USA Flag

Official website of the Department of Homeland Security

Transportation Security Administration

Administrator Kip Hawley's Final TSA Blog Post

Archived Content

Please note that older content is archived for public record. This page may contain information that is outdated and may not reflect current policy or programs.

If you have questions about policies or procedures, please contact the TSA Contact Center.

Members of the news media may contact TSA Public Affairs.

Monday, January 19, 2009
airplane

TSA opened up this web dialogue about a year ago to get feedback from the public and engage with them on the issues that they presented. We have learned a great deal from those of you who have posted and I am grateful for your engagement with us. While some of the individual comments are painful to read and/or based on something that is factually wrong, taken as an aggregate there are undeniable, unavoidable themes.

One of those themes is that TSA's security is intellect-free. The broad categories seem to be about doubting the reality of the current threat, perceived vulnerabilities, and experiences that defy common sense.

With this post, I would like to touch on threat and vulnerabilities and focus on how TSA is introducing more 'smart' security at the airport.

Threat information comes in many forms, virtually all of it coming to us with restrictions on how we can use it. The good news is that we get it -- and use it -- to craft our security activities, and we literally do that every day. The bad news is that a condition of getting the really detailed and actionable information is that we cannot fully explain to the public the 'why' behind what we do. Ellen Howe's previous post discusses how we have tried to get out as much as we can on the 'why,' most recently, with the Ad Council.

The point on vulnerabilities is that since there are vulnerabilities in every system, what's important is to identify them and then compensate for those vulnerabilities with other measures. TSA is involved in risk-management - understanding our vulnerabilities, looking at what terrorists may be planning, and devoting our main efforts to reduce the risk of attacks with catastrophic consequences.

You might look at it like mapping out a spectrum of attacks causing catastrophic consequences, then overlaying it with vulnerabilities, and then circling in red the vulnerabilities associated with high-consequence attack scenarios where we know terrorists are plotting. We look for compensating measures across the spectrum to protect against vulnerabilities or plotting of which we are unaware. But first of all, we take action to close down any vulnerabilities circled in red. When we see an intersection of threat, vulnerability and consequence, TSA takes action as we have with liquids and shoes even though we know that they will not be popular. We are more likely to consider convenience issues in other areas of the spectrum and devote considerable effort in working with our airport and airline colleagues to make things work with the least possible inconvenience. There are technology answers -- but we have to close the gap until the technology answer works and is deployed.

Part of the problem with the 'common sense' theme is that our rhetoric of smarter, flexible, unpredictable, stay-ahead-of-the-terrorist strategy can clash with your personal experience. Some measures are in place now and others rolling out that will sharply reduce that disconnect. I will mention a few examples in each of our key areas: people, technology, and process.

First off with our people, TSA is about two-thirds of the way through retraining our entire airport workforce, from Federal Security Director to front-line Officer. (Headquarters elements are also included.) This training is worthy of its own post but it is two full days in length and covers the gamut from human factors to updated information on terrorist weapons and tactics. It is all about being smart about how we do our security job and how to think in terms of identifying real - and sophisticated - threats and less about running through a checklist.

Secondly, we are also about two-thirds through a major deployment of much more sophisticated carry-on bag scanners, AT-X-ray. About 600 of the new, smarter AT's are deployed already with another 300 more in the next few months. These are the machines that will be able to detect threat liquids (or powders, gels, etc.) automatically and will allow TSA to change the baggie requirement and clear up many of the head-scratching moments you now endure. (Probably about a year away.)

Finally, I have spoken about wanting to break up the rigidity of checkpoint screening and mentioned a goal of changing it up, spreading it out, and calming it down. With a re-trained workforce that has better technology, we can make the existing process calmer. There are opportunities also to make process changes that will make things smoother. For instance, where we have rigid and predictable criteria for extra screening (like last minute travel changes and one-way tickets), we can get more security value by using less obvious criteria like randomness or behavior and make things less congested at the checkpoint.

While this forum will continue to hear from our vigorous critics, I hope that in addition to the words of the indefatigable Blogger Bob and his colleagues, you will see that TSA has backed them up with actions in the year that the EoS Blog has been in business.

Our on-line presence is much clearer, deeper, and more accessible - and improvements will continue. Black Diamond, laptop bags, clearer signage, better explanations of the “why”, are all examples of actions taken by TSA that were helped by this blog discussion. You've helped us prioritize your pain points and we do, in fact, work to reduce those.

The security needs in aviation (and surface transportation) are significant and on-going. Real security risk mitigation can only happen when all parties - including the public - are active, positive participants. The men and women of TSA are amazing in their commitment to protect you and it has been an honor to serve with them. I hope that, going forward, your personal experience with our people, bolstered by better technology and process, will bring us together in support of our common objective - untroubled transportation to our chosen destination and a safe, smooth return home.

Thank you for your interest and participation,

Kip

Tags: 

Comments

Submitted by Anonymous on

I have read all of the blog posts and would like to thank you for all that you ahve done to keep us safe Thank You

Submitted by MSC on

First, I have to say that I give kudos to you guys for being (as far as I know) the only government agency to post a blog that is very frank with the public.

I do scratch my head often when I travel, and have to wonder if you guys are any better than the screeners we had on September 11th. I sometimes ask myself, would the current screeners find a box cutter with precision? That I do not know, but I do appreciate your efforts to focus on behavior techniques, which I think will be much more effective than shoe and liquid screenings.

I am pleased with some of your improvements, such as allowing me to bring my cigarette lighter with me (your notice on repealing that ban was quite amusing).

I look forward to bringing my liquids on the plane again.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Thanks Kip. Been really nice working here with you at the helm. Its been a nice improvement since you joined. GL in the future.

C'mon bloggers, lets be nice to Kip in his final post. He played ball with you guys so say something nice. Show some class if you can.

Submitted by RB on

Sorry Anon, I can't thank someone who has caused so much damage to the United States Constitution.

It is time for Kip to go!

Submitted by Anonymous on

If everyone is supposed to know it's 3.4 oz, why use the 3 oz everywhere official?

Submitted by Tomas on

Hello again, Kip.

Too bad you didn't bother to answer either direct question I asked you in my reply to your "The Path Forward on Liquids" post.

It's the second reply to your post, so it shouldn't be all that difficult to find, but since you obviously either missed it or it slipped your mind, please allow me to ask the most important of those again...
________________

As a handicapped individual I need reasonable accommodations from the TSA at checkpoints. I'm mobility impaired, but have fought my way OUT of a wheelchair after using one for three years. In part, my limitations are distance I can walk and length of time I can remain standing.

I may not be the person you want in your "Black Diamond" lanes, and finding something as simple as a lane marked with the accepted international handicapped symbol (wheelchair in blue and white), where I will be assured of as short a path as practical, a place to sit to remove my shoes, a place to sit to put my shoes on, and as short a time standing in line as practical, does not seem to be something TSA has figured out.

May I have your personal assurance that your people will work WITH the handicapped rather than against us in getting through these chokepoints quickly and with the accommodations we require?

The requirement to provide needed accommodations is settled law, and shuffling me off to the longest, slowest, least accommodating line possible because I cannot move rapidly is NOT an acceptable response.

Thank you for coming to TSA.gov and I am looking forward to your feedback. -- Kip

And thank you in advance for your answers...

Tom (1 of 5-6)

October 25, 2008 3:52 AM
________________

As this is so close to the end of your being in a position to answer, perhaps you can pass the question on to your successor.

Sadly the "dialogue" allegedly started by this blog has been much more one sided than it should have been. Many question, few answers.

I look forward to the changes the future will bring.

Tom (1 of 5-6)

Submitted by Trollkiller on

Before we start trashing Kip, I want you guys to think about a few things.

Would you have created a Blog where you knew you would be personally attacked and then allow those attack posts to be made public? You have to admit that takes some stones, it was not like the man was in the dark about how people felt about him, the "Kip Hawley is an idiot" websites, t-shirts and underwear were a dead giveaway.

Have you guys looked at the other government blogs? Unless you are asking a question without any commentary or you are praising that particular group, your post would not make it. That has not been the case here and I for one appreciate that.

I can see in the year that this Blog has been active the TSA has listened to some of our concerns and have made changes to address those concerns. Granted there is still a lot that needs to be fixed but Kip got the agency when it was already broken, repairs take time.

As you guys already know Kip and I do not agree on a lot of things, and you can be sure that I do think that some of the things the TSA does are statutorily illegal and unconstitutional.

But, and here is the important point, I do not believe that any of the things that frustrate us were perpetrated by Kip with nefarious intent.

Kip, Thank you for your effort, good luck and God bless on all your future endeavors.

Submitted by NoClu on

See ya.

Thanks for establishing this blog.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Kip,

I recognize your passsion for TSA. I also recognize your interaction with the flying public. It was brave for you to put TSA out there like that. I also want to say that good or bad comments, you were willing to take them all. We will miss you and innovative ideas. I hope I will see you one day in one of my lines. I will be able to show you that the negative bloggers are wrong and you have truly left a positive legacy.

Submitted by Anonymous on
LA Times on "terrorism" convictions shows the effect of "flexible, unpredictable" enforcements of ill-defined rules.


Kip @ "Real security risk mitigation can only happen when all parties - including the public - are active, positive participants."

Real security risk mitigation happened long before TSA--when the cockpit doors were armored, and the parties on the planes (the flight crews and passengers) changed their response to hijackings. Since then, everything TSA has done has been a Cover-Your-Self bureaucracy.

I guess hiring a bunch of marketing geniuses (Ad Council) to package your "product" as the solution to terrorism is the only option your mangement has.
Submitted by George on

Whatever my disagreements and criticisms of the TSA and of Kip, I do have to give Kip credit for several things that can only be called courageous. The first is his candor about acknowledging the many problems his agency has with public opinion and credibility. As a loyal appointee of an administration that considers itself infallible, publicly admitting to the TSA's problems must be an act of great courage. And as part of an administration that has made no secret of its intolerance for questions or criticism, Kip also demonstrates courage in opening up this blog to all manner of questioning and criticism. That the questions mostly remain unanswered and the criticism mostly ignored matters less than the existence of an open forum sponsored by an agency of the Bush administration. And Kip deserves credit for that, irrespective of its effectiveness.

I also believe it's unfair and inappropriate to blame Kip for what some people (like RB) consider an infringement of constitutional liberties. Regardless of the courage Kip has demonstrated, he is still a loyal appointee of the Bush administration. He and his agency are constrained by that administration's ideology and approach to matters of security and civil liberties. So he presumably is duty-bound to respond to questions and criticism by reminding us of the fear we all felt on 9/11, and to implement the obsession of his bosses for secrecy. Whatever some may consider "damage to the United States Constitution" was perpetrated from the White House, and dutifully flowed down through the President's loyal appointees. The failings that have caused the public to distrust and resent the TSA (and which are reiterated in blog comments here) are those of the Bush administration overall. Kip is merely following the orders and and implementing the policies of his bosses as they apply to his agency.

I wish Kip well in his next endeavor. And I hope that his successor will implement a more rational approach to security and civil liberties, and will have the authority to remake the TSA into an agency that earns the respect and trust of the public. For as Kip acknowledges, "[r]eal security risk mitigation can only happen when all parties - including the public - are active, positive participants."

Ave atque vale, Kip.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"Show some class if you can."

Kip Hawley's reign of terror and lies has done nothing to make anyone safer, and much to make air travel more dangerous. He has been a blight on this nation, and that truth must not be swept under the rug in the name of social niceties.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Thank you for opening up this blog and suffering our criticism. I may not approve of all your decisions, but I do appreciate your willingness to take feedback, this blog, and your service to our great country.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Kip,

Thank you for all you have done to lead the agency toward a realistic, working security team. I came onto TSA during the first days at BWI and worked across the country training and screening. Even joined you in NAC1. We will miss you and wish you the best of luck in the future.

Contrary to the doubt bloggers; you have provided the leadership and backbone that brought the agency from ponderous and regimented to nimble and engaged with our public.

Again, many thanks!

Joe

Submitted by Winstonsmith on

Good riddance Kip. You will not be missed by me or by anyone who flies regularly. While the Obama administration has its hands full coming in with the mess that your former bosses left across the landscape of our government, I am hopeful that he and his appointees will put in place more common sense regulations that not only address real threats, but respect the Constitution in ways that the TSA under your leadership seems to have forgotten.

Submitted by Dunstan on

Bye, bye... Don't bother with a self serving book...
Our check in luggage still isn't safe from intrusion. Too big a problem for you to handle, I guess.
I hope your replacement can do a better job, safe travel for all passengers and their stuff.

Submitted by Ed Jopeck on

Kip,

Thank you for this blog post demonstrating your command of the components of risk (consequences, threats and vulnerabilities) and TSA's use of them to intelligently analyze, prioritize and manage a broad array of transportation risks. It's the only way we, as a nation, can achieve the security we need at a price we can afford. Knowing that, you and TSA have done much to improve the profession of security risk analysis and management.

As both a security risk management professional and a frequent traveler, I know that the reasons behind some of the things TSA does are not always widely understood or popular with the public, but they have kept travelers in the US safe from terrorists these last seven years. The risks have been analyzed and managed effectively. I compliment you on a job well done, thank you for your service, and wish you the best in your future endeavors.

Ed Jopeck
Immediate Past President, Security Analysis and Risk Management Association (SARMA)

Submitted by Al Ames on

Gotta agree with RB ... can't think of someone who's done more damage to the rights of travelers, well, except former Secretary Chertoff.

Kip's butt's covered, so now security is the new administrator's problem.

I hope that whoever Pres. Obama picks has more respect for the Constitution and the rights of Americans while actually keeping us safe.

Al

Submitted by Anonymous on

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Submitted by Earl Pitts on

Ed,

You work in risk management and can honestly say you believe TSA practice risk management and not risk avoidance?

As someone else who analyzes and manages risk, all I have to say is wow.

Earl

Submitted by BlognDog on

Kip:
All the patriotic, feel-good, good-intentions whitewash in the world isn't going to change the fact that a) you delete-o-metered every post I made here asking how it is EVERY other country in the world can keep its citizens safe without abusing their rights but you cannot and b) you still haven't responded to my numerous queries as to why you still have not responded to the two outstanding formal complaints I have filed, one from 2004 and the other from 2007.

As for all of you who think Kip was "courageous" or something for putting up this blog, you are talking about a man who put up this blog as a lame effort to compensate for the fact that he does not answer his phone, answer his emails, respond to his post or reply to his faxes. Responsible civil servants have replied to their critics for millenia. This blog hasn't done anything to earn Hawley any special recognition.

Submitted by Anonymous on

If only Kip supported doing real risk analysis... the risk analysis that he references was only done in his head. Hopefully the next administration will embrace a more systematic approach to risk management.

Submitted by Trollkiller on
BlognDog said...

Kip:
All the patriotic, feel-good, good-intentions whitewash in the world isn't going to change the fact that a) you delete-o-metered every post I made here asking how it is EVERY other country in the world can keep its citizens safe without abusing their rights but you cannot and b) you still haven't responded to my numerous queries as to why you still have not responded to the two outstanding formal complaints I have filed, one from 2004 and the other from 2007.

As for all of you who think Kip was "courageous" or something for putting up this blog, you are talking about a man who put up this blog as a lame effort to compensate for the fact that he does not answer his phone, answer his emails, respond to his post or reply to his faxes. Responsible civil servants have replied to their critics for millenia. This blog hasn't done anything to earn Hawley any special recognition.

Weird, all of my posts have showed up and Kip has always answered my emails.
Submitted by RB on

I am glad that George can still express his opinions without government interference.

How ever George cannot fly on a commercial aircraft, and soon trains, buses, and ships, without being required to present his ID and travel papers to an agent of the government.

George and some others may be ok with that but I am not and this procedure happened on Kip Hawleys watch.

Submitted by TSO Rachel on

Thank you for all that you have done for TSa and for this country.

Submitted by Anonymous on

So, who's the new guy? And is there any hope of TSA rolling back the unproductive Cover-Your-Self programs?

I mean, if we've got a government bureaucracy buying 6B$ worth of tiger-repellent rocks every year, how do we scale back?

Submitted by Anonymous on

"Thank you for all that you have done for TSa and for this country."

You could have saved a lot of typing by simply writing, "Thanks for nothing."

Submitted by Jim Huggins on

Bob ...

For those of us not steeped in how the U.S. Government works ... how does TSA function in this interim period, until a new TSA administrator is appointed and/or confirmed? (Does the appointment of the TSA administrator require the consent of the Senate?)

Submitted by Anonymous on

Good bye Kip. I hope your organization will now open its doors to reason and Science.

Submitted by George on

RB, at the risk of topic drift, I honestly don't understand why you get your knickers in such a twist over the requirement to show your ID and boarding pass before entering a checkpoint. As the TSA currently implements that requirement, it's merely annoying but harmless security theater that is no threat at all to civil liberties.

The official examines the ID closely, presumably to detect inept attempts at forgery. Then he or she compares the name on the boarding pass with that on the ID. If they match, he or she stamps the boarding pass and admits you to the "real" screening. Since the official doesn't actually do anything else with the documents (such as looking up the actual name in an official database of terrorists, liberals, dissenters, people who post on this blog, and thousands of others who are on the list for no comprehensible reason), I don't see how it threatens civil liberties.

But I also don't see how this particular musical number in the TSA's Security Theater production provides any actual security. It's nothing more than a mindless comparison of two documents. It involves an extra queue that takes time, and it can create difficulties if you aren't meticulous about booking your flights under the exact name on your driving license or passport (e.g., everyone calls me George rather than my embarrassingly pretentious legal name, but the latter is what must appear on my boarding pass to get through this step of TSA screening). I really don't understand what benefit we get in exchange for this annoyance, but I don't see it threatening any civil liberties.

There may in fact be some perfectly valid classified reason for this seemingly absurd procedure. Perhaps it's a "behavior detection" mechanism to select for further scrutiny those who show insufficiently meek deference to the official when presenting their papers? Regardless, it's one of the many utterly unfathomable and seemingly pointless aspects of the "screening experience" that have contributed to the public's skepticism and resentment of the TSA.

If Kip's successor is truly seeking to turn the skeptical traveling public into "active, positive participants," he or she will need to make a priority of carefully reviewing every aspect of the TSA's rules and procedures to ensure that it provides a genuine security benefit commensurate with the burden it imposes.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Do not misunderstand what Kip Hawley has done. Kip has set his legacy in motion with the new training given to all TSA. ENGAGE! is going to set in motion the new security that the TSA is providing. A new administrator is not going to change that but they will embrace it and nuture it. TSA is setup by law of congress. TSA is not going anywhere. The only way the hassle of TSA will get better is with time to get the technology out there to screen passengers accordingly. With all things that the public does not like, TSA screening will become more and more of a regular thing with time.

Submitted by OFFICER GIORDANO on

You know I wish those of you that are complaining about your rights actually knew your rights. I have had ancestor after ancestor fighting for the rights that you have. What the heck have you done lately to defend your rights? Who cares that you have to show a "agent of the government" your id and boarding pass? Who cares that you have to remove your shoes or discard liquids over 3.4 ounces? I sure in the hell don't.

People like you are what put this country into the turmoil it's in now. Yes, I work for TSA. Do you think that TSA personel are exempt from going through security? What about Kip Hawley? EVERYBODY GETS CHECKED!!!

I was given the great pleasure of meeting with the great KIP HAWLEY and his other team members in November. This man has done wonderful things to improve TSA.

Kip I want to personally say THANK YOU and Best Wishes. Hopefully I will be able to meet with you once again during your travels.

Submitted by RB on

On a positive note:

To Bob and other Blog Ops; I suspect it's a busy time around HQ right about now. I hope that the new TSA executive staff support the continuation of this Blog and a call for a real atmosphere of open discussion.

I truly believe that a great deal of good things can come from this forum, however I think TSA needs to reach out a bit more than has happened in the past months.

Should the new crew decided to shut this blog down I hope you can make a case for a last announcement and allow for final words from the readers.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Kip,

PASS did not work; See Feel Think Do will not work.

Submitted by RB on

OFFICER GIORDANO said...
You know I wish those of you that are complaining about your rights actually knew your rights. I have had ancestor after ancestor fighting for the rights that you have. What the heck have you done lately to defend your rights? Who cares that you have to show a "agent of the government" your id and boarding pass? Who cares that you have to remove your shoes or discard liquids over 3.4 ounces? I sure in the hell don't.

;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

Officer Giordano, I care!

You ask what I have done to defend the rights we speak about here. Your rights, mine and every other citizen of this country.

I will tell you what I have done to defend these rights sir; I spent 23 years in the military service of this country, doing things that many people could not stomach or tolerate.

My father was a United States Marine in the Pacific theater during WWII and was one of the lucky survivors. Later he was a Law Enforcement Officer and later yet worked for the Justice Department.

My mother worked for the United States Air Force in a civilian capacity and later for the Justice Department.

My brother spent serveral years in the Coast Guard in the late 60's, then entered Federal Service in the Justice Department also, and finally my sister was a Law Enforcement Officer for 30 years.

I think all of those careers gave something towards defending the rights of all citizens.

Now good sir, tell me just what it is you have done besides screen baggage?

Submitted by RB on

George said...
RB, at the risk of topic drift, I honestly don't understand why you get your knickers in such a twist over the requirement to show your ID and boarding pass before entering a checkpoint.
....................
George, the simple answer is that this country has always had open internal borders where a citizen can travel about without interference from the govenment.

The act of being required to present ID and/or travel papers is the first step down the slope to having to prove who you are and why you are traveling. It is simply not the governments concern to who I am unless they have a warrant for my detention.

I have no issue with giving ID to the aircraft operator since I wish to contract with them to fly as a passenger on their aircraft.

Submitted by Robert Johnson on
Quote from Anonymous: "TSA is setup by law of congress."

I find it laughable that TSA can repeatedly quote law yet disregard it and the constitution when it suits its purposes.

"TSA is not going anywhere. The only way the hassle of TSA will get better is with time to get the technology out there to screen passengers accordingly. With all things that the public does not like, TSA screening will become more and more of a regular thing with time."

I wouldn't be so confident. If Obama makes good on his promise to evaluate government programs and eliminate ones that don't work, that cushy job you have at TSA may not be such a sure thing.

TSA can do a lot to remove the hassle now if it'd get rid of the "layers" (Kippie's favorite word) that don't work and/or are just fluff. A layer is only good if it works and actually does something useful.

Robert
Submitted by Anonymous on

Mister Giordano, we who criticize TSA are patriots and you who work for it are not. You are also our employee.

Submitted by Anonymous on

BlognDog, Al Ames, and RB:
I'm wondering what damage is being done to the Constituion...
BlognDog asked " how it is EVERY other country in the world can keep its citizens safe without abusing their rights but you cannot." Ever consider that we Americans have Too many rights compared to other countries?
I personally would rather stand in a line and follow the rules, and know TSA is doing what's in their power to keep myself and my family safe, than just let Joe Shmoe, who absolute hates the United States, (like most other countries do), decide to take down a plane by whatever means he/she deam necessary.
Maybe everyone should think about this when they drop their parents or children off at the airport.
This country claimed WE WILL NEVER FORGET. It seems most Americans DID forget.

Leigh

Submitted by Anonymous on

RB said...

"George, the simple answer is that this country has always had open internal borders where a citizen can travel about without interference from the govenment...
I have no issue with giving ID to the aircraft operator since I wish to contract with them to fly as a passenger on their aircraft."

We still have open travel within our borders. But unless you ask everyone for ID, how is one to know whether you are a citizen or not? If you are not a citizen in any other country, you need a passport, as do visitors to the United States.
You have no issue showing the airplane operator. But who is to say that a passenger that checks in at the ticket counter doesn't hand off his/her ticket to some illegal alien to travel because the checkpoint doesn't ensure it's the person who just picked up the ticket?
Not to mention, people check in at home don't come in contact with people from the airline until reaching the gate, unless checking a bag in.
I say it's time to get your panties out of that bunch and suck it up. It's for your own good.

Leigh

Submitted by Trollkiller on
OFFICER GIORDANO said...
You know I wish those of you that are complaining about your rights actually knew your rights. I have had ancestor after ancestor fighting for the rights that you have. What the heck have you done lately to defend your rights? Who cares that you have to show a "agent of the government" your id and boarding pass? Who cares that you have to remove your shoes or discard liquids over 3.4 ounces? I sure in the hell don't.


I happen to know my rights but just out of curiosity why don't you explain the basic rights of Americans when they are at the security checkpoint at the airport.

You ask what have I done lately to defend my rights, if you are implying military service is the only way to fight for your rights, you are sadly mistaken.

The military has not fought for my rights since the War of Northern Aggression or you may know it as the Civil War even though that is a false name and definition.

The military fights to protect my freedoms. Citizens fight to protect rights.

As a citizen I fight on almost a daily basis to protect my right to travel freely without Government interference.

I fight on almost a daily basis to protect my right to be free of unwarranted and unreasonable searches.

I fight on almost a daily basis for my right to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

What have YOU done lately to fight for our rights?
Submitted by Trollkiller on
Anonymous said...
BlognDog, Al Ames, and RB:
I'm wondering what damage is being done to the Constituion...
BlognDog asked " how it is EVERY other country in the world can keep its citizens safe without abusing their rights but you cannot."

Ever consider that we Americans have Too many rights compared to other countries?

I personally would rather stand in a line and follow the rules, and know TSA is doing what's in their power to keep myself and my family safe, than just let Joe Shmoe, who absolute hates the United States, (like most other countries do), decide to take down a plane by whatever means he/she deam necessary.

Maybe everyone should think about this when they drop their parents or children off at the airport.
This country claimed WE WILL NEVER FORGET. It seems most Americans DID forget.


Most Americans did not forget and some Americans like me accept that we will never be free of danger.

Because we know we will never be free of danger we are not willing to give up ANY right on the false hope of being completely secure.

I would rather 3000 people die a year in terror related attacks than to give up a SINGLE right.
Submitted by Halı Yıkama Mak... on

If everyone is supposed to know it's 3.4 oz, why use the 3 oz everywhere official?

Submitted by OFFICER GIORDANO on

For those of you that wish to bash me in your comments, here is my response:

I never said that the military is the only one that is protecting your rights. The military DOES help to protect your rights. The majority of people fight for their rights. WHAT HAVE YOU DONE? I ask you again.

What have I done besides screening baggage, you ask? Well let me tell you. I have screened passengers as well. I have checked passengers identification. I have the pleasure of knowing that I did my job to make sure YOUR safe on YOUR flight. I have been apart of apprehending Drunk Drivers. I am working on creating a better checkpoint for YOU. I have helped keep firearms off of flights like yours. I am an active participant to keep my neighborhood safe. I help out my community by donating items and my services. You sir have spent almost more time in the military than I have been living. I want you to know sir that I was raised to be very Patriotic and I am extremely Patriotic. I am proud to say that my family has had a large part in defending this country.

My father was a Marine in the Vietnam War. He then returned home to join the police department. He is now a board member of F.O.P. (Fraternal Order of Police). I have had a family member in every war, conflict, and/or battle that this country has had.

For the Einstein that says that we are not Patriots, are you serious? Patriots step up to the plate and help defend their country. Those of you that want to criticize TSA are not acting like Patriots. By the way I am not YOUR employee, I am a government employee. You sir did not hire me, the DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY did.

I'm glad to hear that there are some of you that enjoy the fact that anybody WAS able to come into this country illegaly. The reason we have the protection that we do is becasue of previous issues. I suppose you like the guy next to you on the plane that is wanted for kidnapping and murder. The drug smuggler that is smuggling 20 kilos of cocaine to try and sell to one of your family members.

The fact is: We as Americans have to make sacrifices everyday to make sure that we stay safe.

I'd like to reiterate what Leigh posted. This country claimed WE WILL NEVER FORGET. It seems most Americans DID forget. I couldn't agree with you more. Alot of Americans have forgotten or became complacent about it.

If you don't like the fact that you have to remove your shoes or discard liquids over 3.4 ounces or the fact that you have to show your id and boarding pass to an "agent of the government", THEN DON'T FLY. Let me let you in on something, here's what my TSA stands for you: There's Still Amtrak. If you don't like that either than you can always drive to your destination.

Oh no that won't work either huh? The police officer might violate your rights when you get pulled over.

The bottom line is you at least have options for your travels. So pick the one that works best for you.

By the way PASS does work! SEE FEEL THINK DO also works!

So I hope one day that we can all agree that TSA and the rest of DHS are doing a great job at protecting the public.

Other than that I'll have to agree to disagree with some of you.

Submitted by Dunstan on

Trollkiller said:
"I would rather 3000 people die a year in terror related attacks than to give up a SINGLE right."

Isn't 3000 about the same as the number of deaths from smoking in the US- every 60 hours? 440,000 each year.

The cynic in me contemplates that if terrorists had lobyists in Washington, terrorism would somehow be legal....

Submitted by RB on

OFFICER GIORDANO said...

The fact is: We as Americans have to make sacrifices everyday to make sure that we stay safe.

We do not have to sacrifice Constitutional Protections. To do so is not an act of a Patriot.

If you don't like the fact that you have to remove your shoes or discard liquids over 3.4 ounces or the fact that you have to show your id and boarding pass to an "agent of the government", THEN DON'T FLY. Let me let you in on something, here's what my TSA stands for you: There's Still Amtrak. If you don't like that either than you can always drive to your destination.

The bottom line is you at least have options for your travels. So pick the one that works best for you.

Those are not always viable options. Tell me how I can take Amtrak to Hawaii from Los Angles? Regardless, TSA is moving to control all forms of public transportation so what will my options be then?

So I hope one day that we can all agree that TSA and the rest of DHS are doing a great job at protecting the public.

I don't think we will agree on the above statement in my lifetime. There is "zero" proof that what TSA is doing has added anything to "protecting the public".

As far as your definition of "TSA: There's Still Amtrak" displays your total lack of objectivity. I think it would be more accurate as "Terrorist Support Agency"!

Now I could be wrong but your couple of post on this blog makes me think your a "wet behind the ears" poorly educated person who is unable to find other productive employment. I'll give you the opportunity to prove otherwise.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I will tell you what I have done to defend these rights sir; I spent 23 years in the military service of this country, doing things that many people could not stomach or tolerate.


So you're saying you were a cook?

Submitted by Sandra on

"Officer" Giordano, you need to get over yourself.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Intersting how Mister Giordano continues to post nothing but bluster and false bravado, while posting nothing that could be remotely considered a fact. The fact is that checking IDs does nothing to make flights safer. The fact is that liquids do not pose any threat to air travel. The fact is that shoes do not pose any threat to air travel. Heck, even Kip Hawley has said that people who show up at airports with firearms are disturbed, not genuine threats to air travel.

Learn your facts, Mister Giordano.

Submitted by George on

@Officer Giordano: So I hope one day that we can all agree that TSA and the rest of DHS are doing a great job at protecting the public.

I hope so too. But that day won't arrive until the TSA and the rest of DHS can honestly convince the public that what they do actually protects them and isn't just gratuitous, costly, intrusive, inconvenient, and sometimes even humiliating "Security Theater." Repeatedly insisting that "Yes it does, but we can't tell you anything more than that because it's classified for National Security reasons" won't do that. Nor will responding to all honestly-offered questions and criticism with "Remember 9/11! Be afraid and terrified!" Until you earn the public's confidence and trust, the public will be skeptical and resentful of what they perceive (correctly or otherwise) as undue and arbitrary intrusions on rights and the loss of liberties.

In short, when the TSA and the rest of the DHS treat the public like "active, positive participants" rather than as enemy threats, and stop hiding their inadequacies behind a smothering shroud of secrecy, the public will rally right behind them, respect them, and even be grateful for what they do. That's all we ask, but the TSA and the rest of the DHS have so far made that all but impossible.

In the words of President Obama, "[W]e reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our founding fathers, faced with perils that we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience’s sake." I hope Janet Napolitano was listening carefully.

Pages