An interesting article. Thanks for posting it.
Instead of profiling potential terrorists, we should profile people who clearly are NOT terrorists. Give these groups of people the "pilot pass," too.
Examples of groups profiled OUT of enhanced screening are:
"You give these people a clearance where they don't have to go through the process at all. So now you have to deal with the population that's left -- occasional flyers, people who recently visited certain countries, people originating from foreign countries..."
So there is a profiling system that doesn't profile the terrorist, leaving us open to charges of racism; it profiles people who are NOT terrorists (a group not likely to complain about it), and leaves the rest for enhanced screening.
-PJ
We should be profiling until we no longer have a reason to profile. The way it looks right now that could be a very, very long time. So be it.
Thanks for the post.
It's the reason why rail works in Europe and not in America.
It’s interesting. When I read “It can’t be done here,” though — I never let “can’t” be the last word in a solution.
Profiling is the common sense approach to airline security. Must get rid of the TSA and let them go back to Walmart.
Good article, but I think you mean "major international passenger airport" or something like that.
Google lists a variety of domestic airports, and an airport in the Negev which is also technically an international airport.
Second level, once over by better trained profiler with some questions and a dog inspection.
Third level, a nose down by a pig.
Pass those get on the plane.
I also think that an air marshal on every flight is imperative.
a) unless absolutely every airport in the US, for example Richmond VA, Jacksonville FL, Billings MN, Medford OR, has scanning and groping, how scanning and groping at selected limited airports makes any sense whatsoever. Terrorists can't board commercial airplanes in Billings?
b) the methods used heretofore in US airports have sufficed,
c) every NFL and College football game, or any mass assembly with no scanning and groping, has orders of magnitude more target rich potential than a commercial airplane,
d) Amtrak carries denser or larger passenger assemblies every day than the airlines, without scanning and groping,
e) scanning and groping millions of normal innocent taxpaying citizens who are subjected violates explicitly every possible interpretation of the intent of the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution, (written with full awareness of the tragedy of mass fear),
f) how Janet Napolitano, (apparently) one of the stupidest most disrespectful bitch appointments of Barack Obama, can sit in a high level meeting proposing scanning and groping and not ask the very questions we have asked here,
g) Michael Chertoff, the Rabbi's son, is invested in airport scanners (not certain of this),
h) there are dozens of more respectful alternatives, like the airlines exercising the responsibility themselves, or passenger pre-clearance, or uniformed security on board the aircraft like every other mass assembly?
Please get back to the Suntrade Institute, because we are forwarding the same questions to our arrogant self serving Senators, and there might be reasonable answers.
Johnny Suntrade
Israel has only one airport? Does not sound like you have been there. They have several in-country airports that handle internal flights.
Statement that Ben Gurion essentially has only one major airline serving most of the people flying is absurd. The country is served by several US airlines as well as numerous other European and other airlines. Most Americans fly to Israel on US based airlines.
You are right about passports being required for international travel. However, passports are only one way of profiling. There are lots of other ways.
Let us stop the euphamisms and say what we mean. What is meant is grabbing men by the testicles and feeling up women's vaginas, especially if they are under 5 or over 80.
I contend the sophisticated behavioural screening that Israel uses would work quite well in the USA. Integrating this method with some less invasive form of scanners/metal detectors, a small fraction of the persons flying would need to be interviewed. The system isn’t nearly as cumbersome as its often made out to be. What it is, though, is effective without strip-searching grandmothers who are obviously not intent on harming a plane full of people.
Several good points about the difference between the Israeli situation and our own (number airports, travellers, etc.) Also very good point about shifting responsibility to either airports or airline companies. That has interesting implications because insurance regulations (for airport and airline) might bear the main burden of determination and payout for loss. I don’t see why both couldn’t be involved.
A number of good suggestions have been made. While we might not endorse (as Americans) a government issued ID. However, airports and/or airlines themselves might issue their own ID checks, retina scans, fingerprinting, background checks for frequent travelers. Perhaps a kind of passport for internal travel.
As for the infrequent traveller, some of the Israeli methods might be employed at time of ticket purchase (which is frequently in advance of travel). Such questions as where/why are you travelling. With whom. Etc. And documentation submitted via email. When the traveller arrives then the Israeli type questioning might be implemented to verify the traveller’s identity.
Dogs should also be employed at big airports because as made clear in many discussions neither the xray scanners nor the intrusive body searches can find “embedded” explosives. However, the dogs (I think) would be able to sniff such substances even inside a body. (They sniff cancer.)
I don’t think any ubiquitous system can be as effective as a myriad of local and corporate unobtrusive traps each with their own motivation for security, i.e., they pay if they fail (you know that capitalist stuff). Example, a small mid-Western airport keeps images of travelers. A daughter visits her mother a few times a year in a neighboring state. She has an ID from both originating and destination airports. She checks in. ID scanned and photo while quick interview (Israeli style) “Hi, Ms Smith, going to see your Mom.” “Yup.” Goes through the normal (as we now know it) metal scanners. (She’s not carrying.) Everybody happy. Pass. They know her and other frequent flyers in their area. They will be particularly alert to a new person.
Big city lawyer. Travels frequently in major airports for clients, depositions, court appearances, various destinations within US. Travels 3-4 major carriers. Has been background checked, fingerprinted, eye retined. Has ID issued by his usual airline companies (per their insurance, security regime.) May purchase tickets long or short before departure. Shows up to window. “You’re off to Detroit for business?” Photo, retina during chat. “Yup.” “OK press the button for fingerprint ID. Have good trip.” Passes metal detectors. Gets on plane.
The infrequent traveler. I’ll bet these cover 10-20 categories. Sport events. Funerals, Weddings, conventions, holidays. At time of ticket purchase one could produce some of the evidence for travel (a la Israel) sports ticket, obituary, wedding announcement, convention papers, etc. Any of the insuring agencies airport, carrier can then do their own random validation of email submitted paperwork in interim before departure (early booking will get better deal because of time to screen) (email because you’re either buying it yourself online or you’ve got an agent who is). This individual will have little longer interview probably depending on what has been submitted.
Infrequent flyers would also be able to apply for “travel permts” through say the passport office. Background, retina, fingerprint.
I don’t know. Just thinking. Gotta go walk the dog.
For instance, the white married businessman with 3 kids, who has lived in the same house with the same wife for 17 years and has 15 bizillion frequent flying miles is NOT likely to blow up the plane, nor is his wife or 3 year old son.
Screen this guy and let him pass with nothing more intrusive than a finger print scan. The same is true for his wife and small children. Do a check on this guy, his wife, and small children every 5 years.
Ah!...But the problem is that whites would be far more likely to pass pre-screening that minorities.