Airport Security is failing

[Handsome Rob]

That is not going to work. Because the 9/11 hicjakers like Mohamed Atta were wearing dress pants and a collar button up shirt.

You'd be profiling EVERYONE who went through the airport.

I don't think he meant profiling them by their clothes.

Like this:

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/744199--the-israelification-of-airports-high-security-little-bother?bn=1

"Israelis, unlike Canadians and Americans, don't take s--- from anybody. When the security agency in Israel (the ISA) started to tighten security and we had to wait in line for — not for hours — but 30 or 40 minutes, all hell broke loose here. We said, 'We're not going to do this. You're going to find a way that will take care of security without touching the efficiency of the airport."

That, in a nutshell is "Israelification" - a system that protects life and limb without annoying you to death.

Despite facing dozens of potential threats each day, the security set-up at Israel's largest hub, Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion Airport, has not been breached since 2002, when a passenger mistakenly carried a handgun onto a flight. How do they manage that?

"The first thing you do is to look at who is coming into your airport," said Sela.

The first layer of actual security that greets travellers at Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion International Airport is a roadside check. All drivers are stopped and asked two questions: How are you? Where are you coming from?

"Two benign questions. The questions aren't important. The way people act when they answer them is," Sela said.

Officers are looking for nervousness or other signs of "distress" — behavioural profiling. Sela rejects the argument that profiling is discriminatory.

"The word 'profiling' is a political invention by people who don't want to do security," he said. "To us, it doesn't matter if he's black, white, young or old. It's just his behaviour. So what kind of privacy am I really stepping on when I'm doing this?"

Once you've parked your car or gotten off your bus, you pass through the second and third security perimeters.

Armed guards outside the terminal are trained to observe passengers as they move toward the doors, again looking for odd behaviour. At Ben Gurion's half-dozen entrances, another layer of security are watching. At this point, some travellers will be randomly taken aside, and their person and their luggage run through a magnometer.

"This is to see that you don't have heavy metals on you or something that looks suspicious," said Sela.

You are now in the terminal. As you approach your airline check-in desk, a trained interviewer takes your passport and ticket. They ask a series of questions: Who packed your luggage? Has it left your side?

"The whole time, they are looking into your eyes — which is very embarrassing. But this is one of the ways they figure out if you are suspicious or not. It takes 20, 25 seconds," said Sela.

Lines are staggered. People are not allowed to bunch up into inviting targets for a bomber who has gotten this far.

At the check-in desk, your luggage is scanned immediately in a purpose-built area. Sela plays devil's advocate — what if you have escaped the attention of the first four layers of security, and now try to pass a bag with a bomb in it?

"I once put this question to Jacques Duchesneau (the former head of the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority): say there is a bag with play-doh in it and two pens stuck in the play-doh. That is 'Bombs 101' to a screener. I asked Ducheneau, 'What would you do?' And he said, 'Evacuate the terminal.' And I said, 'Oh. My. God.'

"Take Pearson. Do you know how many people are in the terminal at all times? Many thousands. Let's say I'm (doing an evacuation) without panic — which will never happen. But let's say this is the case. How long will it take? Nobody thought about it. I said, 'Two days.'"

A screener at Ben-Gurion has a pair of better options.

First, the screening area is surrounded by contoured, blast-proof glass that can contain the detonation of up to 100 kilos of plastic explosive. Only the few dozen people within the screening area need be removed, and only to a point a few metres away.

Second, all the screening areas contain 'bomb boxes'. If a screener spots a suspect bag, he/she is trained to pick it up and place it in the box, which is blast proof. A bomb squad arrives shortly and wheels the box away for further investigation.

"This is a very small simple example of how we can simply stop a problem that would cripple one of your airports," Sela said.

Five security layers down: you now finally arrive at the only one which Ben-Gurion Airport shares with Pearson — the body and hand-luggage check.

"But here it is done completely, absolutely 180 degrees differently than it is done in North America," Sela said.

"First, it's fast — there's almost no line. That's because they're not looking for liquids, they're not looking at your shoes. They're not looking for everything they look for in North America. They just look at you," said Sela. "Even today with the heightened security in North America, they will check your items to death. But they will never look at you, at how you behave. They will never look into your eyes ... and that's how you figure out the bad guys from the good guys."

That's the process — six layers, four hard, two soft. The goal at Ben-Gurion is to move fliers from the parking lot to the airport lounge in a maximum of 25 minutes.

This doesn't begin to cover the off-site security net that failed so spectacularly in targeting would-be Flight 253 bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab — intelligence. In Israel, Sela said, a coordinated intelligence gathering operation produces a constantly evolving series of threat analyses and vulnerability studies.

"There is absolutely no intelligence and threat analysis done in Canada or the United States," Sela said. "Absolutely none."

But even without the intelligence, Sela maintains, Abdulmutallab would not have gotten past Ben Gurion Airport's behavioural profilers.

So. Eight years after 9/11, why are we still so reactive, so un-Israelified?

Working hard to dampen his outrage, Sela first blames our leaders, and then ourselves.

"We have a saying in Hebrew that it's much easier to look for a lost key under the light, than to look for the key where you actually lost it, because it's dark over there. That's exactly how (North American airport security officials) act," Sela said. "You can easily do what we do. You don't have to replace anything. You have to add just a little bit — technology, training. But you have to completely change the way you go about doing airport security. And that is something that the bureaucrats have a problem with. They are very well enclosed in their own concept."

And rather than fear, he suggests that outrage would be a far more powerful spur to provoking that change.

"Do you know why Israelis are so calm? We have brutal terror attacks on our civilians and still, life in Israel is pretty good. The reason is that people trust their defence forces, their police, their response teams and the security agencies. They know they're doing a good job. You can't say the same thing about Americans and Canadians. They don't trust anybody," Sela said. "But they say, 'So far, so good'. Then if something happens, all hell breaks loose and you've spent eight hours in an airport. Which is ridiculous. Not justifiable

"But, what can you do? Americans and Canadians are nice people and they will do anything because they were told to do so and because they don't know any different."

[Handsome Rob]

Casualties on the ground due are still part of the deaths caused by aerial terrorism and should not be neglected when estimating the risks posed by these types of terrorist acts or the potential value of mitigating these risks.

Fair. It's junk science, but it doesn't quell the fact that crossing the street in a busy city is far and away more dangerous than stepping foot on a commercial airliner. Let's not start on our radiation and pollutant exposure living in cities, and rising cancer rates.

Obviously rudimentary security is necessary, but we're getting more than a little carried away. Things like forcing people through the back-scatter peep-hole box with zero long term study even on the books for exposure. Especially cumulative exposure for things like crew.

[Bonam]

Fair. It's junk science, but it doesn't quell the fact that crossing the street in a busy city is far and away more dangerous than stepping foot on a commercial airliner. Let's not start on our radiation and pollutant exposure living in cities, and rising cancer rates.

Indeed, so one would expect that significantly more resources would be allotted to issues like road safety, vehicle safety, cancer research, etc. And, guess what, the security spending at airports is indeed very small compared to these. I do agree that some of the methods implemented so far to try to improve security in our airports may overly invade privacy and some may not be as effective as they are hoped to be, and certainly the health effects of any new scanners need to be properly evaluated, but I disagree that the overall scale of the response has been excessive or an overreaction.

Edited November 11, 2010 by Bonam

[Handsome Rob]

Indeed, so one would expect that significantly more resources would be allotted to issues like road safety, vehicle safety, cancer research, etc. And, guess what, the security spending at airports is indeed very small compared to these. I do agree that some of the methods implemented so far to try to improve security in our airports may overly invade privacy and some may not be as effective as they are hoped to be, and certainly the health effects of any new scanners need to be properly evaluated, but I disagree that the overall scale of the response has been excessive or an overreaction.

Start up cost for CATSA was $2 billion, around $300 million/year in operating expense, around $150-200 million/year in capital costs.

10 years later, $7 billion dollars, at least. Those numbers are very, "Ballparked." What exactly has this money done, what incidents has it prevented that TC security prior failed to do?

In 8 years at Canada's 2nd busiest airport, I've never once seen a success story, including 1/2 dozen friends who's paycheque says CATSA, not sub-contractors. Most of them will privately say that it's a joke, but never publically.

Yet their are way more CT scanners in this airport alone than the regional district of 3 million+ people. Another gun registry or what? Wasted money is wasted money regardless of how you justify it.

[Shady]

That is not going to work. Because the 9/11 hicjakers like Mohamed Atta were wearing dress pants and a collar button up shirt.

You'd be profiling EVERYONE who went through the airport.

Not true. And who said anything about clothes? Israel's El Al Airlines has a very good system. They take many things into consideration.

[dre]

$200 dollar cockpit doors would have prevented 911.

Anyhow... the problem is that providing the feeling of security to frightened Americans is just such damn good business. You can literally name your price and milk em like a big old cow. So while youre probably getting better security now, you can be sure that most of the public money directed towards it just "disappears" faster than a plane-load of US dollars in Iraq.

[Topaz]

Speaking about airport security those x-ray machine are still being said to be dangerous for people who get checked by them. Men especially, could ended up with cancer and I would think people who have gone through cancer treatments would be smart of avoid those machines. The problem is in the US, people don't like the "on-hand" approach and are going more to the x-ray machines.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/101112/health/us_airport_security_health

[GostHacked]

Well, looks like people made a stink and things could be changing.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/11/19/private.airport.screening/index.html?hpt=T2

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/11/19/airports-consider-congressmans-ditch-tsa/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11800037

I've seen clips of small children getting the full pat down. Is little Jonny that high of a risk?

[Shady]

$200 dollar cockpit doors would have prevented 911.

That's complete nonsense.

Anyways, I hope the changes they're talking about involve common sense and some *gasp* profiling.

[GostHacked]

That's complete nonsense.

How is that nonsense? Deny someone access to the cockpit by blocking, locking the doors. How is that nonsense?

Anyways, I hope the changes they're talking about involve common sense and some *gasp* profiling.

Agreed with the common sense.

[bush_cheney2004]

How is that nonsense? Deny someone access to the cockpit by blocking, locking the doors. How is that nonsense?

For starters, the doors cost a lot more than $200!

[Shady]

How is that nonsense? Deny someone access to the cockpit by blocking, locking the doors. How is that nonsense?

Because, some of the planes did have doors. But the pilots opened them to help save the stewards, stewardesses, and passengers.

[GostHacked]

For starters, the doors cost a lot more than $200!

Well true, but they'd still be effective.

Because, some of the planes did have doors. But the pilots opened them to help save the stewards, stewardesses, and passengers.

The pilots have the responsibility of flying the plane. If the pilots get hurt or killed the plane is going down.

Maybe a good idea is to train the stewards /stewardesses, in some martial art training or something of that nature.

[Handsome Rob]

Well true, but they'd still be effective.

The pilots have the responsibility of flying the plane. If the pilots get hurt or killed the plane is going down.

Maybe a good idea is to train the stewards /stewardesses, in some martial art training or something of that nature.

American Airlines FA Pic

Yup, sign 'em up for MMA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Air_Marshal_Service

[GostHacked]

American Airlines FA Pic

Yup, sign 'em up for MMA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Air_Marshal_Service

Something basic at the least.

Seems like the TSA and the MSM are going into severe damage control based on the resistance to the scanners and the pat downs.

Don't touch my junk!!

[msj]

Don't touch my junk!!

Gosthacked, is that you?

[zozviol]

Are we still talking about airport security or are we talking about Presidents?

we do not acknowledge your sham political system....

[bjre]

Young Boy Strip searched by TSA

[GostHacked]

I wonder how that national Opt Day is working out.

I guess people are still overall OK with these 'enhanced pat downs' (is that like enhanced interrogation????) of these screening measures.

So how many of you are ok with the TSA touching your junk, and what do you think of the body scanners? Do you feel safe going through them? It is essentially an X-ray machine. In my experience, only doctors use these things in hospitals.

[bloodyminded]

I wonder how that national Opt Day is working out.

I guess people are still overall OK with these 'enhanced pat downs' (is that like enhanced interrogation????)

No, it isn't.

[GostHacked]

No, it isn't.

That's too bad, but at least the story went national and brought these things to light.

[Wilber]

Because, some of the planes did have doors. But the pilots opened them to help save the stewards, stewardesses, and passengers.

After 9/11 bullet proof doors with dead bolts were installed on all airline cocpits with strict procedures regarding how and when they are opened.

[Oleg Bach]

We in the west are braking down the spirit of society - this gropping and systemic attack on adults that is boardering on sexual harrassment is just another weapon used by evil - instead of assisting in our safetey it has the effect of creating a person that is harrassed to the point of not feeling safe or secure - not to mention a total loss of personal dignity - privacey...

The so-called terrorists have totally won...sad part is that our fearful and cowardly authorities have assisted in the spriitual and moral debasement of their own population.

[GostHacked]

Does the lil old lady in a wheelchair need an enhanced pat down??

[bush_cheney2004]

Does the lil old lady in a wheelchair need an enhanced pat down??

Yes, if only to beat a court challenge for profiling or discrimination.