Which Travelers Have 'Hostile Intent'? Biometric Device May Have the Answer

The Wall Street Journal ^ | 8-14-06 | JONATHAN KARP and LAURA MECKLER

[The Lumster]

At airport security checkpoints in Knoxville, Tenn. this summer, scores of departing passengers were chosen to step behind a curtain, sit in a metallic oval booth and don headphones.

With one hand inserted into a sensor that monitors physical responses, the travelers used the other hand to answer questions on a touch screen about their plans. A machine measured biometric responses -- blood pressure, pulse and sweat levels -- that then were analyzed by software. The idea was to ferret out U.S. officials who were carrying out carefully constructed but make-believe terrorist missions.

The trial of the Israeli-developed system represents an effort by the U.S. Transportation Security Administration to determine whether technology can spot passengers who have "hostile intent." In effect, the screening system attempts to mechanize Israel's vaunted airport-security process by using algorithms, artificial-intelligence software and polygraph principles.

[The Lumster]

The dream of every police state - the ability to arrest anyone for any reason.

When did 'intent' become a crime?

How do you prove that you don't have 'hostile intent' when the machine says you do?

[Mr. Jeeves]

A machine measured biometric responses -- blood pressure, pulse and sweat levels...

I guess white-knuckle flyers better just stay home. ;)

[Robert A Cook PE]

And you seriously think that the fed's are going to PROFILE the specific people who DO want to blow the plane?

BS>

They would ONLY check the people LEAST likely to blow it up,lest the politically corrupt crowd "anger" the muslims who DO WANT to blow up the plane.

Other than that problem (of NOT checking Muslim terrorists) the idea is better than searching luggage and grabbing bottles of water.

[rhombus]

I would suspect that if the machines were so faulty that they start idnetifying little old ladies as terrorists, they will soon be deemed as being too expensive to maintain for such poor results. This however is not the case with TSA agents.

[swain_forkbeard]

Intent has always been an important component for establishing criminality. If you drive your car into someone else's car, it's an accident, not a criminal act. But if you try to collide with them with intent to harm or kill, it's definitely criminal. So there's that.

Then, for U.S citizens, I don't at all see that these biometrics would suffice for criminal charges. Bad answers would sure get your luggage examined, though.

For non-citizens, bad answers might get you an invite out of the country. I have no problem with that.

In these days of necessary compromise between convenience and security, this scheme doesn't seem so bad to me. I like the idea of finding and eliminating the perp, rather than assuming that there's no way to ID the bad guys, so we have to treat every grandma like a potential terrorist.

[-=SoylentSquirrel=-]

God has already endowed us with devices that enable us to weed out terrorists from the crowd:

They're called eyeballs. They are far more accurate than any machine!

[KarlInOhio]

blood pressure, pulse and sweat levels

Well, I would fail. I hate airports. I don't mind flying, but I hate the "stand in this line, now stand in this one, oh boy yet another line" crap at airports.

[jiggyboy]

Just tell them they have to take off their FLIP FLOPS if you want to see if they start swearing. That did it for me on my last trip.

[aculeus]

The dream of every police state - the ability to arrest anyone for any reason.

The dream of every terrorist: useful idiots who deliberately misstate facts.

"Guilty until proven innocent" belongs in courtrooms, not in airport security screening.

[Spiff]

When did 'intent' become a crime?

Nobody said it would be a crime. This sounds like an effective tool in determining who should be more intensely screened before being allowed to board or who may be bumped to a later flight while a background check is performed. No arrest. I think it is a good idea if it works as described.

[ketelone]

What in the world? This is pushing the boundaries of preposterous!

[The Lumster]

Guilty until proven innocent" belongs in courtrooms

You need to brush up on your "Patriot Act' my friend. I am all for defending this country and I voted for Bush twice but this paranoia in the name safety is not healthy. All the pieces are in place for a future administration to start naming certain groups as "enemies of the state"

[ketelone]

Come come dont be silly... you might have sweaty palms because thats how you are, or you might be worried about your kid whos been in an accident youre flying out to see, or about a big business meeting coming up... good grief it could be nigh anything.

[Spiff]

Come come dont be silly... you might have sweaty palms because thats how you are, or you might be worried about your kid whos been in an accident youre flying out to see, or about a big business meeting coming up... good grief it could be nigh anything.

There's a lot more to the described devices and methods than just detecting sweaty palms. And even then, if you're not found to be carrying anything dangerous after an intense screening or you can pass a quick background check you can board the plane.

[aculeus]

All the pieces are in place for a future administration to start naming certain groups as "enemies of the state"

Thank God (Allah?) we have brave souls like you to defend morons like me from real threats.

[The Lumster]

Your trust in government is seriously misplaced

[af_vet_rr]

You need to brush up on your "Patriot Act' my friend. I am all for defending this country and I voted for Bush twice but this paranoia in the name safety is not healthy. All the pieces are in place for a future administration to start naming certain groups as "enemies of the state"

Amen. Many of the "tools" that we have created to combat terror, were dreamed up under liberal administrations or by liberal politicians, whether it was the PATRIOT Act or the National ID, I mean Real ID.

The American people are really being conditioned to accept anything and everything the government does, simply because we are "at war" (a "war" which happens to have no end-game, and which will never end).

Every now and then there is a power grab, whether it be TIA or going after the search engine data earlier this year (which many state and local jurisdictions would love to have access to).

[The Lumster]

The American people are really being conditioned to accept anything and everything the government does

Many of the posts here prove exactly that. It's time to wake up people - the government whether conservative or liberal is not your friend and ultimately cannot be trusted.

[aculeus]

Your trust in government is seriously misplaced.

As I said, I count on The Lumster and his ilk to protect little misguided me and others who mistakenly assume that people who have actually killed Americans by the thousands are the real problem. Thanks to you I now know that the real problem is some future American administration that's going to commit all sorts of horrors upon the citizenry.

My faith in your superior intelligence and diligence is undiminished; my gratitude for your perspicuity knows no bounds.

[af_vet_rr]

As I said, I count on The Lumster and his ilk to protect little misguided me and others who mistakenly assume that people who have actually killed Americans by the thousands are the real problem. Thanks to you I now know that the real problem is some future American administration that's going to commit all sorts of horrors upon the citizenry.

What do you find more dangerous, somebody who can take out a few thousand Americans, or somebody with the keys to the country?

Let's face it, the government had chances to stop 9/11, and they didn't - whether it was INS not giving the majority of the hijackers the boot when they should have, or lapses in judgement at the FBI or more importantly, and this always gets me flamed, the Clinton administratoin.

Let's face it after the first attack on the WTC under Clinton's watch, we lobbed a few missiles Bin Laden's way and did nothing else. We had attacks on Americans that were linked to Al Qaeda and we did nothing for the most part.

Had Clinton made going after Al Qaeda a priority in the mid 1990s, 9/11 would never have happened, and we would not be discussing the newest ways that the government can "fight" a never-ending war.