1
   

STUPID AIRPORT SECURITY

 
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Sep, 2006 01:02 pm
The following report originally appeared in the August 27, 2006 edition of the Philadelphia Inquirer.
Here's like it was published in today's Albuquerque Journal, page 6:

Quote:
Behavior Profiling Improves Air Security


by Jonathan V. Last
The Philadelphia Inqirer

http://i1.tinypic.com/2872fk3.jpg http://i1.tinypic.com/2872fxz.jpg

THE DISCOVERY AND INTERCEPTION of the London air plots was a reminder that, while our intelligence capabilities have improved since September 11, 2001, our airport-security apparatus remains antiquated. Had the terrorists executed their plan, they would have had a high probability of success. Airport security cannot possibly hope to stop similar terrorist operations in the future unless it changes dramatically.

Two options lie before us. The first and more disruptive course is to take commercial carriers out of the baggage business. Passenger tickets would include travelers and the clothes on their backs--no luggage, no carry-ons. In theory, this would lower ticket prices. Passengers could then use that savings to ship their bags ahead of them. (It's not as crazy as it sounds; some people already use FedEx for their luggage.) Today, it would cost you about $120 to send a 40-pound suitcase from a home in Philadelphia to a hotel in Los Angeles by second-day air. This price would almost certainly fall if luggage shipping became big business.

The second option is more practical, although just as radical: adopting the Israeli model of airport security. The Israelis are generally regarded as having the safest air travel in the world because, instead of searching for weapons, they use profiling to search for terrorists.

It isn't as controversial as it sounds. We're talking behavioral profiling here, not racial profiling. Israeli-style profiling first came to the United States after September 11, when Boston's Logan International Airport hired Rafi Ron as a security consultant. Before joining New Age Security Solutions, Ron had been director of security at Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion airport, which has now gone more than 30 years without a serious terrorist incident.

There are differences between Israel and America. Ben Gurion, for instance, handles 6 million to 10 million passengers per year. Logan handles 25 million to 30 million. And the United States has more than 400 commercial airports. But despite the difference in scale, the principles of the Israeli program translate surprisingly well.

"Terrorists are far from being perfect. They are people, they are human beings, just like us, and they do a lot of mistakes," Ron recently told NPR. The system Ron brought to Logan identifies terrorists by focusing on their behavior. As he explained to U.S. News & World Report, "Passengers with illegitimate, violent agendas don't act normally."

Take, for example, the 9/11 hijackers. As Transportation Security Administration analyst Carl Maccario told USA Today, when you watch the tape of the three 9/11 hijackers going through the Dulles security lines, you notice that none of them makes eye contact with security personnel. "They all looked away," says Maccario, "and had their heads down."

In 2002, Ron helped Logan institute the "behavior-pattern recognition" program, or BPR. Uniformed and plainclothes security forces look for behavior that is odd or out of the ordinary. They look for profuse sweat, stiff torsos, clenched fists, quavering Adam's apples, fidgeting, avoidance of authorities, and other markers. When an individual raises suspicion, he or she is approached for what is called a "targeted conversation."

The targeted conversation is a series of friendly questions designed to set the passenger at ease, or the terrorist off-guard. An interviewer at Logan might ask, "What did you see in Boston?"--and then follow up by asking, "Oh, you've been sightseeing. What did you like best?" Questions are progressive in order to verify answers. At the end of the interview, the agent either wishes passengers a good trip and sends them on their way, or initiates additional scrutiny.

These are not interrogations. As Ron explained recently, "We believe that 99.9999 percent of the people that will be approached would probably end up as legitimate people, and they are not terrorists at the end of the day. So, first of all, they have to be treated respectfully and not like criminals. Secondly, we strongly believe that treating them in a friendly manner will also be very important in recruiting their cooperation, and their cooperation is critical for the success of the process."

Targeted conversations work. In 1986, Anne-Marie Murphy, a pregnant, 32-year-old Irish lass, was on her way to board a London flight to Israel, where she was to marry her Arab fiance. After passing through several security checks, she was stopped for a targeted conversation by Israeli security because she stuck out: Pregnant women do not often travel long distances alone. Authorities became more interested in her because of the evasive answers she gave. Turns out, she had a bomb in her carry-on bag.

In 1999, the Millennium Bomber, Ahmed Ressam, was caught because of evasive answers he gave to a Customs official at a Washington state port. According to the journal Homeland Security, targeted conversations at Logan International have resulted in dozens of arrests of criminals, who exhibit many of the same behavioral tics as terrorists.

Naturally, the ACLU has its Pavlovian response, filing a lawsuit against Logan, which charges that BPR is unconstitutional because it necessarily involves racial and ethnic profiling.

But this fear-mongering misses the point exactly. As Ron explained to the journal Transportation Security: "Speaking from a security point of view, it would be professionally stupid to divert attention from non-Arab people. For example, the worst attack on Ben Gurion was carried out by Japanese in 1972. If we focus on ethnic groups, we will miss what the enemy already understands: Using a non-Arab person to carry out an attack might succeed." Behavioral profiling succeeds precisely because it isn't racial profiling.

The success of the BPR pilot program at Logan prompted the TSA to adopt it under the moniker SPOT (Screening Passengers by Observation Technique), and it is now in effect at a dozen American airports. In the coming months, TSA will seek to expand it greatly. Despite carping from the expected quarters, they should.

Our safety depends upon it.
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Sep, 2006 01:27 pm
i think one of the major problems in increasing security at north-american airports is that travellers don't like to be 'inconvenienced' - 'why check me ? check the other guy and leave me alone !' .

we see it whenever we cross the border between canada and the united states . we always carry our passports with us and quickly pass inspection ; often with a friendly : "enjoy your shopping in watertown ".
we also see a lot of people - both canadians and americans - that do not carry a passsport and they are often scrutinized quite a bit .
many of the these people are pretty upset - some are quite mad - when they have to produce two pieces of other identification and are usually asked a few questions .
we have some good friends that were born here and lived here all their lives . they just can't understand why they should carry a passport . as our friend says : "surely , the inspectors can tell an honest person from a dishonest one " .
(this friend of ours was a superintendent for 'correctional services - canada' and believes that one can tell an honest person from a dishonest one - no papers needed Surprised ).
hbg
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Sep, 2006 01:51 pm
Do you mean Canadians can be as rude and self serving as some Americans can? People like me don't mind the security at all, and I would guess neither do you. I do mind getting singled out for extra scrutiny knowing that I fit the profile of no terrorists anywhere while those who definitely do are waived right on through, but hopefully we can get past political correctness and correct that. I still won't mind being singled out, but at least I'll know they're also using common sense right along with reasonable precautions.

I understand that any international travel, including short sojourns into Mexico and Canada will require a passport by the end of this year and the post offices have been busy taking applications as people here are applying for the their first passports ever. I think that's a pretty good idea not that Passports can't be forged as easily as any other official documents.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Sep, 2006 05:11 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Do you mean Canadians can be as rude and self serving as some Americans can? People like me don't mind the security at all, and I would guess neither do you. I do mind getting singled out for extra scrutiny knowing that I fit the profile of no terrorists anywhere while those who definitely do are waived right on through, but hopefully we can get past political correctness and correct that. I still won't mind being singled out, but at least I'll know they're also using common sense right along with reasonable precautions.

I understand that any international travel, including short sojourns into Mexico and Canada will require a passport by the end of this year and the post offices have been busy taking applications as people here are applying for the their first passports ever. I think that's a pretty good idea not that Passports can't be forged as easily as any other official documents.


Can you offer any kind of link or anything to back up your statements that people that don't fit the profile, by that I assume you mean non Arabic looking, get set aside for extra security while people who fit the profile, Arabic looking or with Muslim or Arabic sounding names, get to just breeze on by? Or are we forced to take your word that it happens to you all the time while those Arabs just breeze on their merry way all because of political correctness?

If you do have links, why would your sources be any better than the ones I offered of Arabs/Muslims being racially profiled in airports? If you don't have a link, I think you should refrain making unsubstantiated statements.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Sep, 2006 05:24 pm
I was speaking from my own experience Revel. And as famous and important as I am, they almost never put me in the newspaper for stuff like that.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Sep, 2006 09:33 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
I was speaking from my own experience Revel. And as famous and important as I am, they almost never put me in the newspaper for stuff like that.


In other words you have no way to substantiate your claims of you being extra scrutinized while Arabs and Muslims ease on by. Do you know of any links of that happening anywhere in American airports? I would think if it true that at airports Arabs and Muslims breeze by while non Arabs/Muslims stand in lines being extra scrutinized, there would be reports or stories about it in this day and age after 9/11. It should be an easy enough thing to find, yet I couldn't find any links. Maybe you would have better luck.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Sep, 2006 10:50 pm
revel wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
I was speaking from my own experience Revel. And as famous and important as I am, they almost never put me in the newspaper for stuff like that.


In other words you have no way to substantiate your claims of you being extra scrutinized while Arabs and Muslims ease on by. Do you know of any links of that happening anywhere in American airports? I would think if it true that at airports Arabs and Muslims breeze by while non Arabs/Muslims stand in lines being extra scrutinized, there would be reports or stories about it in this day and age after 9/11. It should be an easy enough thing to find, yet I couldn't find any links. Maybe you would have better luck.


You don't go to airports much, do you Revel? It is quite obvious you don't have a clue what you're talking about.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Sep, 2006 07:19 am
Foxfyre wrote:
revel wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
I was speaking from my own experience Revel. And as famous and important as I am, they almost never put me in the newspaper for stuff like that.


In other words you have no way to substantiate your claims of you being extra scrutinized while Arabs and Muslims ease on by. Do you know of any links of that happening anywhere in American airports? I would think if it true that at airports Arabs and Muslims breeze by while non Arabs/Muslims stand in lines being extra scrutinized, there would be reports or stories about it in this day and age after 9/11. It should be an easy enough thing to find, yet I couldn't find any links. Maybe you would have better luck.


You don't go to airports much, do you Revel? It is quite obvious you don't have a clue what you're talking about.


No, I don't go to airports much. However I can read and I have read from right wing blogs of those complaining of little old ladies being scrutinized but not where Arabs and Muslims just breeze on by. It's the second item in which I doubt your credibility in telling the truth of your personal experiences at airports.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Sep, 2006 09:43 am
Fine. Those who don't want to believe something are certainly not required to do so. But since I do frequent airports quite a bit and have to go through security in numerous states and occasionally another country, I think I might know a bit more about it than you do. And I won't lose a lot of sleep because you have chosen still one more occasion to criticize me personally instead of discussing the subject. Don't you guys on the Left ever get tired of doing that?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Sep, 2006 09:49 am
Quote:
I do mind getting singled out for extra scrutiny knowing that I fit the profile of no terrorists anywhere while those who definitely do are waived right on through, but hopefully we can get past political correctness and correct that.


Yeah, but the really sneaky terrorist would maybe disquise themselves as someone who isn't profiled, wouldn't they?

You just can't be careful enough with these terrorist fellows, after all, they are the biggest threat to the existence of humanity ever, right?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Sep, 2006 02:22 pm
It's refreshing to learn about airport security from someone's personal experiences, from someone who went "through security in numerous states and occasionally another country".
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Sep, 2006 02:40 pm
Well experience is experience from wherever it comes. You know what I think is refreshing? It is people who actually have an original thought and actually participate in discussions. The brown nosers, toadys, snipers, parrots, and 'me too me too' group has become so tiresomely predictable and are wearyingly boring.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Sep, 2006 02:57 pm
Thanks God that you joined here.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Sep, 2006 02:59 pm
I certainly find Fox's posts to be 'refreshing,' don't you?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Sep, 2006 08:00 pm
This doesn't seem to be a problem in the USA, at least, I've never read anything about it.


Quote:
Concerto for laptop? Conductor's sharp note over airport security

· Musicians hit by ban on instruments in cabin
· Protests at crippling effect on cultural life


Jeevan Vasagar
Monday September 11, 2006
The Guardian


From Waterloo in London, Ralph Kirshbaum took the Eurostar to Paris with his £2.5m cello in the seat beside him. Yesterday afternoon, the virtuoso musician crossed the Alps, changed trains in Milan, got picked up by car in Verona and dashed to a rehearsal in the Italian town of Lendinara. A journey which could have taken fewer than three hours by air had lasted more than 24. Kirshbaum's experience is by no means unique.

Musicians are to lobby Downing Street over fears that airport counter-terrorism measures could cripple Britain's cultural life. So widespread is the alarm that Mark Elder, guest conductor at the Last Night of the Proms, joined the chorus of protest from the stage on Saturday night.
"I think we would all agree that the time has come really to put an end to this unfairness," he told the audience at the world's most popular classical music event. "Otherwise it seems to me that next year we should all look forward to Concerto for Laptop and Orchestra."

Restrictions on hand luggage, intended to reduce the volume of baggage going through cabin security checks, have had a devastating impact on performers.

Musicians who were used to stowing their Stradivarius in the cabin fear that irreplaceable instruments will be smashed by a careless baggage handler or wrecked by freezing temperatures in the hold. Instead, they are cancelling concerts or enduring exhausting train journeys.

Elder told the Proms audience: "The one aspect of the situation that really affects us here on the platform is the enormous difficulty that so many musicians are having at the moment in travelling by plane into this country and out of it. And I think it's greatly to be regretted."

The security measures forced the highly regarded New York-based Orchestra of St Luke's to cancel debut appearances at the Proms and the Edinburgh Festival.

Musicians plan to lobby ministers when parliament returns next month. Keith Ames, spokesman for the Musicians Union, said: "We are planning to table a motion outlining the problem and calling for a dispensation on all flights to let musicians carry instruments into the cabin.

"Nobody expects a slackening in security but the fact that musical instruments - that are made of wood and can be scanned - have to go into the hold means that musicians will just not fly."

British cellist Steven Isserlis, who plays a Stradivarius, said the instrument's owner had banned him from placing it in an airline hold. With a concert planned in New York next month, he faces flying from Cologne, where he has another engagement, to Montreal and then taking a train to the US. A concert schedule planned two years in advance may need to be stripped down if the security measures remain in place. Isserlis said: "It will end up with Europeans playing in Europe and Americans playing in America."

In an interview by mobile phone as his train crossed the Alps, Kirshbaum said he flew between 50 and 80 times in a typical year, buying a ticket for his cello so it could stay by his side. He said: "Musicians think nothing of playing one night in America, three nights later in Germany, five nights after that in Japan.

"London together with New York is the musical capital of the world. That will change if you don't have great artists coming regularly, performing, sharing their art."

The instrument, made in 1729 by the venerated craftsman Domenico Montagnana, is considered one of the 10 best surviving examples of that instrument-maker's art.

There are signs that the security situation is in flux. Musicians with the Mariinsky Theatre, a Russian ensemble which put on a Shostakovich festival in London, were able to take instruments as hand luggage on a flight from Stansted to Stockholm last month. Special dispensation was made for the charter flight.

The transport secretary, Douglas Alexander, hinted yesterday that travel restrictions might soon be relaxed. Limits on the size of hand baggage and restrictions on taking some liquids on board are being discussed with airlines and UK airport management, he told Sky News.

A Department for Transport spokesman said: "We keep security under review. Musicians are still subject to the same restrictions as other passengers. We would advise musicians to contact specialist handling companies."
Source
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Sep, 2006 08:22 pm
you must not forget that gangsters carry their guns in violin cases :wink: Exclamation
i've seen it often enough in hollywood movies , so it must be true .
hbg

http://www.fotosearch.com/thumb/ARP/ARP114/Mr_Cat.jpg
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Sep, 2006 03:47 pm
US public opinion is actually more nuanced than I had thought or feared; it is evenly split on this issue.

Quote:
Airline Passenger Profiling Splits Americans

Angus Reid Global Scan : Polls & Research
September 12, 2006

Adults in the United States are divided on whether certain people should be searched or questioned before entering a plane based on their background or appearance, according to a poll by Opinion Dynamics released by Fox News. 48 per cent of respondents approve of the use of racial profiling to screen airline passengers, while 45 per cent disagree. [..]

Polling Data

Do you approve or disapprove of using racial profiling to screen airline passengers?

48% Approve

45% Disapprove

7% Don't know

Source: Opinion Dynamics / Fox News
Methodology: Telephone interviews with 900 registered American voters, conducted on Aug. 29 and Aug. 30, 2006. Margin of error is 3 per cent.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Sep, 2006 03:55 pm
Can you find a similar poll for Great Britain, Nimh? The last thing I read on this was that they were considering implementing such a policy but I never saw any follow up as to whether they did or not.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 01:58 am
In Britain, every second person is completely body scanned (that means twice), only handluggage not bigger than a briefcase is allowed etc etc

That is: for passengers leaving Britain or on domestic flights.

For those flying inward, normal (national) security applies.

There have been a lot of reports about/against such, especially the CEO of Ryanair ...

Quote:
End this pointless airport charade
Extra security measures since last month's foiled bomb plot have gone on long enough, says Ryanair's chief executive
continued
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 01:58 am
Part 2
Quote:


source: Evening Standard, 12.09.2006, Late West End Edition, page 13
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/15/2024 at 11:12:25