Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

‘Spot’ teams to spy on passengers [Sanity alert]
The Times (UK) ^ | August 20, 2006 | Unsigned

Posted on 08/20/2006 8:30:43 AM PDT by aculeus

ELITE teams of security officers are to be trained to monitor passenger behaviour at airports in a new attempt to combat terrorism.

The “behaviour detection squads” will patrol terminals to monitor the gestures, conversations and facial expressions of passengers. One of their aims will be to spot those who may be concealing fear or anxiety.

People deemed to be acting suspiciously will be taken for questioning and prevented from flying if they fail to explain their actions.

UK trainers have studied the techniques in America, where behaviour detection squads are already deployed at airports.

The plan is part of an overhaul of passenger screening. Instead of solely relying on searches to uncover weapons and bombs, airport authorities are increasingly seeking to pinpoint the terrorists themselves.

In the long run, passengers flying from international hubs such as Heathrow and Gatwick could even face a lie-detector test before they board.

In America behaviour detection officers are working at a dozen airports, including Washington Dulles and Boston Logan. The programme, called Screening Passengers by Observation Technique, or Spot, is run by the US Transportation Security Administration (TSA).

“There are infinite ways to find things to use as a weapon and infinite ways to hide them,” said Kip Hawley, the director of the TSA. “But if you can identify the individual, it’s by far the better way to find the threat.”

(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Extended News; United Kingdom; War on Terror
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-42 next last
To: aculeus
Not even random. Do like stewardess's . I'm not saying they aren't conscientious but when you are going too , I think it would make a difference.
21 posted on 08/20/2006 9:31:32 AM PDT by CindyDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Good to know this is happening.

I'd like to know where to sign up for the program. I'm looking for a part time gig to help with the war effort.

22 posted on 08/20/2006 9:39:43 AM PDT by numberonepal (Don't Even Think About Treading On Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CindyDawg


If random screeners wouldn't know if today is the day they get on a plane. Why tip them off about the fact they won't go on any plane they've not been assigned to?


23 posted on 08/20/2006 9:41:16 AM PDT by aculeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: aculeus

That's a good point. I was thinking though that if you knew , you were riding with the passengers you were screening you would be extra cautious, knowing that if anything gets by, it could kill you. They could also help staff on the plane and monitor during flight time .


24 posted on 08/20/2006 9:47:10 AM PDT by CindyDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
My dog, Spot!


25 posted on 08/20/2006 9:50:50 AM PDT by pageonetoo (You'll spot their posts soon enough!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pageonetoo
Awwww:') I used to have a spot dog too. Mine had white spots though. Someone stole Charlie. I didn't even report it .
26 posted on 08/20/2006 10:14:01 AM PDT by CindyDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: aculeus

Yeah, it's good to know--but now the ACLU knows and that means a civil rights lawsuit that will try to end the program.

Anyone out there disagree with that?


27 posted on 08/20/2006 10:53:03 AM PDT by wildbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wildbill

ACLU really has no case and probably won't make a fuss. There's no expectation of privacy while in a public place. Police take pictures of demonstrators all the time. Surveillance cameras capture images of people walking along the street all the time. Really there's no invasion of privacy.


28 posted on 08/20/2006 10:58:19 AM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: durasell

Long ago I saw an El Al spokesman say that they look for terrorits, not just weapons. On a flight from Buffalo I was randomly slected to have my suitcase rummaged. It was just me and youngsters coming home from Pope's Youth event. No likely terrorists, at all.


29 posted on 08/20/2006 11:24:56 AM PDT by ClaireSolt (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ClaireSolt

I've been randomly selected and the folks that I dealt with were very professional. Not a big deal in my opinion.


30 posted on 08/20/2006 11:27:43 AM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: LoneRangerMassachusetts

If your that uptight about it maybe you shouldn't fly?


31 posted on 08/20/2006 11:39:17 AM PDT by Thombo2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: durasell

The only way in which it is a big deal is that it is a stupid system. It is inefficient and ineffective, and that's a big deal.


32 posted on 08/20/2006 12:07:06 PM PDT by ClaireSolt (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ClaireSolt

We haven't been doing it for very long. I fly frequently and have seen it get more efficient at most airports.


33 posted on 08/20/2006 12:14:29 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: durasell

Random cannot by definition be as efficient or effective as targeted.


34 posted on 08/20/2006 2:20:04 PM PDT by ClaireSolt (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
One of their aims will be to spot those who may be concealing fear or anxiety.

"I've been nervous before."

35 posted on 08/20/2006 2:21:50 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClaireSolt

I'd do both. Cover all the bases.


36 posted on 08/20/2006 2:32:12 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: wildbill
Anyone out there disagree with that?

My two-point explantion of why no lawyers ever objected to preflight baggage inspection:

1. Lawyers fly.

2. Lawyers' mothers fly.

37 posted on 08/20/2006 3:18:36 PM PDT by aculeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: durasell

It's not an invasion of privacy--but if the screeners detect nervousness in all, or mostly all, young Muslim males and then search them, the ACLU could go into search and seizure law which is another cup of tea, saying they are de facto profiling according to ethnicity.

I'm not a ACLU lawyer and I came up with that in a couple of seconds after I read your post.


38 posted on 08/20/2006 4:39:58 PM PDT by wildbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: wildbill

Why would they detect nervousness in all or most Muslim males? Are they an unusually nervous bunch?


39 posted on 08/20/2006 4:43:01 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: durasell
Are they an unusually nervous bunch?

Just the terrorists or the ones carrying explosives...

40 posted on 08/20/2006 5:00:40 PM PDT by phantomworker ("Don't accuse me of your imagination.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-42 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson