A sarcastic op-ed in the LA Times by Jim Tierney critiqued TSA airport screening but failed to offer new solutions–or even an understanding of the issues.
By Ken Dunlap
TSA Administrator Peter Neffenger has challenged his organization to envision the Transportation Security Administration as an “integrated whole.” This will require a grand strategy to ensure that our security capabilities outpace the threats over time.
Little research has been developed on the economic security aspect of homeland security. This past week, I presented a paper at the Eastern Economics Association (EEA) 42nd Annual Conference in Washington, DC, and it afforded the kind of dialogue we need on customer service and homeland security.
My recent post on DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson’s “State of Homeland Security” talk prompted a passionate response from Christian Marrone, former Chief of Staff to the Secretary. Here is my response to him.
DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson’s final “State of Homeland Security” talk included the usual reference to his “Unity of Effort” initiative. While his intentions are good, within DHS, the effort is viewed as nothing more than a “Unity of Rhetoric” initiative. Here are several ways well-meaning ideas have fallen well-short of reality.
Having good customer service improves the profitability of merchants at the airports, and from a law enforcement perspective, a calm airport environment allows CBP and other law enforcement officers to identify potential threats. Here’s how.
Half of the U.S. public believes the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) makes flying safer—and half don’t. There’s plenty of evidence that TSA airport screeners are not effective, but worse, the agency is rigging the system to make sure it is the only option for airport security. It doesn’t have to be this way.
The Screening Partnership Program, managed TSA, relies on private sector employees for airport screening. Millions of passengers are screened by this program each year. I have wondered over the years why more airports, especially the large ones, are not a greater part of SPP. There are many good reasons why they should be.
During the President’s address to the nation on December 6, he said what has not been said since the attacks on 9/11. A terrorist attack occurred on American soil. This simple statement is a big deal. Here’s why.
By William Flynn
The tactics used in the attacks in Paris last week require a recommitment in the homeland to heightening our vigilance of potential attacks. To support this, what were the tactics, techniques and procedures used in the Paris attacks from which we can draw applicable lessons for the United States?