3 ms·
It might be worth having a small panel or advisory committee with good intelligence clearance, which periodically evaluates aviation threats and realistic ways
by Aelinsaar 10y ago
It might be worth having a small panel or advisory committee with good intelligence clearance, which periodically evaluates aviation threats and realistic ways to handle them. In cases where there are no good solutions, as you suggest, no security theater will be engaged in.
- criley2 10y agoWe do audit the TSA. They fail about 95% of the time (67 fails out of 70 tests) in official audits: http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/01/politics/tsa-failed-undercover-airport-screening-tests/ http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/01/politics/tsa-failed-undercover...
- Aelinsaar 10y agoI'm not suggesting an audit of the TSA, since the TSA does nothing useful. I'm suggesting an audit of the likely threats, likely solutions, costs, etc. I.E. the thinking that led to reinforcing cockpit doors. The TSA doesn't enter into this, since they are much MUCH worse than flipping a coin.
- someguydave 10y agoExcept what do you mean by 'intelligence clearance'? The reason we have to screen everyone is because of the egalitarian jealousies of the masses.
- MatthaeusHarris 10y agoIntelligence as in information, not as in smarts. Intelligence clearance = access to classified information.
- someguydave 10y agoYes, I understand that was what you meant. What qualifies someone to have a clearance?