Airport screeners missed bomb parts

Airport screeners missed bomb parts

news.yahoo.com

WASHINGTON - Government investigators smuggled liquid explosives and detonators past airport security, exposing a dangerous hole in the nation's ability to keep these forbidden items off of airplanes, according to a report made public Wednesday.

(visit the link for the full news article)

We've seen this happen in the past and it looks like it's still happening. As much as I believe this is just fear mongering.. (scaring people of terrorists and flying and things related)someone needs to start doing their jobs correctly.

news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Add that to the story I saw on TV today about the TSA sending an email to an airport who was getting a surprise security inspection, advising the airport the who/what/how/when & where the secret inspection was to be conducted.

The TSA gave some lame excuse, but how is it a surprise if you know it is going to happen?

Here's an article on that info:

Security officials questioned about TSA email

Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security Kip Hawley faced tough questions this morning from members of the House Homeland Security Committee about an e-mail from a top Transportation Security Administration official that appears to provide advanced warning of undercover investigators sent to test airport security.

So the TSA was aware of the inspection but they still failed? I don't know what's going on here but something isn't right.

I don't work at an airport, never have and probably never will, but how easy is it to let a potentially dangerous substance get through airport security?

With all the security checkpoints they have in airports now I would imagine it to be quite difficult.

When I flew out to Oregon (nothing big) they were inconsistent as I got checked on the way back but not on the way there with the same items each time so I guess it depends on the motivation of the particular screener...... I got searched for having my playstation with additional LED light I added which to me should look like a bomb on a screen but what do I know? The guy made me take it all out and screen individually which was cool but I only got checked once which didnt make sense to me..........



When I flew out to New York they TSA guys seems way unorganized and again inconsistent because on the flight to new york I got right through nothing wrong, but again on the way back I had to show my school ID as I'm only 15 and my 8 year old cousin had to show his too (kinda creepy that in elementary they give school IDS) but anyway they said our IDs were not good enough to get through so we had to go sit in a room for half hour and nothing happened then guys came in who seemed confused and let us go which was lame.....


I dont know I still see a lot of problems with our airport security and am surprised that no follow up attack of 9/11 or something like that has occured, unless there is something more sinister behind it all I dont know?

reply to post by Roland Deschain


No, I am sorry for not clarifying, the news I provided is in addition to your story. It makes it look worse IMO.

Alot of recent security breakdowns, these incidents, the FBI/CIA illegal immigrant with possible ties to Hezbollah in Lebanon.

It is disturbing, to state it lightly.


ed:sp

[edit on 11/14/2007 by JacKatMtn]

It has nothing whatsoever to do with the number of checkpoints. It has EVERYTHING to do with the technology at said checkpoints, and the training with the technology.


Yes, I speak from experience.

So the current technology in airports is not up to date or keeping up with the current technology used to conceal weapons and harmful substances?

[edit on 14-11-2007 by Roland Deschain]

reply to post by Zaphod58


It must be very frustrating to have the equipment, and not enough trained personnel to run them properly or vice versa.

Sounds like a budget funding issue.

I hope you can see light at the end of the tunnel.

It depends on what technology you're talking about. The technology wasn't designed to detect an IED that is built from different components. When it was developed the big threat was from already made explosives, so it was designed to find "actual" explosives. But even then some explosives are extremely hard to detect on some equipment. X-rays are advancing, but there is only so much that can be done with a checkpoint x-ray. If you want a better system it's going to require a bigger system. Most checkpoints won't handle bigger systems than are there now.




That is the CTX 5500. It's one of the best systems out there for detecting explosives, but even it relies on the operator to find other things. I can't and won't go into details on how it operates, but it's by far the best system on the market. But it's also by far too big and slow to operate in a checkpoint.




This is the Rapiscan 522B, one of the more popular systems for checkpoints. It's a good system, and it tests the operator as they scan bags. But if you have a cluttered bag, it's 10x harder to find something than in an emptier bag. And most people have very cluttered bags.

There are three checkpoint systems that I worked with. Most airports operate the same three companies. Rapiscan, L-3, and Hyman. All are decent systems, but personally I found the Rapiscan to be the easiest to work with, and the best system.





These are the Ion Track Itemiser, and the Barringer Ion Scan. The Itemiser is by FAR the best system on the market. It's biggest problem was too many products caused it to alarm. However, thanks to some recent discoveries by GE/Ion Track that problem has been resolved.

Now for some new technologies.




This is the EntryScan by Ion Track. It consists of an Itemiser mounted on top, with sensing chambers on the sides. Again, I can't and won't go into details on the operation of this system.




This is the Secure 1000 backscatter x-ray system. Backscatter x-rays are the newest technology, and will find anything you would want to hide. Think they're coming soon to an airport to keep you safe? Think again! The ACLU has already started a campaign against them because they can show the outline of genitals. The regulations require a female screener for a female passenger, and male screener for male passengers, but that's not good enough. The ACLU wants them kept out of airports completely.

The EntryScan is just now beginning to be installed at a few test airports around the US to see how well the system works. But again, these systems were designed to find something along the lines of C-4 and other premade explosives. NOT something that you can carry on separately and mix together, unless one of them is some kind of explosive already.