11/20/2010

TSA: Heavy Fines and Heavy-Handed but you're Still Not Safer

From the photograher, Dean Shaddock: This was ...Image via Wikipedia
U.S. Need To Use Behavioral Profiling Screening At Airports
by Brian Johnson
Saturday November 20, 2010  10:10 AM PST

I am all for having top notch security at our nations' airports. The new screening machines and pat downs don't allow us to fully reach that standard.  The scanners now being used, while being high definition enough to allow screeners to see everybody's "junk", are not the holy grail that the TSA would have everybody believe.  They would not have caught either the "underwear" bomber or the "shoe" bomber. They are essentially no more effective than metal detectors.
There are already reports of Al Queda moving to new tactics of placing explosives inside of their seemingly inexhaustive supply of potential martyrs who would blow themselves up for their ticket to heaven.  From sticking explosives in body cavities, to surgically implanting liquid explosives into breast implants, the enemy is in the process of abandoning past tactics.  The scanners would be ineffective against these methods.
The Israelis have a method which has been recognized worldwide as the most effective screening process out there.  It involves, horror of horrors, profiling.  Those on the left, who have a hermantile fit at the mention of the word, will distort this and attempt to turn this into a racial issue, in their morally superior, but dangerously naive attempt to appear compassionate and caring.
The Israeli method of profiling is not based primarily on race or ethnicity, which is why it is so effective.  They profile behavioral cues.  Each person goes through a thirty to 45 second "interview" with a highly trained "screener".  Specific questions are asked, body movements, posture, eye movement, and the answers themselves are evaluated.  If a "flag" comes up, the person is sent to a secondary screening area where a more thorough process is deployed.  Potential problem passengers are discovered before entering more secure areas of the airport facility.  If the profiling method is used, and I believe it should be, TSA should be removed from screening, and this technology should be handled by private contracting personnel trained in these procedures.  TSA would be used only as an oversight.
This is coming more to the forefront as the TSA scanner issue and pat downs continue.  But "Big Sis", Janet Napolitano is not backing down at this point.  In fact, she is doubling down on the current methods, threatening $11,000 fines and arrest for travellers who want to opt out of the scanners and pat down, even if they want to leave the airport and drive to their destinations.
As I mentioned at the top of this post, I do see the need for security and the safety of the passengers who fly, as well as the threat to national security.  The fact is, there are other methods which are just as effective and less intrusive to privacy, including scanners which detect the same things the current scanners do, but don't show a person's "junk".
Being naturally curious about the motives  of government bureaucrats, my question is : "why are we using this particular scanner, when others are equally effective?  Maybe it is the fact that former Director of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff has financial interest in the maker of the scanners.  Or is it that George Soros holds 11,000 shares in the company that makes the scanners? 
I'd like to know the answer to these questions and more..  If this whole fiasco has been because of financial favors to inside-the-beltway cronies at the expense of privacy and liberty issues of the people of the United States, we should know about it.

Read article: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/business/sfl-airport-scans-pat-downs-refual-20101121,0,5604032.story
Enhanced by Zemanta
There was an error in this gadget