Trump admin axes ‘Quiet Skies’ traveler surveillance program — which ‘failed to stop a single terrorist attack’
The TSA, Surveillance, and the Erosion of Trust in Air Travel
Air travel in the United States has long been a subject of both fascination and frustration. For many, the experience of navigating airports, enduring security checks, and dealing with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is a necessary evil—an inconvenience accepted in the name of safety. But recent revelations and ongoing controversies have cast a harsh light on the effectiveness, ethics, and even the legality of some TSA practices. In this article, we’ll explore the latest bombshells about the TSA’s surveillance programs, the broader implications for civil liberties, and the cultural climate that allows such overreach to persist.
The Quiet Skies Program: Surveillance Run Amok
The Quiet Skies program was launched in 2012 under the Obama administration, purportedly to track “dangerous individuals” traveling by air. The idea was to have federal agents, including air marshals, follow certain U.S. citizens during their travels, monitoring their behavior for signs of potential threats. On paper, this might sound like a reasonable precaution in a post-9/11 world. In practice, however, the program quickly became a tool for political targeting and invasive surveillance.
Political Weaponization
According to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Christine Gnome, the Quiet Skies program was not only ineffective—it failed to stop a single terrorist attack in over a decade—but was also weaponized against political opponents. Notably, former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard was added to a terror watch list the day after she criticized then-Vice President Kamala Harris. Hundreds of Americans, including those who merely attended the January 6th rally (regardless of whether they entered the Capitol), found themselves under surveillance, subjected to additional screenings, and even followed by air marshals.
The Cost of Failure
The financial cost of the Quiet Skies program is staggering: approximately $200 million per year, all for a system that has not caught a single terrorist. The human cost, however, is harder to quantify. Innocent Americans have been harassed, delayed, and stigmatized, often without any recourse or explanation. The program’s lack of transparency and accountability has only deepened public mistrust.
Matt Taibbi just EXPOSED that Tulsi Gabbard was put on a TSA “terrorist watch” program that cost $200M a year — and never made an arrest.
— End Tribalism in Politics (@EndTribalism) September 30, 2025
“Former Hawaii Congresswoman and presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard was placed in a surveillance program called Quiet Skies.”
“The… pic.twitter.com/p5mL3oSTj4
Outsourcing Surveillance: The Role of Private Companies
The Evade Program
One of the most troubling aspects of the TSA’s surveillance apparatus is its reliance on private sector companies to circumvent legal restrictions. The Evade program, another Obama-era initiative, allowed the TSA to use a private company to monitor social media posts, geolocate individuals, and flag “suspicious” behavior. Because federal agencies are legally barred from certain types of domestic surveillance, outsourcing this work to private firms provided a convenient loophole.
Targeting Political Opponents
Evidence suggests that the Evade program disproportionately targeted conservatives. Whistleblowers and investigative journalists have uncovered patterns indicating that individuals with right-leaning views, or those who criticized the administration, were more likely to be added to terror watch lists or have their TSA PreCheck privileges revoked. In one egregious case, even the wife of a federal air marshal was labeled a domestic terrorist and surveilled for over two years—without any evidence of wrongdoing.
The Kafkaesque Nightmare of Watch Lists
Once added to a watch list, getting off is a bureaucratic nightmare. There is no clear process for removal, and those affected often find themselves missing flights, subjected to repeated screenings, and unable to get answers from government agencies. In one particularly absurd case, a baby—who wasn’t even born on January 6th—was flagged because of an association with a parent who attended the rally.
In 2024, I launched an investigation into TSA’s “Quiet Skies” program. It was supposed to track terror threats, but under Biden it was twisted into a political surveillance tool. Veterans, lawmakers, political opponents, and even the family of a Federal Air Marshal were targeted. pic.twitter.com/bf2A9n4dGi
— Senator Rand Paul (@SenRandPaul) September 30, 2025
The Ineffectiveness of the TSA
For many travelers, the TSA is synonymous with inconvenience. Long lines, arbitrary rules, and invasive pat-downs are the norm. Stories abound of agents confiscating harmless items—like powder-based dry shampoo—simply because they fall under the vague category of “bathroom stuff.” Despite these hassles, the TSA’s actual effectiveness is questionable. The agency has a well-documented failure rate, with undercover tests revealing that agents miss prohibited items at alarmingly high rates.
Security Theater
The concept of “security theater”—measures that provide the appearance of safety without actually improving it—perfectly encapsulates the TSA’s approach. The agency’s defenders argue that the mere existence of the TSA deters would-be terrorists, but there is little evidence to support this claim. Instead, the TSA has become a bloated bureaucracy, more focused on justifying its own existence than on genuinely protecting the public.
The Persistence of Bureaucratic Overreach
Government programs, once established, are notoriously difficult to dismantle. The longer the TSA and its associated surveillance programs persist, the more entrenched they become. Calls for reform are met with resistance, and the agency’s failures are often excused or ignored. As a result, travelers are left to endure a system that is both ineffective and invasive.
