Claims that leaked security failure figures are “outdated” are easily debunked
Monday, Jan 3rd, 2011
The TSA has once again reverted to lies in an attempt to protect its new security theatre show control measures, claiming that recent reports of 70% security failure rates are no longer accurate.
Just over a fortnight ago we reported on the revelations that TSA agents are now so busy groping and irradiating airline passengers that they are routinely missing the presence of bombs and guns in both tests and live situations.
After ABC News covered the story of an Iranian/American businessman expressing his disbelief at being allowed onto a flight with a loaded handgun, it was widely reported in the media that such TSA failures were commonplace.
It was noted that screeners detect less than 30% of the knives and guns that officials try to sneak through security in tests. Failures to detect explosive material and bomb parts were also disturbingly high, according to the reports.
This underscores how the newly enhanced and invasive TSA security procedures are pure theatre and actually do nothing to make anyone safer. Indeed, it may be argued that the procedures are putting fliers in more danger as screeners are spending more time groping people and ordering them through x-ray body scanners than checking for potentially dangerous items in their hand luggage.
In a belated response, the now infamous TSA blogger “Bob”, who previously claimed that despite thousands of complaints from passengers, there was “no fondling, squeezing, groping, or any sort of sexual assault taking place at airports”, says that the security failure rate figures widely covered by the media are no longer relevant.
The TSA blog describes the security failure reports as “all misleading” and “outdated”, claiming that the figures cited were taken from tests carried out in 2004-2005.
Not true Bob.
As highlighted by The Economist’s business travel blog:
The ABC News report Gulliver linked to last month didn’t rely on 2004, 2005, or 2006 numbers—it referenced “a person briefed” on “the latest tests” who said they have a failure rate of 70%.
In addition, TSA head John Pistole made the following comments less than a month ago during an interview on Good Morning America:
“… unfortunately, [undercover testers] have been very successful over the years. And one of the findings is that we have not been thorough enough. And the concern obviously is, if that’s an Abdulmutallab — a Christmas Day bomber — who is doing it rather than an undercover agent, then that can have catastrophic results.”Of course, very few people actually know what the current rate of TSA security failures are, because the Department of Homeland Security has classified the results of the most recent random, covert “red team tests,” where undercover agents try to see what they can get past airport security. The reason they have done so is presumably because the results have been so shockingly and consistently bad for the past nine years.
If the figures had improved significantly then you can rest assured that the TSA would be forcing them down our throats as justification for enhanced airport tyranny, rather than declaring them top secret and locking them away from public view.
As The Economist’s Gulliver blog states “the agency can’t have it both ways. If TSA officials are going to imply that the situation has improved since the last inspector general and GAO reports were leaked to the press, they should prove it.”
However, it seems the agency would rather send out an anonymous blogger named Bob to attack anyone who points out the absurdly obvious where the TSA’s security theatrics are concerned.
Once again this shows that the TSA and Homeland Security are willingly resorting to outright lies in a pathetic attempt to bolster their ailing control agenda. Those making official statements on behalf of the legions of strip search goon squads clearly have little regard for the safety of Americans.
Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor at Alex Jones’ Infowars.net, and regular contributor to Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham in England.