Liberty or security

[August1991]

Underage drunks kill more people in a year than terrorists.

They didn't in the US in September 2001.

Asking for indentification is a requirement for purchase of alcohol. It isn't humiliation. It's the law.

Then the law officially sanctions arbitrary discrimination.

The airline and security overreacted. They removed three doctors from a flight who had already been cleared by security while letting the man who made the accusation to continue his flight. Nice.

I can't speak of this specific case but it seems reasonable to me for the airline to ask the three to leave the plane.

Dobbin, I think you just don't get it. As some would say, you're living in a 10 September world.

[jdobbin]

They didn't in the US in September 2001.

Then the law officially sanctions arbitrary discrimination.

I can't speak of this specific case but it seems reasonable to me for the airline to ask the three to leave the plane.

Dobbin, I think you just don't get it. As some would say, you're living in a 10 September world.

Please show a cite that underage consumption of alcohol did not add up to more deaths than Sepetmber 2001.

The law has set down agreed upon parameters for driving, drinking and whole host of others areas. It follows due process.

Maybe you should be thinking of this particular case. An accusation was made and the accuser flies. It allows the power of bigotry to be the deciding factor of airline security. Don't feel comfortable with a brown skin person on the plane, tell the flight attendant that you think they are sketchy.

The waste of time removing three passengers and their luggage while allowing the accuser to fly on was an embarrassment. Security cleared these three before the plane even pushed off but because the passengers were already spooked, the plane took off.

You just just don't the racial profiling isn't working. CSIS has said as much but right wingers feel that it is okay to routinely do it. Let's roll.

[gc1765]

Underage drunks kill more people in a year than terrorists.

They didn't in the US in September 2001.

You can't really compare only one year, it's only fair to look at all the statistics. Even in 2001, the numbers weren't that different....any other year and the number of underage alcohol related deaths is much higher than deaths from terrorism in the U.S.

Link

[Leafless]

Underage drunks kill more people in a year than terrorists.

They didn't in the US in September 2001.

You can't really compare only one year, it's only fair to look at all the statistics. Even in 2001, the numbers weren't that different....any other year and the number of underage alcohol related deaths is much higher than deaths from terrorism in the U.S.

What does the deaths of underage alcohol related deaths who have contributed greatly to their own deaths have to do with being done in by murderous terrorist which can only be compared to acts of genocide.

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

[jdobbin]

What does the deaths of underage alcohol related deaths who have contributed greatly to their own deaths have to do with being done in by murderous terrorist which can only be compared to acts of genocide.

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

I have no idea. I wasn't the one who brought it up.

What do murderous terrorists and doctors who have already cleared security have to do with keeping planes safe in the air?

[jbg]

The waste of time removing three passengers and their luggage while allowing the accuser to fly on was an embarrassment. Security cleared these three before the plane even pushed off but because the passengers were already spooked, the plane took off.

You just don't the racial profiling isn't working. CSIS has said as much but right wingers feel that it is okay to routinely do it. Let's roll.

As I tirelessly point out, you may not get a perfect fit but it's better than nothing. Remember, even if some of the terrorists are white converts, there aren't many of those. Also, they tend to be a bit on the mentally unstable side, and less likely to succeed for a host of reasons. One is that their family is unlikely to support their "endeavors" and may turn them in (unlike Arab or South Asian families). Another is that "community oddbals" are less likely to work well with others. A third is they're just not as good at being a terrorist.

Remember Richard Reid? He didn't succeed in his attack for a reason.

[jdobbin]

As I tirelessly point out, you may not get a perfect fit but it's better than nothing. Remember, even if some of the terrorists are white converts, there aren't many of those. Also, they tend to be a bit on the mentally unstable side, and less likely to succeed for a host of reasons. One is that their family is unlikely to support their "endeavors" and may turn them in (unlike Arab or South Asian families). Another is that "community oddbals" are less likely to work well with others. A third is they're just not as good at being a terrorist.

Remember Richard Reid? He didn't succeed in his attack for a reason.

And once these guy were cleared again by security, why have the plane push off before reboarding them?

As I said, the doctor in question just wanted an apology and and explanation. Almost everyone acknowledges his accuser was upset with them as soon as they boarded the plane. They were guilty for being brown.

[jbg]

As I said, the doctor in question just wanted an apology and and explanation. Almost everyone acknowledges his accuser was upset with them as soon as they boarded the plane. They were guilty for being brown.

I agree with the apology and explanation. But the fact is, it can, will and should happen again.

[jdobbin]

I agree with the apology and explanation. But the fact is, it can, will and should happen again.

There have been a lot of security issues on planes this week. Some legit, some which are basically a tantrum by a child delaying everyone while security runs around with guns.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,210471,00.html

Airlines have to do a better job along with the federal government. No one wants to bail the industry out again because they don't act with better sense.

[WestViking]

Transport Canada snores on.

It is difficult to understand why Transport Canada cannot take air travel safety seriously. It is not as if air piracy, hijackings or skyjackings are new, nor is the take-over of aircraft for political purposes. This has been going on for over 75 years.

The first recorded aircraft hijack attempt was made on February 21, 1931, in Arequipa, Peru. Byron Rickards, flying a Ford Tri-motor, was approached on the ground by armed revolutionaries. He refused to fly them anywhere and after a ten day stand-off Rickards was informed that the revolution was successful and he could go in return for giving one of their number a lift to Lima.

During 1967-76 there were 385 incidents. In 1977-86 the total was 300 and in 1987-96 there were 212. Over a 30 year span, there were almost 900 incidents. Transport Canada took no measures to ensure safety of Canadian flights.

Although the Air India disaster took place in 1985, Transport Canada is still focusing its prevention methods on passengers and only recently began security screening of airport personnel who have access to the baggage, food, supplies and aircraft at our air terminals.

Baggage is still not thoroughly checked for explosives. Where are the explosive detection devices and x-ray machines that can detect questionable luggage for further scrutiny quickly and efficiently?

The ineffective and silly security measures undertaken following the horrors in New York 11 September 2001 are still in place. Passengers endure lengthy waits while grandmothers and children take off shoes for inspection. Explosive detectors are nowhere in evidence.

The prohibition against profiling is stunning. It is hard to think of a more inane excuse for inconveniencing travellers than subjecting them all to checks to ensure that people have no hurt feelings. No one can explain how this makes air travel safer. Why are we not doing thorough checks on passengers who fit the profile of past skyjack attempts or who are from nations where terrorists congregate, train and operate from?

Banning all liquids en flight is silly. The imbeciles who thought this one up failed to take into account that many people like to have water or juice available on a long flight. No one considered that having water and juice available for purchase in the secure area of the airport would allow some measure of comfort for travellers.

Transport Canada even refused to allow liquids purchased in the duty-free shops in the secure section of the airport to be taken on an aircraft. Apparently goods for sale in the secure section of the airport have not been checked to ensure that contraband has not been smuggled in. This is a huge security breach.

Years ago a security person insisted on seizing my nail clippers, which were useless as a weapon, while happily clearing my laptop computer oblivious to the possibility that I had replaced the CD drive or second battery with explosives.

I cannot avoid the conclusion that current airport security measures are based on the premise that if enough passengers are sufficiently inconvenienced, the public will assume something constructive is being done. It is not. Airport security stinks.

• People with electronic gear should be able to have their items checked by qualified personnel and sealed with tamper-proof tape prior to going to a security check.

• Explosive detection sniffers should be in use at every airport security check.

• Checked baggage should be thoroughly screened for explosives.

• Airlines should be promoting heavy duty vinyl bags for holding liquids and gels safely in checked luggage and providing low cost, low deductible insurance against lost or damaged baggage.

• Passengers should know that they can purchase water, juice, milk and reading material in the secure area of the airport and take their purchases on board with them.

Security must be an integral, seamless part of air travel, not an add-on that disrupts and inconveniences travellers. If Transport Canada cannot treat passengers with dignity and respect while ensuring their safety, the responsibility should be given to Justice or Public Safety either of which has a wealth of experience in applied security.

The insanity has to stop before a lot of people are needlessly killed.

[jbg]

I agree with the apology and explanation. But the fact is, it can, will and should happen again.

There have been a lot of security issues on planes this week. Some legit, some which are basically a tantrum by a child delaying everyone while security runs around with guns.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,210471,00.html

Airlines have to do a better job along with the federal government. No one wants to bail the industry out again because they don't act with better sense.

Sometimes industry bailouts are justified. The government's first function is to ensure the safety of its citizens, especially when assembled in large groups. If some group or other is making it dangerous for people to travel or even be together, the government must step in, or else government is not functioning.

[jdobbin]

Transport Canada snores on.

The insanity has to stop before a lot of people are needlessly killed.

And you think U.S. security is doing all these things?

How much are you willing to pay for a flight that most experts say can never be totally secure?

[WestViking]

Transport Canada snores on.

The insanity has to stop before a lot of people are needlessly killed.

And you think U.S. security is doing all these things?

How much are you willing to pay for a flight that most experts say can never be totally secure?

Let's fix the problems with Canadian airport security before we point fingers at the neighbours.

El Al seems to manage top notch security with minimal passenger disruption. Perhaps we have something to learn.

Not even a trip to the supermarket is completely without risks. That does not prevent us from taking logical and reasonable steps to milimize air travel risks. We already pay a premium for air travel security when we buy a ticket - we also pay a premium at many airports for 'upgrades and improvements', but I don't see much except inconvenience and window dressing in place of proper security measures.

[jdobbin]

Let's fix the problems with Canadian airport security before we point fingers at the neighbours.

El Al seems to manage top notch security with minimal passenger disruption. Perhaps we have something to learn.

Not even a trip to the supermarket is completely without risks. That does not prevent us from taking logical and reasonable steps to milimize air travel risks. We already pay a premium for air travel security when we buy a ticket - we also pay a premium at many airports for 'upgrades and improvements', but I don't see much except inconvenience and window dressing in place of proper security measures.

El Al has only 33 planes and 43 destinations.

All pilots have to have military training and hand to hand combat training. There are six agents aboard every international flight. Passengers must report three hours before every flight. Entire body searches are conducted and all luggage is checked.

Air Canada has 337 planes and 240 destinations. I suppose we could place over 2000 agents in planes, have all passengers arrive three hours before take-off, only hire Canadian Forces pilots, train them in hand to hand combat and screen all luggage checked or unchecked through a screener.

I suppose all that is possible.

Oh, and to make sure are planes are equipped with anti-missile countermesaures.

[August1991]

What does the deaths of underage alcohol related deaths who have contributed greatly to their own deaths have to do with being done in by murderous terrorist which can only be compared to acts of genocide.

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

I have no idea. I wasn't the one who brought it up.

What do murderous terrorists and doctors who have already cleared security have to do with keeping planes safe in the air?

I was the one who made the initial comparison of airport security checks and of checking the ID only of young people who buy booze.

It's a comparison that illustrates well the issue. We could check everyone's ID but it would be costly and achieve little value. So, we obviously don't waste effort doing it. This kind of discrimination is accepted.

[jbg]

El Al has only 33 planes and 43 destinations....Air Canada has 337 planes and 240 destinations. I suppose we could place over 2000 agents in planes

True.

All pilots have to have military training and hand to hand combat training. There are six agents aboard every international flight. Passengers must report three hours before every flight. Entire body searches are conducted and all luggage is checked....

(For Canada) have all passengers arrive three hours before take-off, only hire Canadian Forces pilots, train them in hand to hand combat and screen all luggage checked or unchecked through a screener.

I suppose all that is possible.

Oh, and to make sure are planes are equipped with anti-missile countermesaures.

Maybe that should be the case in Canada. Or maybe people above some undisclosed, and changing, age could be exempted from the searches unless they met some other profile element. Additionally, they couldo exempt "puddle jumper" destinations from these measures. How likely is it that a Toronto - Thunder Bay or Ottawa - Moosonee flight would be targeted?

Thus, the pre-arrival time could be lowered to maybe two hours.

[jdobbin]

Maybe that should be the case in Canada. Or maybe people above some undisclosed, and changing, age could be exempted from the searches unless they met some other profile element. Additionally, they couldo exempt "puddle jumper" destinations from these measures. How likely is it that a Toronto - Thunder Bay or Ottawa - Moosonee flight would be targeted?

Thus, the pre-arrival time could be lowered to maybe two hours.

El Al says they don't eliminate anyone including celebrities. They don't know who could be coopted.

Recently, the B.C. court that has been responsible for the Robert Pictou trial began one of the most extensive screening processes in Canada. They have caught old ladies with knives, people with all sort of drugs, children carrying 22 calibre pen guns and one person with explosives. You name it. All of these things are small enough to pass through normal security.

As I have said repeatedly said here, the best defence for secuity on an airplane is very good screening of both luggage and passengers on the ground and observation by trained staff. You can be sure that the El Al staff would know that three doctors on a flight posed no danger because they had screened them prior. They would also know that a bigoted drunk could pose a danger as bad a bomb in terms of passenger security.

[August1991]

As I have said repeatedly said here, the best defence for secuity on an airplane is very good screening of both luggage and passengers on the ground and observation by trained staff.

Dobbin, there you go... "observation by trained staff... "

The simple point I am making is that screening involves putting effort where it will do the most good. It is certain that El Al pays more attention to certain people and less attention to others.

To travel to Canada or the US, French citizens do not require a visa. Philippino citizens do require a visa but are subject to a perfunctory check. Syrian and Iranian citizens require a visa and extensive checks.

It would be foolish to treat all citizens the same way and we don't.

[jdobbin]

Dobbin, there you go... "observation by trained staff... "

The simple point I am making is that screening involves putting effort where it will do the most good. It is certain that El Al pays more attention to certain people and less attention to others.

To travel to Canada or the US, French citizens do not require a visa. Philippino citizens do require a visa but are subject to a perfunctory check. Syrian and Iranian citizens require a visa and extensive checks.

It would be foolish to treat all citizens the same way and we don't.

That's where you're wrong. In a few places last week, such as ABC News, security experts said that El Al treats *all* passenger as a potential risk. The reason for that is that the person who carries a bomb can be an old grandmother or a young girl. If you are looking for one thing, a bomber will make it look like something else.

That is why *everything* is checked and trained staff look for behaviours that give away a terrorist.

And the reason we have visa requirement for some countries is by and largely for immigation reasons.

I know you are trying to make the case for racial profiling but even the Israelis know that it is too limiting when looking for terrorism.

[Leafless]

I know you are trying to make the case for racial profiling but even the Israelis know that it is too limiting when looking for terrorism.

What is RACIAL PROFILING'?

"For the purposes of its inquiry, the Commission’s definition for "racial profiling" is any action undertaken for reasons of safety, security or public protection, that relies on stereotypes about race, colour, ethnicity, ancestry, religion, or place of origin, or a combination of these, rather than on reasonable suspicion, to single out an individual for greater scrutiny or different treatment."

Why do you keep pulling out the race card in times when national security especially applied to air travel is a main concern?

Notice that in the definition of racial profiling it states rather than stereotype but " rather than on reasonable suspicion to single out an individual for grater scrutiny or different treatment."

In the world of to-days terrorism I think it is totally reasonable based on statistics to pay extra attention to Arab Muslims.

What is happening is not racial profiling but 'terrorist profiling' and it's to bad Arab Muslim terrorist are ruining it for their Arab Muslim brothers.

http://www.ohrc.on.ca/english/consultation...ort-fact1.shtml

[jbg]

I know you are trying to make the case for racial profiling but even the Israelis know that it is too limiting when looking for terrorism.

I am sure they use "profiling" to the extent of determining how hard they look at any given person.

[jdobbin]

What is RACIAL PROFILING'?

Brown skin. Must remove from plane.

[jdobbin]

I am sure they use "profiling" to the extent of determining how hard they look at any given person.

They assume all people are suspects until proven otherwise. They do this every time, all the time.

[Wilber]

Wilber, I understand your point but I disagree, sort of.

Your line of reasoning means that we allow Imams into prisons to minister to Muslims held under terrorist charges. If we were to refuse such access, we would be accused of being - as you say - bigots. Heck, we allow Imams into Canada to preach values contrary to what many Canadians hold dear.

If those 19 guys who flew the planes into buildings in 2001 had been members of a political party, would we allow proponents of the same political movement free access to young people in our country? IOW, why do we treat a religious movement differently from a political movement?

How do you feel about such terms as the "Christian Republic of Iran" or the "Holy Iranian Republic"? It seems to me that religious movements get a wider berth than political movements.

Not my line of reasoning at all. When you screw up and someone suffers for it, you apologize. My line of reasoning is no more complicated than that.

Today's biggest problem with terrorism is coming from some people in the Muslim community. It makes sense that Muslims should come under more scrutiny than other religious groups but that doesn't give anyone a Carte Blanche to treat all Muslims like crap.

[jbg]

Today's biggest problem with terrorism is coming from some people in the Muslim community. It makes sense that Muslims should come under more scrutiny than other religious groups but that doesn't give anyone a Carte Blanche to treat all Muslims like crap.

You're missing the point. The problem is that the "Muslim community" is doing and saying nothing about the terror emanating from within its community.