TSA SOP - Page 2

dadof18x'er · 12-09-2009, 18:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Utah Bob

They have already gone to a secret handshake in lieu if ID cards. Everything is under control.

this whole thing is spooky to me, how vulnerable are these flights right now?

inside job? nothing surprises me any more, a good ole crisis would unify the country.

JAGO · 12-10-2009, 05:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

I'm still wondering "why" the CIA feels a need to identify itself to a TSA agent ???????

Or the need for showing "Creds" CONUS ?????

Armed CIA agents on US soil???? Only in the movies I think.

So why the need for CIA Creds flying CONUS?

Team Sergeant:

In answer to your question, post 9/11 I recall legislation to give CIA GS-1811 (criminal investigator) status for the protective details surrounding director CIA, NSA, DIA, etc w/ arrest authority. The thought was that the various directors present a target and their details need to be able to have the authority to act should something happen. The need was clear and post 9/11 USMS and USSS were drawn very thin.

As far as exercising law enforcement authority in CONUS, Dept of the Army, DoD, US Mint, etc., all have statutory authority to run their own police forces. In fact, the officer that took down the Major out at Ft Hood was a DA police officer. The authority is on the federal books and CIA has a police division that protects their multiple CONUS facilities. Over time I've met perhaps a couple hundred of the CIA police officers and they are quite good. Probably due to the pre-employment screening they get.

One last point, anyone who works for the USG and has gone thru the OPM background invest process knows the limitations. Especially if they went thru one in the old days with Army MI sniffing everybody's underwear and can compare the two. Because a "one size fits all" program w/ OPM in the lead just wouldn't work, a limited number of federal agencies retain their ability to conduct their own suitability determinations and need investigators for that purpose.

v/r
phil

Ret10Echo · 12-10-2009, 08:35

FLEOA to TSA: 'Don't shoot the messenger' in manual kerfuffle

Interview with the President of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association Jon Adler.

Five Transportation Security Administration employees have been placed on leave after documents containing security information were found posted on the Internet. Jon Adler is the National President of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association. Adler's group is asking Congress to hold a closed-door hearing on the breach to determine what happened.
Tags: Management, FLEOA, Jonathan Adler, TSA

http://www.federalnewsradio.com/?nid=15&sid=1836166

**Team Sergeant** · 12-10-2009, 10:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by JAGO

Team Sergeant:

In answer to your question, post 9/11 I recall legislation to give CIA GS-1811 (criminal investigator) status for the protective details surrounding director CIA, NSA, DIA, etc w/ arrest authority. The thought was that the various directors present a target and their details need to be able to have the authority to act should something happen. The need was clear and post 9/11 USMS and USSS were drawn very thin.

As far as exercising law enforcement authority in CONUS, Dept of the Army, DoD, US Mint, etc., all have statutory authority to run their own police forces. In fact, the officer that took down the Major out at Ft Hood was a DA police officer. The authority is on the federal books and CIA has a police division that protects their multiple CONUS facilities. Over time I've met perhaps a couple hundred of the CIA police officers and they are quite good. Probably due to the pre-employment screening they get.

One last point, anyone who works for the USG and has gone thru the OPM background invest process knows the limitations. Especially if they went thru one in the old days with Army MI sniffing everybody's underwear and can compare the two. Because a "one size fits all" program w/ OPM in the lead just wouldn't work, a limited number of federal agencies retain their ability to conduct their own suitability determinations and need investigators for that purpose.

v/r
phil

I understand the need for federal police forces, the need for "Creds" and protective details for the chiefs. The "only" one I would question is the CIA's. In my opinion, if, the TSA has the CIA's "Cred's" posted in their TSA manual it could be assumed that the CIA's agents are traveling often and "armed" in CONUS.

Knowing how well the FBI has faired in recent shootings I'd hate to see a "CIA" agent pull a gun on an airplace........(or even have one for that matter, this does not include a protective detail.)

TS

AngelsSix · 12-10-2009, 21:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

(Want to bet it's a female in charge of firearms training at FLETC?)

HEY!! Now that's not fair TS!! You ought to know better....there are some FEMALE firearms instructors that take out jobs SERIOUSLY!! You should know, you taught at least ONE of them!!

Triman19 · 12-14-2009, 02:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

Everyone goes on the "List".

TS, are you referring to the Blue, Green "lists" conspiracy? In reference to the government lists?

one-zero · 12-15-2009, 15:11

CIA creds in the TSA manual have nothing to do with being armed. Plenty of agencies have non-armed folks w/creds. You could probably come up with quite a few at every level (local to fed), heck the county medical examiner here has creds...but doesn't carry, same for FBI analysts and other support types. no biggie.
The biggie here is that the TSA and DHS for that matter are nothing more than jackass reactions to 911 and make us more vulnerable at the end of the day - starting w/mindest. I didn't have much of a problem w/the Patriot act when implemented for it's intended use (catch foreigners hiding/using US AO). But the current admin seems to like it for different reasons...

As with many things we could accomplish what we need by better using the assets, units, agencies, etc on hand vice these bloated agencies...

**Team Sergeant** · 12-15-2009, 16:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by one-zero

CIA creds in the TSA manual have nothing to do with being armed. Plenty of agencies have non-armed folks w/creds. You could probably come up with quite a few at every level (local to fed), heck the county medical examiner here has creds...but doesn't carry, same for FBI analysts and other support types. no biggie.
The biggie here is that the TSA and DHS for that matter are nothing more than jackass reactions to 911 and make us more vulnerable at the end of the day - starting w/mindest. I didn't have much of a problem w/the Patriot act when implemented for it's intended use (catch foreigners hiding/using US AO). But the current admin seems to like it for different reasons...

As with many things we could accomplish what we need by better using the assets, units, agencies, etc on hand vice these bloated agencies...

My point exactly, iffin you ain't armed there's no reason to be showing them "creds".

**The Reaper** · 12-15-2009, 18:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

My point exactly, iffin you ain't armed there's no reason to be showing them "creds".

Unless you are a courier.

TR

Ret10Echo · 12-15-2009, 18:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by one-zero

The biggie here is that the TSA and DHS for that matter are nothing more than jackass reactions to 911 and make us more vulnerable at the end of the day - But the current admin seems to like it for different reasons...

As with many things we could accomplish what we need by better using the assets, units, agencies, etc on hand vice these bloated agencies...

Apologize for the hijack....

There was yet another Senate hearing today to discuss DHS and the (lack of) managment within the organization (link here). Duplicative processes is an understatement. Unlike a corporate merger, each of the 22 Agencies that were slung together maintained its internal bureacracy. How do you expect to get anything done when there are no clear lines of authority?

By the way...GAO keeps making the call...(DHS remains on the high risk list seen here) and Congress keeps asking questions, but DHS is what congress made it. So why are these out-of-touch polito-loons surprised?

I think the congress critters love the situation because it provides them with a great deal of leverage and the ability to reach down into DHS and pull out whatever rabbit they are looking for. Pet projects reign supreme. Millions dumped into meaningless projects and little to no real ovesight until after the money is spent....

Pretty convenient if you think about it. DOD was getting wise to these antics. DHS lacks the sophistication and has sufficient infighting to allow huge fraud, waste and abuse to take place. But if any protest is made then you are obviously un-American since you do not care for the "security" of the nation.

Does this explain all of the points where organizations like TSA are found to be so very lacking? No, it does not. But why in the world do you create this "thing" that you really want to be some sort of national-level police force but fail so miserably to make IT into something functional? (isn't that what it kinda-sorta ought to be?).

Just my wooden nickle...(adjusted for inflation)

**Team Sergeant** · 12-15-2009, 19:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Unless you are a courier.

TR

Boss,

I've carried classified (TS) material all over the world, and to Washington DC, many times, ain't no one going to ask to see those "papers" in your brief case. Not CONUS anyway.
Carrying other stuff, maybe....

TS

dr. mabuse · 12-17-2009, 22:25

Was a little surprised with how the CIA creds look. Looks like something someone would sell at the gun shows along with a Hawaii Five-0 badge.