What will it take to change US airport security?

ThePresence

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
27,727
16
81
It does not anticipate new schemes, it bans substances that were used in previous attempts - a purely reactive plan. It should be emulating Israeli airport security according to this article. As someone who's traveled to and from Tel Aviv numerous times - I agree.

Boston Globe:
THE SAFEST airline in the world, it is widely agreed, is El Al, Israel's national carrier. The safest airport is Ben Gurion International, in Tel Aviv. No El Al plane has been attacked by terrorists in more than three decades, and no flight leaving Ben Gurion has ever been hijacked. So when US aviation intensified its focus on security after 9/11, it seemed a good bet that the experience of travelers in American airports would increasingly come to resemble that of travelers flying out of Tel Aviv.

But in telling ways, the two experiences remain notably different. For example, passengers in the United States are required to take off their shoes for X-ray screening, while passengers at Ben Gurion are spared that indignity. On the other hand, major American airports generally offer the convenience of curbside check-in, while in Israel baggage and traveler stay together until the security check is completed. Screeners at American airports don't usually engage in conversation with passengers, unless you count their endlessly repeated instructions about emptying pockets and taking laptops out of briefcases. At Ben Gurion, security officials make a point of engaging in dialogue with almost everyone who's catching a plane.

Nearly five years after Sept. 11, 2001, US airport security remains obstinately focused on intercepting bad things -- guns, knives, explosives. It is a reactive policy, aimed at preventing the last terrorist plot from being repeated. The 9/11 hijackers used box cutters as weapons, so sharp metal objects were barred from carry-on luggage. Would-be suicide terrorist Richard Reid tried to ignite a bomb in his shoe, so now everyone's footwear is screened for tampering. Earlier this month British authorities foiled a plan to blow up airliners with liquid explosives; as a result, toothpaste and cologne have become air-travel contraband.

Of course the Israelis check for bombs and weapons too, but always with the understanding that things don't hijack planes, terrorists do -- and that the best way to detect terrorists is to focus on intercepting not bad things, but bad people. To a much greater degree than in the United States, security at El Al and Ben Gurion depends on intelligence and intuition -- what Rafi Ron, the former director of security at Ben Gurion, calls the human factor.

Israeli airport security, much of it invisible to the untrained eye, begins before passengers even enter the terminal. Officials constantly monitor behavior, alert to clues that may hint at danger: bulky clothing, say, or a nervous manner. Profilers -- that's what they're called -- make a point of interviewing travelers, sometimes at length. They probe, as one profiling supervisor told CBS, for "anything out of the ordinary, anything that does not fit." Their questions can seem odd or intrusive, especially if your only previous experience with an airport interrogation was being asked whether you packed your bags yourself.

Unlike in US airports, where passengers go through security after checking in for their flights and submitting their luggage, security at Ben Gurion comes first. Only when the profiler is satisfied that a passenger poses no risk is he or she allowed to proceed to the check-in counter. By that point, there is no need to make him remove his shoes, or to confiscate his bottle of water.

Gradually, airport security in the United States is inching its way toward screening people, rather than just their belongings. At a handful of airports, security officers are being trained to notice facial expressions, body language, and speech patterns, which can hint at a traveler's hostile intent or fear of being caught.

But because federal policy still bans ethnic or religious profiling, US passengers continue to be singled out for special scrutiny mostly on a random basis. Countless hours have been spent patting down elderly women in wheelchairs, toddlers with pacifiers, even former US vice presidents -- time that could have been used instead to concentrate on passengers with a greater likelihood of being terrorists.

No sensible person imagines that ethnic or religious profiling alone can stop every terrorist plot. But it is illogical and potentially suicidal not to take account of the fact that so far every suicide-terrorist plotting to take down an American plane has been a radical Muslim man. It is not racism or bigotry to argue that the prevention of Islamist terrorism necessitates a special focus on Muslim travelers, just as it is not racism or bigotry when police trying to prevent a Mafia killing pay closer attention to Italians.

Of course most Muslims are not violent jihadis, but all violent jihadis are Muslim. "This nation," President Bush has said, "is at war with Islamic fascists." How much longer will we tolerate an aviation security system that pretends, for reasons of political correctness, not to know that?
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
Screeners at American airports don't usually engage in conversation with passengers, unless you count their endlessly repeated instructions about emptying pockets and taking laptops out of briefcases. At Ben Gurion, security officials make a point of engaging in dialogue with almost everyone who's catching a plane.
Heh, that makes so much sense that I'm surprised it's not done here.
 

mrSHEiK124

Lifer
Mar 6, 2004
11,488
2
0
I was subject to a strip search at Ben Gurion (as was my dad) because we're Arab. It also takes up to an hour for them to go through all your baggage, garment by garment, item by item, checked or carry-on.
 

Scouzer

Lifer
Jun 3, 2001
10,358
5
0
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
I was subject to a strip search at Ben Gurion (as was my dad) because we're Arab. It also takes up to an hour for them to go through all your baggage, garment by garment, item by item, checked or carry-on.

Do you think flights coming out of Ben Gurion are safer?
 

ThePresence

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
27,727
16
81
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
I was subject to a strip search at Ben Gurion (as was my dad) because we're Arab. It also takes up to an hour for them to go through all your baggage, garment by garment, item by item, checked or carry-on.
My brother (Jewish) was detained at Ben Gurion for 9 hours because he has a friend who is an alleged member of the Kach party, which is banned in Israel. He did it gladly knowing that it was these kinds of procedures that are keeping him safe.
 

mrSHEiK124

Lifer
Mar 6, 2004
11,488
2
0
Originally posted by: Scouzer
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
I was subject to a strip search at Ben Gurion (as was my dad) because we're Arab. It also takes up to an hour for them to go through all your baggage, garment by garment, item by item, checked or carry-on.

Do you think flights coming out of Ben Gurion are safer?

Hell yeah, nothing gets past baggage check at Ben Gurion. It was kinda funny when they opened one of our pickle bottles (you've really gotta be Arab to know what I'm talking about, cucumbers and the like in 2 liter soda bottles in brine, that tend to fizz up or even explode when opened) and immediately refused to open the rest after the first one made such a mess and startled the sh!t out of the poor girl that was checking that bag.
 

KillerAngel

Senior member
Mar 24, 2001
249
0
0
But in telling ways, the two experiences remain notably different. For example, passengers in the United States are required to take off their shoes for X-ray screening, while passengers at Ben Gurion are spared that indignity.


That made me LOL.
 

Jeff7

Lifer
Jan 4, 2001
41,596
20
81
Officials constantly monitor behavior, alert to clues that may hint at danger: bulky clothing, say, or a nervous manner.
I'd be screwed. I always seem nervous to people, or act like someone's out to get me. It just seems to be my normal demeanor.
Engaging in conversation with me probably wouldn't do much to help, as I tend to be nervous and quiet around people I don't know well.
 

Eeezee

Diamond Member
Jul 23, 2005
9,922
0
76
What did that have to do with people being too PC? There's nothing preventing Americans from doing the exact same thing that the Israelis do. Looking for bulky clothing or strange behavior is not racial profiling. It's a good idea and there's literally nothing to prevent us from doing it. One can make accusations, but in any court of law a security officer will win if it's your word versus his.

Singling out old ladies in wheelchairs is just stupid, however so is singling out every single arab that flies or singling out anyone because of skin tone. That is plain idiocy and a waste of time. Anyone can try to blow up or hijack an airplane. A white guy in his 20s is just as likely as an arab in his 20s. Little old ladies are not likely. It's that simple.
 

Fingolfin269

Lifer
Feb 28, 2003
17,948
34
91
Originally posted by: Eeezee
A white guy in his 20s is just as likely as an arab in his 20s.

O RLY? Sorry someone had to use that phrase. I do disagree with you though. I mean, a white person could also blow up a plane but we tend to be in-your-backyard serial killers instead of plane exploding extraordinaires.



 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
80,287
17,081
136
How much longer will we tolerate an aviation security system that pretends, for reasons of political correctness, not to know that?
[/quote]

Thats an interesting question.
It will probably take just as long as it takes people to figure out that we made a Politics and News section for......
Politics and News! :p

 

Kadarin

Lifer
Nov 23, 2001
44,296
16
81
The various changes and enhancements to passenger screening have not been designed to improve real security, but rather to increase the perception of security. In other words, to make it seem as if the government is doing something real about the threat of terrorism.
 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
80,287
17,081
136
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
The various changes and enhancements to passenger screening have not been designed to improve real security, but rather to increase the perception of security. In other words, to make it seem as if the government is doing something real about the threat of terrorism.
Thats what I figured.
I worked for the federal government in a manner of speaking.
Was in the Navy for 9 years.

Its not allowed down at the workcenter level, but at the command level and above the standard policy is to cover up problems or fake progress rather than actually fix problems.
After paying close attention to the first and second Bush regimes, I think I know where this policy originated.
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
167
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
Let's see if I can sum it up clearly enough...

Remember the fiasco with New Orleans? We found out that those running the operation really had no business doing so in the first place.

Remember the Anthrax letters? They didn't know that the anthrax could be spread in the post office from the letters. The Canadian equivalent to the U.S. agency had actually thought of running through some scenarios and doing some testing, and already knew that anthrax could be spread by leaking from the corners of the envelopes.

You're right. The U.S. plan is almost completely reactionary, rather than pro-active. Does the US gov't have a place where people can make suggestions? Not that I know of. If they did, I'd be more than happy to offer a few suggestions of things to look out for. In the British case - liquid explosives - anyone else thing that they got lucky? What if they didn't catch on to that scheme? (assuming the threat was real and not some bogus gov't exaggeration to make it sound like they're actually good at infiltrating these groups of nutcases) - but what if it was only 3 people who came up with the idea? How long until the real terrorists realize, "hey, ya know? Maybe having 21 people involved in a scheme causes too many risks of us getting caught; maybe we should have smaller groups." In that case, they're certainly going to think of something that'll get by our security. It's sort of like the war on drugs. Every time we figure out how to stop a method of transporting drugs into the US, the drug smugglers think of a new method. That is, it's a game of cat and mouse, and our policies always leave us one step behind, rather than one step ahead.

Terrorist checklist of the future:
Only a couple people know? Check
Avoided large transfers of money? check
Not carrying the explosives in shampoo bottles on carry-on? check

 
Jun 4, 2005
19,723
1
0
This whole thing is making me think that the terrorists are winning. While they're not destroying mass-targets anymore, they're the reason that WE'RE making our lives miserable.
 

Rumpltzer

Diamond Member
Jun 7, 2003
4,815
33
91
It sounds like Ben Gurion International is employing skilled workers as their security force. Have you every been to LAX? Do you think that the people working security at LAX are capable of engaging in conversation with passengers? Would you trust them to make profiling judgements?
 

mrSHEiK124

Lifer
Mar 6, 2004
11,488
2
0
Originally posted by: Rumpltzer
It sounds like Ben Gurion International is employing skilled workers as their security force. Have you every been to LAX? Do you think that the people working security at LAX are capable of engaging in conversation with passengers? Would you trust them to make profiling judgements?

Replace LAX with JFK, TPA, EWR, ORD, etc.
I've never encountered a TSA employee that seemed as skilled as the people responsible for security checks at Ben Gurion.
1. They inspect all of everyone's ******, no profiling there.
2. Some people will get strip searched or asked questions, but its nothing too severe.
3. They don't seem like they just got out of high school.
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
167
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
The various changes and enhancements to passenger screening have not been designed to improve real security, but rather to increase the perception of security. In other words, to make it seem as if the government is doing something real about the threat of terrorism.

George Carlin had a monologue years ago about the quality of airport security...
Anyone can get on an airplane and I'll tell you why. They know they are not a security risk because they have answered the three big questions.

Question #1:

"Did you pack your bags yourself?"

"No, Carrot Top packed my bags. He and Martha Stewart and Florence Henderson came over to the house last night, fixed me a lovely lobster Newburg, gave me a full body massage with sacred oils from India, performed a four way 'round the world', and then they packed my bags.

Next question:

"Have your bags been in your possession the whole time?"

"No. Usually the night before I travel---just as the moon is rising---I place my bags out on the street corner and leave them there, unattended, for several hours. Just for good luck.

Next question:

"Has any unknown person asked you to take anything on board?"

"Well, what exactly is an 'unknown person'? Surely everyone is known to someone. In fact, just this morning, Kareem and Youssef Ali ben Gabba seemed to know each other quite well. They kept joking about which one of my suitcases was the heaviest.".............

Airport security is a stupid idea, it's a waste of money, and it's there for only one reason: to make white people feel safe! That's all it's for. To provide a feeling, an illusion, of safety in order to placate the middle class. Because the authorities know they can't make airplanes safe; too many people have access. You'll notice the drug smugglers don't seem to have a lot of trouble getting their little packages on board, do they?......

And by the way, an airplane flight shouldn't be completely safe. You need A little danger in your life. Take a ****** chance, will ya? What are you gonna do, play with your prick for another 30 years? What, are you gonna read _PEOPLE_ magazine and eat at Wendy's till the end of internal linktime? Take a ****** chance.....

You have to be realistic about terrorism. Certain groups of people---Muslim fundamentalists, Christian fundamentalists, Jewish fundamentalist, and just plain guys from Montana---are going to continue to make life in this country very interesting for a long, long time. That's the internal linkreality.

Angry men talkin' to god on a two-way radio and muttering incoherent slogans about freedom are eventually gonna provide us with a great deal of internal linkentertainment. Especially after your stupid ****** economy collapses all around you, the terrorists come out of the woodwork. And you'll have anthrax in the internal linkwater supply and sarin gas in the air conditioners; there'll be chemical and biological suitcase-bombs in every city, ......

As far as I'm concerned, all of this airport security--the cameras, the questions, the screenings, the searches--is just one more way of reducing your liberty and reminding you that they can ****** with you anytime they want. Because that's the way Americans are now. They're willing to trade away a little of their freedom in exchange for the feeling---the illusion---of security.
 

FeuerFrei

Diamond Member
Mar 30, 2005
9,144
929
126
My complaint is those news agencies that publish things like "In a recent test of security at _____ airport, TSA screeners missed 4 of 10 weapons hidden in baggage." It pisses me off that they would make security weaknesses public instead of just letting the agency responsible address any discovered shortcomings. It's like drawing a target on a particular airport.
 

KLin

Lifer
Feb 29, 2000
30,426
744
126
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: ThePresence
Topic Title: What will it take to change US airport security?

The only thing that can save the U.S. now is it's citizens, full scale Revolution II.

lol