this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2026
90 points (98.9% liked)

news

807 readers
876 users here now

A lightweight news hub to help decentralize the fediverse load: mirror and discuss headlines here so the giant instance communities aren’t a single choke-point.

Rules:

  1. Recent news articles only (past 30 days)
  2. Title must match the headline or neutrally describe the content
  3. Avoid duplicates & spam (search before posting; batch minor updates).
  4. Be civil; no hate or personal attacks.
  5. No link shorteners
  6. No entire article in the post body

founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Brkdncr@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago

Let them think this is their idea.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 14 points 6 days ago (1 children)

priviziation is not the same as getting rid of.

[–] IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Privatization would return us to the pre-9/11 days when the TSA didn’t even exist. The problem with the private security back then was that each airport was responsible for contracting out their own security. So you had no standardized training, airports going with the cheapest bidder, etc.

I still remember taking a business trip back in the 90’s, wearing the exact same clothes through two different airports. At one airport I walked through security without a hitch. At the second one I set off the metal detector multiple times. The screener ultimately used a wand and determined it was the metal studs in the jeans I was wearing and also the metal eyelets in my shoes. When I mentioned breezing through security at the first airport he said it wasn’t surprising the different airports had their metal detectors set to different sensitivities.

Privitization can be a good replacement for the TSA, but only if it’s done correctly with proper training, standardization, testing, etc.

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 7 points 6 days ago
[–] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

Someone is reading ahead in project 2025.

[–] Jumbie@lemmy.zip 82 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Holy fucking shit. The crazy person is now making sense.

Unless of course he means replace them with a Nazi force.

[–] warbosstodd@piefed.social 40 points 1 week ago (2 children)

A privatized Nazi force. That Airports will be forced to contract with at a rate that’s negotiated by Trump cronies. $5 it’s Blackwater

[–] grue@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

$5 it’s Blackwater

I'll take that bet, mainly because it's changed names three times since then to try to launder its reputation.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_(company) :

It was renamed Xe Services in 2009, and was again renamed to Academi in 2011, after it was acquired by a group of private investors. In 2014, Academi merged with Triple Canopy to form Constellis Holdings.

[–] mushroommunk@lemmy.today 15 points 1 week ago

I dunno. Pinkertons would want in on that racket too.

[–] megopie@lemmy.blahaj.zone 34 points 1 week ago (1 children)

“Hey this super unpopular mass surveillance security theater is super expensive, and also trying to argue for why it should get funding is not helping us in the polls, and like, there are actual mass surveillance things we do want to abuse for police state shit that aren’t getting funding because they’re in the same department. Can we just drop this public facing part so it’s easier to fund the parts we do care about?”

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 3 points 6 days ago

It isn't that it is super expensive, but that it is being used as a bargaining chip regarding ICE funding and the blame isn't going to Democrats. A failure of TSA to properly do its job right before the World Cup is going to get blamed on Republicans and the smart Republicans know this.

It also lets Republicans potentially crush a union as a treat.

[–] dumnezero@piefed.social 5 points 1 week ago

inb4 Grok TSA