Posted on 08/04/2004 9:36:47 PM PDT by quidnunc
Even as the Bush administration warns of an imminent terror attack, it is again allowing the "rights" brigades to dictate the parameters of national defense. The administration just cancelled a passenger screening system designed to keep terrorists off planes, acceding to the demands of "privacy" advocates. The implications of this for airline safety are bad enough. But the program's demise also signals a return to a pre-9/11 mentality, when pressure from the rights lobbies trumped security common sense.
The now-defunct program, the Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System, or Capps II, sought to make sure that air passengers are flying under their own identity and are not wanted as a terror suspect. It would have asked passengers to provide four pieces of information — name, address, phone number and birth date — when they make their reservation. That information would've been run against commercial records, to see if it matches up, then checked against government intelligence files to determine whether a passenger has possible terror connections. Depending on the outcome of those two checks, a passenger could have been screened more closely at the airport, or perhaps — if government intelligence on him raised alarms — not allowed to board.
Privacy advocates on both the right and the left attacked Capps II from the moment it was announced. They called it an eruption of a police state, and envisioned a gallimaufry of bizarre hidden agendas — from a pretext for oppressing evangelical Christians and gun owners, to a blank check for discriminating against blacks.
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
Doubtful that a terrorist would provide those four bits of information with any measure of truth. This system is all too analogous to all the anti-gun laws on the books: they do nothing to deter the criminals and serve only to harass the law-abiding.
An untruthful response is one of the things that triggers the system. A terrorist with a stolen identity will also have dated information, not up-to-date info. The system checks the terrorists' data against commercial data, and commercial data is going to be quite fresh. If the terrorist slips up and gives the wrong month, day or year for his assumed identity's birthday, he gets nailed. Of course, a terrorist can memorize this and get through... except, he's also asked for his address. If he has that memorized too, he can still be nailed if the victim of the identity theft has changed their address since their identity was stolen. A credit card record would show a wrong addy, or some other commercial account would; dual billing addresses for the 'same; individual may raise eyebrows. This is another hurdle the terrorist will have to jump, and it's not in his hands- it depends on the victim's location.
If a terrorist slips through because he successfully remembered his victim's birthdate AND because his victim is still using the same address, he still has to come up with a phone number that won't draw suspicion. Phone numbers are changed frequently, and phone numbers are involved in numerous commercial transactions, from the service provider, to creditors, employment, etc.
He may also be caught if he's incurred expenses on that ID but hasn't paid his bills in a while- owing to his bill being sent to the victim, who may have alerted the companies of the billing error, etc. Or, if he had the bill sent to an address or email addy where his victim doesn't live or has no account, this may raise flags. The working life of his false identity can be made very short.
And there is that state driver's license or national driver's license photo on file, or passport photo, etc, which would be called up when this info is input. The data on these has to match what the terrorist is now claiming. Conflicts will inspire a closer look, and more questions which mean more hurdles.
A terrorist may not be aware that his victim has by the time the ID is used, already changed either his phone number, location, employer, etc. What's more, he may not be aware that his victim just made a credit card purchase at a Cracker Barrel restaurant off of highway 64 in western Illinois- or had bought concert tickets in Hamburg, Germany- ten minutes before trying to pick up his boarding pass in the airport terminal at Tampa, Florida.
So it's not just the names and addresses he has to memorize that can get him- it could be the timing. It's the unpredictable nature of not being in control of the identity theft victim's activities, not being able to explain how he could be in two places at once, that could trip the system so long as it is designed to look for these discrepencies.
The system, unfortunately, is not intelligent enough to appreciate the nature of criminal conspiracy.
Terrorists are like cockroaches; they do not exist in a solitary fashion. They congregate. And to that end, any known terrorist can easily acquire the identity of a willing neophyte member of his organization. It's a known tactic and easily implemented.
Part of my work is understanding how to defeat these "security" measures. In many ways, defeating such systems isn't just easy, it's trivial...especially when there's only four information items required to satisfy this challenge.
Congrats to all of those who opposed this.
How proud you must all be for helping the terrorists out like this.
Where is the difference here between Bush and Kerry? Both are fakes in my opinion when it come to true homeland security.
Old ladies and young children are wand raped at the intrusive security gates, while we are not protected by a proven technology because of political correctness.
Bush and his team are less of an obvious danger to the US than Kerry/Edwards, but don't think that this pack of RINOs in Washington are fundamentally different from the rat party.
Privacy jerks, including William Safire and other stupid conservatives, are going to have blood on their hands.
I have had the same phone number for over 20 years. The only thing that has changed is my area code.
I also believe that this system would have done no good. The only thing that will work, is the ability to profile passengers.
The only thing that will work, is the ability to profile passengers
We can't have that now!
/sarcasm
I tend to agree, which is why I would add the thumprint. I believe biometric data should be provided when ordering airline tickets. (Or entering the US from a Middle East country.)
A poorly designed system is a poorly designed system no matter who creates it.
Biometrics is not the panacea everyone talks it up to be. We have been using it for years, we started with hand geometry and moved finger print scanning. There are several problems with both of them. p.s. do not be surprised if you see a change in our laws concerning finger prints, there is a growing concern that they are not as unique as had been originally touted, especially where only a partial print is available. (Look at some of the work being done in image pattern recognition) You know those nasty criminals almost never are nice enough to leave a full set at the scene of the crime.
Agreed, not a panacea, but also not the restriction on freedom that is claimed by those who oppose it. The main thing would be to get several agency databases to be sharred. Not an easy task either it seems. But we have to be more certain passengers, truck drivers, nuclear plant workers, etc are who they say they are.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.