If you’re like most Americans who fly even just once per year, you know how frustrating the experience has become in the post-9/11 world in which passengers are presumed to be guilty until — after an aggressive pat-down — they’re proven otherwise.
What’s worse is the indiscriminate nature of the searches which include octogenarian, wheelchair-bound ladies and children.
But the argument by big government officials is that all this is necessary to protect against terror attacks. Except, apparently it’s not.
Accordingly officials with knowledge of recent undercover tests of TSA effectiveness, the draconian security screening is failing, at a minimum, three out of four times.
This begs the obvious question: is it all worth it?
We wager not.
Here’s more from ABC News…
In recent undercover tests of multiple airport security checkpoints by the Department of Homeland Security, inspectors said screeners, their equipment or their procedures failed more than half of the time, according to a source familiar with the classified report.
When ABC News asked the source familiar with the report if the failure rate was 80 percent, the response was, “You are in the ballpark.”
In a public hearing following a private, classified briefing to the House Committee on Homeland Security, members of Congress called the failures by the Transportation Security Administration “disturbing.”
Rep. Mike Rogers went as far as to tell TSA Administrator David Pekoske, “This agency that you run is broken badly and it needs your attention.”
Pekoske was confirmed by the Senate this summer.
Inspectors “identified vulnerabilities with TSA’s screener performance, screening equipment, and associated procedures,” according to a statement from the Department of Homeland Security.
