TSA the worst aviation disaster in history!

[Dagny]

http://www.news10.net/news/article.aspx?storyid=113529&provider=top&catid=188

SACRAMENTO, CA - An airline pilot is being disciplined by the Transportation
Security Administration (TSA) for posting video on YouTube pointing out what
he believes are serious flaws in airport security.

Update: Whistleblowing pilot explains why he did it

The 50-year-old pilot, who lives outside Sacramento, asked that neither he
nor his airline be identified. He has worked for the airline for more than a
decade and was deputized by the TSA to carry a gun in the cockpit.

He is also a helicopter test pilot in the Army Reserve and flew missions for
the United Nations in Macedonia.

Three days after he posted a series of six video clips recorded with a cell
phone camera at San Francisco International Airport, four federal air
marshals and two sheriff's deputies arrived at his house to confiscate his
federally-issued firearm. The pilot recorded that event as well and provided
all the video to News10.

At the same time as the federal marshals took the pilot's gun, a deputy
sheriff asked him to surrender his state-issued permit to carry a concealed
weapon.

A follow-up letter from the sheriff's department said the CCW permit would
be reevaluated following the outcome of the federal investigation.

The YouTube videos, posted Nov. 28, show what the pilot calls the irony of
flight crews being forced to go through TSA screening while ground crew who
service the aircraft are able to access secure areas simply by swiping a
card.

"As you can see, airport security is kind of a farce. It's only smoke and
mirrors so you people believe there is actually something going on here,"
the pilot narrates.

Video shot in the cockpit shows a medieval-looking rescue ax available on
the flight deck after the pilots have gone through the metal detectors. "I
would say a two-foot crash ax looks a lot more formidable than a box
cutter," the pilot remarked.

A letter from the TSA dated Dec. 6 informed the pilot that "an
administrative review into your deputation status as a Federal Flight Deck
Officer has been initiated."

According to the letter, the review was directly related to the discovery by
TSA staff of the YouTube videos. "The content and subject of these videos
may have violated regulations concerning disclosure of sensitive security
information," the letter said.

The pilot's attorney, Don Werno of Santa Ana, said he believed the federal
government sent six people to the house to send a message.

"And the message was you've angered us by telling the truth and by showing
America that there are major security problems despite the fact that we've
spent billions of dollars allegedly to improve airline safety," Werno said.

The pilot said he is not in trouble with his airline, but a supervisor asked
him to remove public access to the YouTube videos.

He does, however, face potential civil penalties from the TSA. He said he
would likely go public when it becomes clear what the government plans to do
with him.

By George Warren

[VOR-DME[_4_]]

Dare we say this pilot has an ax to grind?!
Based solely on the account posted here, I would say their actions against him
are appropriate and justified, and certainly in line with what he expected in
launching this self-serving publicity campaign.



In article >, says...
>
>
>http://www.news10.net/news/article.aspx?storyid=113529&provider=top&catid=188
>
>SACRAMENTO, CA - An airline pilot is being disciplined by the Transportation
>Security Administration (TSA) for posting video on YouTube pointing out what
>he believes are serious flaws in airport security.
>
>Update: Whistleblowing pilot explains why he did it
>
>The 50-year-old pilot, who lives outside Sacramento, asked that neither he
>nor his airline be identified. He has worked for the airline for more than a
>decade and was deputized by the TSA to carry a gun in the cockpit.
>
>He is also a helicopter test pilot in the Army Reserve and flew missions for
>the United Nations in Macedonia.
>
>Three days after he posted a series of six video clips recorded with a cell
>phone camera at San Francisco International Airport, four federal air
>marshals and two sheriff's deputies arrived at his house to confiscate his
>federally-issued firearm. The pilot recorded that event as well and provided
>all the video to News10.
>
>At the same time as the federal marshals took the pilot's gun, a deputy
>sheriff asked him to surrender his state-issued permit to carry a concealed
>weapon.
>
>A follow-up letter from the sheriff's department said the CCW permit would
>be reevaluated following the outcome of the federal investigation.
>
>The YouTube videos, posted Nov. 28, show what the pilot calls the irony of
>flight crews being forced to go through TSA screening while ground crew who
>service the aircraft are able to access secure areas simply by swiping a
>card.
>
>"As you can see, airport security is kind of a farce. It's only smoke and
>mirrors so you people believe there is actually something going on here,"
>the pilot narrates.
>
>Video shot in the cockpit shows a medieval-looking rescue ax available on
>the flight deck after the pilots have gone through the metal detectors. "I
>would say a two-foot crash ax looks a lot more formidable than a box
>cutter," the pilot remarked.
>
>A letter from the TSA dated Dec. 6 informed the pilot that "an
>administrative review into your deputation status as a Federal Flight Deck
>Officer has been initiated."
>
>According to the letter, the review was directly related to the discovery by
>TSA staff of the YouTube videos. "The content and subject of these videos
>may have violated regulations concerning disclosure of sensitive security
>information," the letter said.
>
>The pilot's attorney, Don Werno of Santa Ana, said he believed the federal
>government sent six people to the house to send a message.
>
>"And the message was you've angered us by telling the truth and by showing
>America that there are major security problems despite the fact that we've
>spent billions of dollars allegedly to improve airline safety," Werno said.
>
>The pilot said he is not in trouble with his airline, but a supervisor asked
>him to remove public access to the YouTube videos.
>
>He does, however, face potential civil penalties from the TSA. He said he
>would likely go public when it becomes clear what the government plans to do
>with him.
>
>By George Warren
>
>
>
>

[Mxsmanic]

VOR-DME writes:

> Dare we say this pilot has an ax to grind?!

I see no indication of that.

> Based solely on the account posted here, I would say their actions against him
> are appropriate and justified, and certainly in line with what he expected in
> launching this self-serving publicity campaign.

Perhaps you, for one, welcome our new TSA overlords.

[VOR-DME[_4_]]

In article >,
says...
>
>
>VOR-DME writes:
>
>> Dare we say this pilot has an ax to grind?!
>
>I see no indication of that.


Yet it's printed right in the article. The ax is even described in some
detail! Jackass, will you ever learn to think before you write? Even the most
trivial of expressions goes right over your head, every single time.

[george]

On Jan 3, 3:55*am, VOR-DME > wrote:
> In article >,
> says...
>
>
>
> >VOR-DME writes:
>
> >> Dare we say this pilot has an ax to grind?!
>
> >I see no indication of that.
>
> Yet it's printed right in the article. The ax is even described in some
> detail! Jackass, will you ever learn to think before you write? Even the most
> trivial of expressions goes right over your head, every single time.

Mixed up has problems with reality.
Better to ignore the jackass

[Bob Noel[_3_]]

In article >,
VOR-DME > wrote:

> Dare we say this pilot has an ax to grind?!
> Based solely on the account posted here, I would say their actions against
> him
> are appropriate and justified, and certainly in line with what he expected in
> launching this self-serving publicity campaign.


I would guess that you don't have any experience or knowledge of
security procedures.

Anyone claiming that the videos show any sensitive security information
doesn't know the definitin of "sensitive" or "security". Exactly what
information shown in the videos isn't already public knowledge? Exactly
what information shown in the vidoes show procedures that provide actual
security?

[a[_3_]]

On Jan 3, 6:43*am, Bob Noel > wrote:
> In article >,
>
> *VOR-DME > wrote:
> > Dare we say this pilot has an ax to grind?!
> > Based solely on the account posted here, I would say their actions against
> > him
> > are appropriate and justified, and certainly in line with what he expected in
> > launching this self-serving publicity campaign.
>
> I would guess that you don't have any experience or knowledge of
> security procedures.
>
> Anyone claiming that the videos show any sensitive security information
> doesn't know the definitin of "sensitive" or "security". *Exactly what
> information shown in the videos isn't already public knowledge? *Exactly
> what information shown in the vidoes show procedures that provide actual
> security?

The issue is, he showed shortcomings in the existing procedures. The
correct description for this pilot should be "Whistle-blower" . That
the whistle blowing called attention to shortcomings in the systems
should be greeted by the authorities with "Hey, thanks for pointing
that out", not "We're gonna get you for embarrassing us".

[vaughn[_3_]]

"a" > wrote in message
...
>That
>the whistle blowing called attention to shortcomings in the systems
>should be greeted by the authorities with "Hey, thanks for pointing
>that out", not "We're gonna get you for embarrassing us".

Bingo! The TSA has become a law unto itself. We need to scrap it and start all
over again with an organization that believes in following the Constitution and
the law..

What should be our favorite recent example: The TSA recently decided to expand
its own authority by imposing far-reaching security regulations on the entire
light aircraft world. Nearly a decade after 911 and with no specific security
threats they could point to, they tried to short-circuit the entire rulemaking
process by unilaterally imposing "emergency" regulations on us. As it turned
out, they lost that battle, but not yet the war...

Vaughn

[[email protected]]

vaughn > wrote:
>
> "a" > wrote in message
> ...
>>That
>>the whistle blowing called attention to shortcomings in the systems
>>should be greeted by the authorities with "Hey, thanks for pointing
>>that out", not "We're gonna get you for embarrassing us".
>
> Bingo! The TSA has become a law unto itself. We need to scrap it and start all
> over again with an organization that believes in following the Constitution and
> the law..
>
> What should be our favorite recent example: The TSA recently decided to expand
> its own authority by imposing far-reaching security regulations on the entire
> light aircraft world. Nearly a decade after 911 and with no specific security
> threats they could point to, they tried to short-circuit the entire rulemaking
> process by unilaterally imposing "emergency" regulations on us. As it turned
> out, they lost that battle, but not yet the war...
>
> Vaughn
>

TSA apparently doesn't feel bound by any laws, rules, or regulations, including
TSA rules and regulations.

In spite of rules for the special handling of "medical supplies", we have
numerous instances of agents confiscating them even when a "supervisor"
was involved and after the person had called TSA up front to make sure
everything was according to TSA rules.

In spite of rules for the special handling of diplomats, TSA has run at least
3 diplomats through the wringer in the last year.

TSA is just "security theater" and has no clue how to provide real security.



--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[VOR-DME[_4_]]

In article >,
says...

>
>I would guess that you don't have any experience or knowledge of
>security procedures.
>
>Anyone claiming that the videos show any sensitive security information
>doesn't know the definitin of "sensitive" or "security". Exactly what
>information shown in the videos isn't already public knowledge? Exactly
>what information shown in the vidoes show procedures that provide actual
>security?


Well, to fill in your reading gaps I did explicitly say I was commenting
solely on the article published here, and not on the content of any of the
videos, which I did not watch. I do not agree with those here who claim that
public, self-publicity stunts by professionals who are expected to play an
active role in public safety campaigns, yet who behave as peeved adolescents
showing us trumped-up facetious facts we all already know qualifies as
"whistle-blowing" in any constructive manner. I further reiterate my
conviction that the response he has received is likely not far from what he
must have expected, lest he be the most naïve pilot amongst us, and most
likely corresponds to a career move on his part. The book is next.