighting some kind of bug and feeling pretty bad).

Before airports had an option. They could use the TSA for security, or they could let a private firm do it (as long as they used approved methods).

Due to the large public backlash against the TSA - 16 airports gave TSA the boot and went with private security. Now, the TSA has put a stop to that. Airports no longer have a choice - they must use the TSA . The existing 16 that are using private firms for security may continue to do so for now.

The program that has been stopped is the one that allowed airports to "opt-out" of using TSA.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Let me get this straight.

If you:



  1. Own your own jet
  2. Pay for storage at a facility
  3. Can fly yourself, or pay a captain of your choosing


and still need TSA to make sure you aren't transporting drugs domestically?

They (.gov) have really cornered the market. IMO, this is all about controlling drugs.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 12:19 PM
link   
Thanks for posting this. It's clear that the government agencies want the security to be in THEIR hands, not the airports'.

The only thing we can do to fight this is to NOT FLY! Unless of course you have a million dollars to throw into a lawsuit that can fight its way to the Supreme Court. I'd really love to hear how they would come down on the legal Constitutionality of this issue.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Dance4Life
 


No, that's not what it's saying. This is for commercial airports and airlines only. Not private or public aircraft.

For a while, the TSA would allow airports to use their own security, as long as they followed TSA procedures. Now, they're not doing that anymore. I don't think this story has anything to do with private aircraft.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 12:28 PM
link   
I think if this has got to be a reality for now, it might as well all be under one agency using full-time, consistently trained personnel reporting to the same chain of command. Contractring always has its own set of issues (many of them security and accountability related) that we just don't need to be exposing a critical function to. When it comes to security and law enforcement, the control just makes more sense to me and outweighs the cons, which I admit do exist too..

reply to post by Dance4Life
 

Those might be exactly the kinds of planes that fly into buildings too?



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


Good call.

Not that I have the bankroll to test that theory anyway. Didn't know previously that there were actually public airports w/o TSA.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


Apparently it isn't the case anyway.

But let's see. Supposedly there have been 3 flights in the history of aviation that have intentionally been flown into buildings? Let's just say supposedly a total of 10 as I might not be too sharp on my history.

So that most likely equals out to .00000000051% of all flights in history have intentionally been flown into buildings.

How many car bombs have exploded intentionally? Far greater than planes, no? So should every car hit a checkpoint before they are allowed out into a public street?



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Dance4Life
 

I think there have been more than three. And the idea here is prevention too. I just don't see the wisdom in jumping through hoops about commercial flights and not any others. You can search a commercial flight from now to 2012 and let it go, but if a private flight carrying a bomb on it decides to run into in on the runway or midair, what's the point?

Also I'd like to note that I did preface my statements by saying if this is going to happen it might as well happen consistently and in controlled fashion.
edit on 1/29/2011 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


Well but that's the thing. There are just so many ways around for those intent to do harm that leads me to doubt the reasoning behind the massive public screening process in the first place.

Honestly, it seems more about putting on a show and getting people to comply with government abuse / intrusion without question than it does about security. To me that makes sense - from a security standpoint what they are currently doing does not make sense.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Frogs
 

It is a show. The hypocrisy is pretty evident when you look at how open the borders and ports still are and how few cargo flights and containers are inspected. Anyone wanting to get us, could in those ways.

P.S. Love your avatar theme...it made me smile...Frogs on a lily pad and ribbit



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   
The answer to the deliberations is pretty simple from where I see it . TSA was never about providing safety to the citizens
It was and is and will be all about money (contracts for the screeners ), control and power , well those last two go together anyway



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Frogs
 




The program that has been stopped is the one that allowed airports to "opt-out" of using TSA.


Ohh, that is bad. Centralised, monopolistic control is not a good thing, especially when it has strict nazi policies that the president just laughs at. America has been invaded by stealth, it looks like the slavery issues from the last civil war is coming back.



new topics

top topics



 
7

log in

join