Video: Former El Al official explains … common sense
posted at 2:20 pm on December 29, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Fox News interviewed Isaac Yeffet, the former head of El Al airlines, explains why Umar Abdulmutallab would never have made it onto one of El Al’s flights. The first reason is the most obvious — when someone’s father rats them out as a potential terrorist, El Al tends to take that more seriously than the American State Department did. But there’s more to the El Al approach than just taking threat information seriously:
Yeffet says body scans are more provocative than effective, which is an interesting argument. The Israelis have a better method of screening passengers anyway, which is to send agents into the terminal to check out all of of the people looking to board flights. I wrote about this more than three years ago, and the US even tried a pilot program in 2006 based on the Israeli method. Some question (as did one of the Fox anchors here) whether that can be applied in the much larger airports and markets in the US. But that’s a question of scale, not of possibility, and it would just take a commitment to training enough agents to find key indicators of problems rather than statistical sampling as a means of screening passengers. Yeffet himself says that the US could use that same system, if we are willing to discard our political correctness and use the right kind of expertise on the problem.
Obviously, we need to improve our performance if an Umar Abdulmutallab can get onto a flight bound for the US. However, we need to do more to copy the success of El Al, and stop trying statistical sampling as a security measure.
Along those same lines, Tunku Varadarajan wonders when we will stop punishing all travelers for the terrorism of the few:
Of course, there has been a homeland reaction. The Transportation Security Administration went predictably into Pavlovian overdrive, announcing a series of new security measures that would take immediate effect. This is the other, less reassuring, side of the episodic nature of the terrorist threats against us. We seem always to react, never to anticipate—and in this form of hasty reaction, with its flavor of humiliation, and of having been outwitted by a wearer of dangerous underwear (or shoes), there lurk always the seeds of over-reaction. No one can move from his seat for an hour before landing. No electronics. No coats on laps.
The broader point is that we need, constantly, to recalibrate our bandwidth of stoicism. We are at war with al Qaeda; that organization is doing its best to kill us. Our need is, of course, to make it as near to impossible for it to do that. But our reaction to each new threat must not be to grant al Qaeda small, but important, victories, in the form of an imposition by the TSA of inconveniences on travelers that have not been thought through, inconveniences that are, themselves, a form of theater—the extempore theater of homeland security.
Here are two modest proposals. First let’s have a TSA head, for Pete’s sake: a year after President Obama got to the White House, he has yet to appoint an administrator to the outfit that’s paid to weed out the dangerous fliers. And second: instead of denying my 10-year-old boy the right to take a pee when his destination is a whole hour away, why can’t we be radically more careful about those we let on board our planes? Abdulmutallab’s name was not on the terrorist “no-fly” list, which has fewer than 4,000 names in total. It was, however, on a larger database of some 550,000 individuals, called TIDE (Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment)—and it was inserted there, it seems, only last month.
Why is anyone on this list allowed to board a plane to the United States? Why not convert TIDE into a “no-fly” list? Let anyone on that list who believes his name is there erroneously, or undeservedly, appeal—through legal channels—for removal. If he has a case, it will surely be heard, and yield a just, airborne outcome.
This echoes Yeffet’s point. There is no “right” for people abroad to board an airplane and enter the US. Derogatory information such as that supplied by Abdulmutallab’s father should have resulted in the suspension of the visa immediately. How can we expect fliers to undergo the humiliations of the TSA’s new procedures when the State Department doesn’t take that kind of information seriously?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
On an airline! This guy would have never made it to my front porch. It’s almost like this administration wants isolated terror attacks in this country for some reason.
Tommy_G on December 29, 2009 at 2:23 PM
Wow. Some nations have grownups in positions of authority.
*sigh*
Cicero43 on December 29, 2009 at 2:24 PM
We have the ACLU here, so common sense is verboten.
darwin on December 29, 2009 at 2:28 PM
even if it’s not possible to put all 550,000 thousand “watch list” people on the do not fly list, it is possible to search the living f*ck out of them, and also be quicker to boot them from flights for suspicious activity. And never, ever let more than one of them on the same flight.
BuzzCrutcher on December 29, 2009 at 2:30 PM
Here from the article is what I feel is most of the problem with this administration:
Our government no longer thinks we are in an actual war. They think this is one or two guys that are loosley tied together and not a world wide organized group that is dedicated to killing Westerners in general and Americans specifically. That sort of thinking will eventually get large numbers of Americans killed IMO.
Johnnyreb on December 29, 2009 at 2:33 PM
Obama dithered.
Security withered.
OR
Abdulmutallab is a killer
Obama acts like Chip Diller
UltimateBob on December 29, 2009 at 2:36 PM
Muslims will not pass through security if they were forced to go through a body scan because being seen naked is against their religion?
Guardian on December 29, 2009 at 2:36 PM
But if we did that, it would just make Abdul into a terrorist and then he might try and blow up a plane.
/lefty logic
rbj on December 29, 2009 at 2:37 PM
Word.
The Race Card on December 29, 2009 at 2:37 PM
Obama Cancels Funding for Airline Pilot Firearm Training.
A blast from the past. (no pun intended.)
mad saint jack on December 29, 2009 at 2:37 PM
c’mon people its time to relax and lower our defenses & security. Its not GWOT anymore, its Overseas Contingency Operation.
All is well
tommer74 on December 29, 2009 at 2:38 PM
Throwing political correctness and those that practice it overboard, the answer to this madness is simple: prohibit ANYONE from the middle east or ANY Muslim country, regardless of sex, age, name, religion, or country of origin, boarding and flying on any airplane to the United States. Let them take a ship if they want to come here.
bradley11 on December 29, 2009 at 2:38 PM
Then we can take the car, bus, train, or just walk.
However, the best protection is profiling. Detroit will be busy.
Oil Can on December 29, 2009 at 2:39 PM
This way, the fanatics and fellow travelers will be inconvenienced (and barred), not the run-of-the-mill American airline passenger.
bradley11 on December 29, 2009 at 2:39 PM
They should offer pig flights and no pig flights. The pig flights will have a piglet in a cage right up front for everyone to see as they board. For those who are offended no pig flights can be offered. The market can dictate.
Rose on December 29, 2009 at 2:39 PM
Having flown on El Al, they scrutinize everyone, but they definitely use profiling too.
Mr. Joe on December 29, 2009 at 2:40 PM
Yes how will we get rid of PC-think?
Can you imagine the FBI trying to run any sort of screening? Actually can you imagine a National Airline run out of DC?
The problem of scale is not one of possibilities but fitting the needs at the scale necessary to achieve the end results. This is not a scale free problem but a scale dependent one, and the number of airports at home and overseas that this would need to apply to is staggering. Mind you if there were airlines that did this and publicized this as a benefit of flying, say with some large indemnity or insurance against terror incidents built into the ticket price then we might get somewhere: airlines would tailor screening, baggage checks and so on to fit what they perceive as the risks.
A decentralized approach would then attack the scale problem through decentralization and having a number of different screening arrangements, each with their own security basis thus making centralized leaking impossible. Unlike the current TSA. But this requires recognizing that the scale matters, the scale dictates the response and the scale creates a different set of possibilities than a centrally run system. The fun is that you can’t mandate for airlines to do something like this, provide central direction and then not have the problems of centrally dictated security. For security do you really want ‘One Size Fits All, Fits None Well’? Israel can deal with its scale of problems in one way, and the US must examine a different set of solutions due to the scale we face.
If you want options then pay for them and go to airlines that are willing to do those things, or to private individuals willing to fly you on private aircraft to your destination. To get a different system stop using the current one and invest via your flight dollars into another one that has inherent security built into it. You will pay more… but you will also get what you want.
If you want to get rid of PC-think, then avoid it and pay for something better that does what you want it to do. And don’t complain about the price as security has a cost to it: your life.
ajacksonian on December 29, 2009 at 2:42 PM
Here’s one possible reason. Remember Bush’s approval ratings after the Sept. 11 attacks? Axelrod & company probably believe that another attack would give Obama’s sagging approval numbers a healthy boost.
The only thing wrong with that assumption, of course, is that Bush actually took action, and the country responded positively to his actions. Obama would sit on his thumbs, vote present, and wonder why his numbers stayed flat.
UltimateBob on December 29, 2009 at 2:42 PM
Say. What have you heard on the news about health care and climategate since Christmas Eve? Hummmm. Wag that dog.
MikeA on December 29, 2009 at 2:44 PM
in a word: Credible
Too bad the adults in the administration will get their PC panties in a wad before ever listening to common sense
gatorboy on December 29, 2009 at 2:48 PM
There have been reports that Abdulmutallab was allowed on the flight from Nigeria WITHOUT A PASSPORT.
How is it possible that someone without a passport would be allowed on any international flight, let alone one bound for the United States?
There is more to this story that needs to be investigated!
wren on December 29, 2009 at 2:48 PM
What a great succinct statement! Yes some countries do have adults in charge. Too bad about US.
But this is why Ed (and others) are wrong when they whine about “butcher knives” and tout “millimeter wave scanners” etc.
Bureaucrats care about expanding their own power and budgets, NOT anything else!!
Britain is a toilet because of out of control bureaucracies. We’re becoming so complacent that we are allowing them to grow to the same level of control.
For all sorts of reasons, from basic human rights, to economics, to security, We must start starving bureaucracies to death.
From the “war on drugs” to the “war on terror” the bureaucrats are institutionalizing the “struggle” as a reason for existence and a growth industry.
The partnership between the terrorists and TSA/DHS/etc must be broken.
CrazyGene on December 29, 2009 at 2:49 PM
The PC-think you won’t discard is this:
You are to be allowed to move freely unless somebody can prove you should be contained.
When in fact you’re a terrorist threat until you prove yourself harmless and should be denied access until authorized.
When you can face up to that you’ll enjoy the same security at the airport as a US naval vessel in an Arab port. For the same reason.
Chris_Balsz on December 29, 2009 at 2:51 PM
That wouldn’t have stopped Richard Reid, the would-be shoe bomber.
ProfessorMiao on December 29, 2009 at 2:52 PM
That wouldn’t work, either. Muslims hellbent on ‘martyrdom’ think they are exempt from the rules. Many of the 9/11 terrorists were heavily into alcohol and hot babes.
ProfessorMiao on December 29, 2009 at 2:55 PM
Meanwhile, Big “Surprise”: the Obama administration is flirting with unionizing the TSA
In the immortal cliché of Hot Air…what could go wrong?
RushBaby on December 29, 2009 at 2:55 PM
Good interview.
AnninCA on December 29, 2009 at 2:56 PM
ElAl: Hello. I see you are going to Rome today. What are you going to do there?
Passenger: Well, I hear it’s really historic with lotsa ruins and all.
EA: You have studied this?
Pax: Yeah
EA: I have a Rome expert right over here who would like your opinion. You will really like chatting with him.
Probably a lot smoother than that but you get the idea and ElAl has prevented another attack.
Alternate ending:
Pax: Hey man, I’ve got a plane to catch.
EA: Wrong. You have a conversation to conclude. /Well dressed polite people converge on Pax.
Caststeel on December 29, 2009 at 2:57 PM
I took four El Al flights to and from Israel between 1998 and 2004 (excellent tours with Zola Levitt Ministries), and was always impressed by (and grateful for) their pre-boarding security measures.
Their no-nonsense staff interviewed each person for some minutes, asking questions about our plans, while others searched our luggage. Sometimes they asked the same question repeatedly during that time, but phrased it in different ways. On the periphery of the interview area stood several people, casually sitting or leaning against walls, but clearly watching us. My assumption was that they knew who they were looking for, but also that they were attuned to any bit of behavior or conversation that seemed the least bit out of the ordinary.
On one occasion, the El Al screener asked a gal in our group about the necklace she was wearing, which had writing in Hebrew. The girl said, “Oh, do you speak Hebrew?” — a pretty absurd question that was asked innocently, but also out of nervousness, and it was enough to get her an extra round of questions.
The extra attention from the screeners made her even more nervous, but she was allowed to board with the rest of us. And she didn’t begrudge the extra precautions.
KyMouse on December 29, 2009 at 2:57 PM
The name list of those banned from flying must be enforced at every travel parameter; government issued passport, visa, airlines selling tickets, airlines checking in travelers. Failure by employees to perform accordingly should terminate their employment as participants in terror, knowingly as saboteurs, otherwise as incompetents.
PC is entrenched within American culture at the moment. It would take MORE than simply mimicking the Israeli method stateside, since the US government is an EO employer that prides itself MORE on representing diversity than in protecting national security or protecting any American citizen.
America needs trained dogs throughout the airports at every point of entry, both into the airport, into the boarding area, and as passengers board.
Dogs have more common sense than PC people have about confronting a threat. The dogs also have more courage than most people. And the dogs would intimidate terrorists far more than dumb@ss employees who really only want a paycheck without having to put themselves out at all.
And trained dogs are MUCH more reliable than technology run by the same employees unable so far to prove accountable for success. The dogs would prove much more cost effective than technology. And the dogs would not invade the personal space and privacy of people hosting no explosives and no illegal drugs.
maverick muse on December 29, 2009 at 2:57 PM
Remeber the old saw about “When the only tool you have is a hammer all your problems begin to look like nails”? The problem is that the current format of the TSA is constructed to create the apperance of security by making everyday citizens who travel jump through hoops. The goal is to make them feel safe, not to keep them safe. There is very little that TSA in its present format can do to stop the real threats. On the other hand the entities that could stop those threats are in a position to do so. El Al has proven that logical safeguards can anddo work, but that requires a national commitment that America thus far does not have. What we have is the TSA and its grandma groping goons, so when we have a problem we send in the goons, cause that’s all we got to send.
MikeA on December 29, 2009 at 2:58 PM
Nice idea, and I don’t know how this would work for private flights. But when you fly El Al out of Toronto, you first go through El Al’s security and then must go through the “regular” security. So you get the efficiency and effectiveness of good security AND the gross inefficiency and intrusiveness of regular system.
I believe that the US is only country that still requires you to remove your shoes and put them through the x-ray machine, but I might be wrong about that.
ProfessorMiao on December 29, 2009 at 2:59 PM
Well really! That just makes too much sense! /sarc
j_galt on December 29, 2009 at 2:59 PM
No one has ever accused most politicians of having any common sense!
It would be nice, but probably fruitless, for Obama and Napolitano to read this article.
GFW on December 29, 2009 at 2:59 PM
Shut up and pay your taxes.
-BHO
RedNewEnglander on December 29, 2009 at 3:00 PM
+1,000,000,000,000
Threadwinner.
ProfessorMiao on December 29, 2009 at 3:01 PM
Why does the tape keep starting and stopping??
PattyJ on December 29, 2009 at 3:02 PM
ACLU “Not Concerned At All” That the Names of Over 350 Million Americans Are on a “Not Safe to Be Flying” List http://optoons.blogspot.com/2009/12/aclu-not-concerned-at-all-that-names-of.html
Mervis Winter on December 29, 2009 at 3:02 PM
I have had the privilege of going through Israeli security several times. Oh it’s a massive pain in the arse, but I have honestly never felt safer on an airplane.
The TSA scares the bejeebers out of me. If it didn’t take so long to get places via car/boat, I’d avoid any and all domestic flights in Canada and the U.S.
mjk on December 29, 2009 at 3:03 PM
When I flew El Al from Prague to Tel Aviv, I was questioned for no less than 45 minutes. And I’m a white redhead. They may profile, but they pull no punches for anyone. My friend was also questioned. After the questioning, we went back to our seats and waited for the flight as the agents questioned other people. At some point he got his camera out of his bag and took a picture of the terminal. When we went to board, he forgot his camera in the lobby. We were sitting on the plane, when we saw one of the agents board. He walked straight to my friend and handed him the camera and said, “you might miss this” and then left. He knew the owner of the camera even though my friend only took it out well after we sat back down.
Those guys are good.
bilups on December 29, 2009 at 3:05 PM
But none were tattooed…as the marshals walk thru the terminal they can pass all the heavily tatted kids, women and men.
Ironically, most of the terrorists are easily profiled, that is what the interview is about…it’s not like they recruit (yet) some blond bimbo, or a tatted skateboarder, or an Asian businessman….this guy was pretty easy to identify, Arab name, bought one-way ticket with cash, dad told officials he was a radical, underwear that smelled like dynamite…
right2bright on December 29, 2009 at 3:09 PM
The camera could have been a bomb…he probably wasn’t too happy when he saw the camera sitting there in the terminal.
right2bright on December 29, 2009 at 3:10 PM
I just got back from a trip to Europe and flew back to Houston through Frankfurt. I set off the metal detectors (twice, cause we accidentally left and had to come back), and only then did they x-ray my shoes. Everyone else was able to go on without that.
However, I did have to take off my shoes in Paris. They even gave me a little slip cover thing.
Esthier on December 29, 2009 at 3:16 PM
That’s a huge red flag. Many countries won’t let you in with just a one-way ticket anyway, just for illegal immigration issues.
Honestly, there’s so much we could already be doing with just a little common sense.
Esthier on December 29, 2009 at 3:19 PM
Isaac Yeffet gave Obama a free lesson:
STOP DISPLAYING IDIOTIC PANIC THAT PROVES YOUR WEAKNESS.
Obama’s only transparency to date enables terrorism. His stupidly ordered mandates again enable terrorists at the encumbrance of all airline employees and passengers, to deny passengers the use of toilets, blankets, or pillows. To keep all hands visible, Obama may as well have ordered passengers handcuffed in their seats the last hour of flights. Exactly how were flight attendants expected to enforce all of Obama’s foolish rules? Again, it was the brave passenger who left his seat in order to thwart the terrorist attack.
maverick muse on December 29, 2009 at 3:21 PM
So they are more concerned with safety and human life over the usual suspects getting all ButtHurt???
Imagine that.
BigWyo on December 29, 2009 at 3:21 PM
Police worldwide use dogs. You’re exactly right. Muslim fundamentalists would be nervous around dogs in the first place so what better way to find those who would kill us simply because we don’t look the same and believe the same.
Mojave Mark on December 29, 2009 at 3:21 PM
Personally I think they need to start profiling – this is beyond a joke now.
Bombers have one thing in common -they are all extreme Muslims, all extreme Muslims need to be thoroughly checked, especially converts.
I hadn’t really flown since 9/11 and I finally flew last winter. My idea of the security we went through was that it was a joke. It was a pain and took forever but had someone really wanted to blow up the plane, I’m they could have done so.
Hope on December 29, 2009 at 3:24 PM
While I don’t agree with all Israel’s actions and policies, the necessity of this one is indisputable.
Dark-Star on December 29, 2009 at 3:25 PM
West Berlin ( Tegel ) in the Cold War Days had El Al-type measures: Every passenger went from the ticket counter to an area where two uniformed West Berlin cops closed the curtains around you in a small circle, patted you down, made you actually take a picture if you had a camera, etc.
Tegel had lotsa cops with submachine guns walking around, making you feel like you’d be Toast if you tried something stupid.
I can’t remember hearing about any flight out of West Berlin that had any problems…….
Janos Hunyadi on December 29, 2009 at 3:31 PM
Why not? There are 6.7 billion people on Earth. Why can’t we say that less than one percent out of one percent of them can’t enter the United States on an airliner? I bet there’s more than half a million people who can’t fly at all because of heart or lung problems. Those people either take cruise ships to get here or they stay home, and somehow the gears of commerce haven’t shuddered to a halt because of it.
Fabozz on December 29, 2009 at 3:31 PM
Do it. Do it now. Start training people–and not muslim sympathizers, either–tomorrow. Screen them well and political correctness be damned straight to the deepest pits of hell where it belongs. Have dogs at every single flight sniffing every single person who gets on a plane bound to or from or over or anywhere near our country. It needs to be done and it needs to be done yesterday–that is, as of September 12, 2001.
Bob's Kid on December 29, 2009 at 3:33 PM
Government Employee Union–the employees are already corrupt. Imagine their further insulation from being responsible to perform their Constitutional job duties, engorging the organized crime that already permeates our government, given their own Union. Imagine government employees gone on strike, and their union literally attacking non-union workers reporting in to work.
TSA given a union via Obama is just another power grab by Unions to own the US Government.
maverick muse on December 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM
Bingo. When given a goldmine of information, the State Department sat on its hands. Meanwhile, hours and hours of potential productivity go out the window everyday while ordinary, innocent travelers are waiting for procedures to occur that are “supposed” to improve safety.
Somebody has some ‘splainin’ to do.
ted c on December 29, 2009 at 3:39 PM
The use of explosives sniffing dogs is a great idea. But Muslims would protest, of course, and their protests would probably be taken seriously in America.
I was flying back from San Francisco a few years after 9/11 and I actually saw one of the security guys frisk a gorgeous golden retriever (he was boarding as the seeing eye companion for one of the passengers). I could hardly stifle my laughter, because if you wanted to use a dog as an IED, the fur is not where you would hide the explosives.
ProfessorMiao on December 29, 2009 at 3:39 PM
Ed, I don’t think this is true. Part of what allows them to profile easily is that people entering Israel fit a narrow set of profiles. There are Israeli residents, those who are visiting family, those visiting for religious reasons, historians/archeologists, and a few other very common sets of people. Each of them can be asked very specific questions by a well-trained agent. The same is not even remotely true in the US. The range of types of people and reasons for flying is much larger, and it is easy for someone to make up a fake profile that the agent wouldn’t know much about without sticking out.
Not to mention that if you’re going to spend the same amount of money that the TSA currently spends, you’d have much much longer lines of people waiting to be interviewed by these trained agents. Or else you’d need to increase spending by enormous amounts, and I don’t think that’s something we need to do.
tneloms on December 29, 2009 at 3:39 PM
Mojave Mark on December 29, 2009 at 3:21 PM
Bob’s Kid on December 29, 2009 at 3:33 PM
NO TSA UNION!
Do NOT permit incompetents permanent government employment.
Trained Dogs do need professional human co-workers to protect the dogs, just as the dogs protect their human companion. Together, the dog/man teams outperform the tech/man team composition.
Much more reliable.
Much more effective.
Much less intrusive against innocents.
Much less expensive.
Trained dogs keep their companions in line; less corrupt.
maverick muse on December 29, 2009 at 3:46 PM
Well if the pigs won’t work then I’d go with the dogs. My husband and sons are flying next week and I wasn’t particularly concerned until this attempt on Christmas. Perhaps they could put trained undercover people on planes and have them sit next to suspicious looking passengers.
Rose on December 29, 2009 at 3:52 PM
We are so stupid. This guy is right and our rules are stupid. Political correctness is going to be our downfall with terrorism.
Mo2Do on December 29, 2009 at 3:52 PM
maverick muse on December 29, 2009 at 2:57 PM
The pendulum of popular opinion has shifted against PC and into the conservative camp.
Yes, Obama and Holder will hold out PRO-RADICAL Muslim terrorists.
But Americans have grown actively restless against the Obama/Holder corruption of the US Judicial Branch. And being 2010 next week, this year’s re-election campaigns provide the perfect opportunity for conservatives to push and get what we want now: NATIONAL SECURITY AND LOWER TAXES!
maverick muse on December 29, 2009 at 3:55 PM
– Tunku Varadarajan
No, Al Qaeda doesn’t want to kill us. Subjugate us, destroy our economy, shatter our power in the world, but not kill us.
TinMan13 on December 29, 2009 at 3:57 PM
It’s more than possible – that’s not that many data records, for crying out loud. As some national pundit put it earlier this week, I think, our credit card companies track more people than that on a real-time basis. How many CC transactions, bank debit card transactions, etc, take place every day? More than 550,000, more than the number of people trying to get on-board a plane at any given moment, I’ll bet you.
This can be done – like everything else, however, it’s a matter of will.
Midas on December 29, 2009 at 4:03 PM
Have you ever been through Israeli security? Why don’t you ask some of us who have what kind of questions we were asked? H*ll, I was asked about my underwear and my, shall we say, feminine hygeine products. One of the other people asked me where I grew up, what my parents’ names are, what they did for a living.
It had sh*tall to do with WHY I was going to Israel or leaving Israel. It had to do with profiling and watching for reactions that mean “liar.”
mjk on December 29, 2009 at 4:03 PM
The people running things are too politically correct to even realize HOW DAMNED STUPID THEY ARE!
GarandFan on December 29, 2009 at 4:05 PM
Ya know, letting a$$hats on airplanes with exploding underwear can be pretty expensive as well.
Midas on December 29, 2009 at 4:06 PM
“No, Al Qaeda doesn’t want to kill us. Subjugate us, destroy our economy, shatter our power in the world, but not kill us.”
If you value your worth as a human being, if you respect your mother or any other woman, if you believe in individual freedom and universal human dignity, then they sure as h-ll want to kill you.
ebrown2 on December 29, 2009 at 4:07 PM
Senator XXXX:
Good afternoon. Christmas Day brought us a terrorist attack on our soil, the second in as many months. Prior to this attack, Abdulmutallab’s actions left a clear trail of warning signs. He paid cash for a ticket, checked no luggage for a two week stay, had no valid passport, and purchased a one way ticket to Detroit. These four facts were enough to question this individual. Nevermind these warning signs, however, it should have been enough that this individuals father, the economic minister of Nigeria, contacted the US Embassy to express concerns over his son’s terrorist activities over a month ago. Was that enough to get young Abdullamuallab a questioning or closer look? No, and this person nearly set off 80g of PETN on approach to Detroit, an unsuccessful attempt thanks to the quick action of a young Danish traveler who risked himself to save the lives of 253 people and a US owned jumbo jet on Christmas.
Americans do not expect perfection in regards to international airline travel. We understand that inconveniences and delays are part of the game after 9/11. We do expect that the billions of dollars that have been invested in the TSA and the State Department eventually merge into action and prevent the issuance of travel visas, sales of airline tickets, and the carrying of a bomb onto a US airline.
Is this the same return on investment that we can expect from this healthcare reform you voted for? Billions of dollars slushed into it and then failed diagnoses when there are clear warning signs, failed treatment plans, and evasive excuses like those made by DHS Napolitano? Furthermore, will our healthcare then become incumbent upon some unwitting hero to take care of when the systems that are “in place” fail dramatically as did those of the TSA and State Department on Christmas Day?
The American people demand answers regarding the string of abject failures that occurred on 25 DEC 09. This string of uncomedic errors is ridiculous and we are now owed an explanation as to why an Al Qaeda terrorist, whom our State Department had information about, was allowed to board a flight with a bomb and nearly kill 253 people. Moreover, the burden of proof regarding how our tax money is invested in government programs that are sold as being either for our “safety” or for our “health” has now gone considerably higher and rests upon the shoulders of the government.
ted c on December 29, 2009 at 4:09 PM
I’ve actually found the airport security for flights within Israel tougher than El Al’s. Some people forget that this is a country where you pass through a metal detector and have your bags searched going into a shopping mall and many restaurants.
ProfessorMiao on December 29, 2009 at 4:09 PM
I’ve never heard of Muslims not liking dogs – really?
Midas on December 29, 2009 at 4:09 PM
And here’s the rub: persons having an IQ significantly above room temperature would be needed to fill these jobs. These are not, repeat not, what you’ll find in the ranks of TSA today. Rather, you’ll find folks who appear to have been selected for a high susceptibility for forming a unionized gubmint workforce. And if you happen to be someone who thinks that expressing this is RAAAAACIST, make the most of it!
ya2daup on December 29, 2009 at 4:17 PM
To me, the best solution would be to let the airlines handle it themselves. Some would make the investment, and have “greeters” at their terminals. Others wouldn’t make the investment. Guess which one I’d fly on?
Implementing a system like this would save us money, and time, which is also money. And it would save lives, which are worth more than gold.
hawksruleva on December 29, 2009 at 4:34 PM
I think the TIDE members should be added to the no fly list and like any American whose identity has been stolen, you do all the footwork to clean it up.
meMC on December 29, 2009 at 4:37 PM
So you’d rather be patted down by Fat Joe the TSA guard while he’s eating his doughnut? Then take off your shoes, and have your luggage examined? Then walk through a scanner in which you’re rendered essentially naked?
If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear from questions. I’d rather be embarrassed than dead. But that’s just me.
hawksruleva on December 29, 2009 at 4:37 PM
I’ve been to Israel at least 10 times, and every time they’ve asked me why I’m visiting. They’ve also asked me the types of questions you listed (though not the ones about feminine hygiene).
But as far as I understand, those “random” questions are meant elicit reactions (like you said) that raise flags and lead to further questioning, not necessarily trigger a search or stop the person from proceeding altogether. I was under the impression that the further questioning that could really trap someone were the ones that ask about the purpose of the visit, where if you’re caught in a lie, you really can’t proceed at all. If you know this to be wrong, I’m willing to be corrected.
tneloms on December 29, 2009 at 4:39 PM
Silly rabbit. You don’t have to interview EVERYbody. You only need to interview likely suspects, based on an earlier comparison of the flight manifest to the terrorist database.
You’d also talk to some random folks, but that’s mostly to provide uncertainty for the bad guys to deal with.
Put it like this. Take a flight of 100 people:
25 business men and women, married. Round-trip tickets.
15 business folks, single, 1-way tickets, paid for by corporate travel company.
15 business folks, single. Round trip tickets.
30 families on vacation. Men, women, children. Round trip.
10 free spirits, travelling 1-way.
5 other.
You can talk to 15 of them, and let the other 85 pass with little risk.
hawksruleva on December 29, 2009 at 4:45 PM
The TSA is part of the Dept of Homeboy Security.
I travel often and am amazed at how unprofessional the people to whom we charge with our security are. Most wear their uniform like they were gangbanging on a ghetto street corner. Most are Bon Qui Qui rude, same attitude different uniform.
Alden Pyle on December 29, 2009 at 4:53 PM
Great article from Haaretz: The charade of airline security
hawksruleva on December 29, 2009 at 4:56 PM
One is not inconvenienced if one does not fly to, from or within America.
albill on December 29, 2009 at 5:09 PM
This would be the logical thing to do. However, first you would have to fire all the TSA employees and hire real screeners, not these High School dropouts. These people can barely follow their simple instructions – the same instructions, by the way, that have been published on the Internet by the brilliant TSA supervisors. Do you feel safer yet?
Uniblogger on December 29, 2009 at 5:10 PM
I was addressing what Ed was talking about, which is the Israeli system. In that system they interview everybody. In fact, Ed specifically rejected the proposal of sampling. I’m actually in favor of something like what you proposed, and I think that people who reject “statistical sampling” don’t understand statistics very well.
tneloms on December 29, 2009 at 5:17 PM
I was in USA and Canada in July. Getting on an Australian flight in the first place was an absolute joke. In the end we had to fly through the checkpoints to even make the flight. I am not joking. Fortunately we did not have to remove our shoes.
We landed in Los Angeles where we went through 2 checkpoints and we had our photograph taken. The people at the checkpoints were not the brightest individuals in my opinion. From Los Angeles we flew to NYC. We did not pass through any security check point in NYC but for the first time we had to remove shoes at Los Angeles. It is a pointless exercise in my opinion.
The Canadian border security has not changed in over 20 years. If you are not American or Canadian you get the full search. It happened like that in 1984/85 and the border security for the train was even tougher. Everybody on the train at the border was quizzed about why they were entering Canada. Passports had to be produced, the little form had to be filled out, and then came the quizzing which included for one Canadian why was he returning to Canada. The foreigners had to produce evidence that they intended leaving Canada. It was tough.
When we returned to USA out of Canada through Vancouver, we had to undergo a similar process. Our luggage was checked and x-rayed prior to getting on the train. We then stopped in the middle of nowhere for border security. This time the Americans were a lot easier… again this was the same as 1984/85. However to get our flight home we had to remove our shoes once again…. grrr….. it is so unnecessary. One man had a shoe bomb. He failed. As if anyone was going to try the same trick….. time to stop that check in my opinion.
Now the thing you are all missing in relation to the Nigerian bomber is that he had a passport yet pretended that he did not have one. There was an accomplice, and Indian man (maybe Pakistani?). They pretended he was a refugee. So here is what should happen in the future instead of more ridiculous rules. Alleged refugees without papers should not be allowed onto any flights into the USA. This has to stop immediately. If there are no papers then the person cannot board the flight. I suspect that the Nigerian gave a false name which is why he was not picked up. Regardless, if the person is an alleged refugee he or she should not be allowed onto the aircraft without papers of some sort…. the person should be held in the country where he or she is trying to board the aircraft until checks are completed.
This person should have been profiled simply because of the claim to be a refugee. It does not matter if he looked Muslim or not. His photograph should have been taken and flashed around the world to see if he came up on any database.
There really was a very massive fail, all because of the libtard ACLU getting upset over profiling. Time to push back against CAIR and ACLU on this matter.
maggieo on December 29, 2009 at 5:22 PM
Yes, they do. But most of the interviews take a matter of a few minutes. They do not handsearch everybody’s carryon bags, either. They use the passenger lists, watchers in the terminals, and peoples’ reactions to questions to determine who to spend more time with.
ProfessorMiao on December 29, 2009 at 5:26 PM
It would become readily apparent that we were doing that. And once AQ tries some demographic ingenuity to match their technical ingenuity with explosives, such as paying for a round trip ticket, or setting up a company and shopping for tickets with their corporate card, they’re through. Because the point of that system is to make customers happy, not stop terrorists.
Once you stop looking for it, is the time to try it again.
Chris_Balsz on December 29, 2009 at 5:30 PM
There has been one unconfirmed report that he attempted to board the plane without a passport, so I’m waiting on that one. Everything I heard indicates that he flew on a ticket with his own name on it. That alone should have been enough to keep him off the plane, given that he had been ratted out by his own father to the US State Dept. The absence of checked luggage is another major red flag.
Not that I’m saying anyone without papers should ever be allowed to board a plane, mind you. We just don’t know that that really was the case in this instance.
ProfessorMiao on December 29, 2009 at 5:32 PM
I know someone from the Department of Homeboy Stupidity maybe lurking on this thread.
So to you creep , explain this
http://www.tsa.gov/press/releases/2006/press_release_11022006.shtm
Why this private company won the right to hire workers who didn’t even have greencards or proper documentation?
And while you attempt to forward this link to your bosses in Hawa-II
get an explanation to why majority of screeners @ bayarea airports are elderly Phillipinos? Followed by elderly Bangladeshis and Pakistanis?
macncheez on December 29, 2009 at 5:34 PM
Not at all. What’s the “margin of error” in your plan? 1 in 10,000? 1 in 1000? 1 in 100? How many millions of passengers a year? Of course calculated error only applies to random circumstance, not AQ manipulation of blind spots.
Chris_Balsz on December 29, 2009 at 5:43 PM
I was travelling within Israel with 2 friends, one of whom is gentile and looks like a middle-aged lefty peacenik (but who is even more hawkish on terrorism than me), who had also visited Beirut several years ago. The other friend and I are middle aged Jews.
We crossed into Jordan at the Eilat crossing to do the Wadi Rum Bedouin jeep tourist thing overnight, then crossed back. This is very common tourist activity. We were going to fly from Eilat to Tel Aviv that evening. The Eilat airport is this dinky beach town airport with prop planes.
While our luggage was on the x-ray conveyor we were surrounded by security guards who took us each into a different corner of the room to question us.
They said “so you met your friends here…”
“No, we know each other in the States, we flew here together on the same plane.”
“Why did you drive all over the country?”
“Because we are tourists and wanted to see those places.”
“What did you do in Jerusalem? Why are you going to Tel Aviv? Are your friends Jewish? What did you do in Jordan? What’s the name of the tourist company? Why did your friend go to Beirut? So… you met each other in Tel Aviv…..”
“No we flew here together on the same plane from New York.”
etc etc
As an extra measure they kept us long enough to make us miss our flight. The next flight was in an hour and a half. We missed dinner with our Tel Aviv friend. I called her and told her why we were going to be late and she said, “I’m glad they were doing their job.” Well, so were we even though it was a pain in the ass.
At Ben Gurion they go down the line for the x-ray machine and talk to you. It’s very quick for most people. One time I got a cute young girl who was clearly in training with her supervisor, a slightly older girl. She was very earnest and I enjoyed being her guinea pig.
YehuditTX on December 29, 2009 at 5:47 PM
I appreciate being a (half-assed) practicing Jew, because after I tell them I’m from New York, they always ask me what synagogue I go to and I can name 4 or 5. They ask if I speak Hebrew, I say “Ktzat (a tiny bit).” B’seder, on to the next tourist.
YehuditTX on December 29, 2009 at 5:53 PM
There is a simple solution to this, and it is relatively affordable. Create a few career police jobs in TSA, or another agency that could work with TSA. Make those jobs pay 120% of Captain pay in the average big city police department. Then recruit seasoned police officers to fill those positions without regard to any stupid union rules. Set up shifts that assure that every TSA team has at least one of these officers in charge and on hand at all times with nothing to do but observe, shake hands and talk to people. Any cop that has been on the job for a two or three years can see that bad guys from 100 yards in a crowd, and can smell them when they get closer better than a dog. Put some real cops in there and give them discretion to check anyone they want to check and this problem will be solved overnight. The single most powerful weapon we could possibly deploy is the trained human mind. You still can’t build a machine that comes close, and whatever you can build is wasted when you give it to people who can’t even read the instruction manual. So far TSA has only proven that no system based on procedures written by lawyers and office jocks and built around gadgets is idiot proof.
MikeA on December 29, 2009 at 5:57 PM
Why is there a flight between Amsterdam and Detroit anyway?
Akzed on December 29, 2009 at 6:02 PM
When 99% of terrorists are muslim and 99% of the security effort goes in patting down 83 year old non-muslim grannies at the airport, the system will never work well.
angryed on December 29, 2009 at 6:08 PM
From ticketing onward, names should be fed into the TIDES data base. A simple Y/N could be fed into the process if the ticket is purchased in cash or if the ticket is for one-way travel to further raise red flags. A Y/N regarding the check-in of luggage should be added to the mix. Too many alarms of irregularities? The person is culled from the queue and questioned with an in-depth interview by a person skilled/trained in the process.
Heck, even throw in the taking of a photo at check-in, or have a video camera recording the transasction. Banks do so. Why not a vulnerable transportation hub?
From my experience, any check-ins for overseas flights must be accompanied by the showing of a passport. (Why wasn’t the Nigerian caught at that point? He should never have been in the gated area to begin with.)
Travelers from the ME may require additional scrutiny/interviewing, as should those who show evidence of such travel on their passports. (Many of the recruited crop of young jihadists have lived their entire lives in Western countries, yet they have traveled to the ME for training. They, too, should be flagged. Even though they are second or third generation immigrants to a Western country, these young males seem to be particularly attracted to jihad.)
Red flag foreign students traveling on visas for more in-depth interviewing.
Have a number of bomb-sniffing or drug-sniffing dogs floating around all areas of the airport: ticketing, baggage, gateways. They can be intimidating enough to all, but they would be especially so to the usual suspects. Besides, dogs don’t threaten to join featherbedding unions.
While we do not rely on train travel as much as do other countries, such security features could be implemented at train stations, too. Too many terrorist acts have taken place on trains and subways for security personnel not to be vigilant.
onlineanalyst on December 29, 2009 at 6:14 PM
The TSA is a joke. If the airlines were responsible for their own security we would be much better off and we could dispense with the TSA and save a lot of money in the process.
duff65 on December 29, 2009 at 6:35 PM
Quicker solution to all our Islam related troubles. Mass internment. Yes, it violates a load of civil rights but Liberals hardly care about civil rights except as a tool to beat Republicans over the head.
While we are at it. Mass-internment for Liberals.
All Problems are thus solved.
And bringing out Ben Franklin’s quote doesn’t apply as I am advocating trading other people’s liberty for my security and security of my Liberty…
Holger on December 29, 2009 at 6:36 PM
When will we stop punishing all Americans for the few that don\’t have health insurance?When will we stop punishing all Americans for the few that use guns to commit crimes?When will we stop punishing all Americans for the few that make bad investments?When will we stop electing Democrats?
Socratease on December 29, 2009 at 6:41 PM
When I was working I flew on a regular basis. Since 9/11 I have not been on a plane and don’t intend to be until we get some sensible security in place. PC doesn’t replace good sense and stupid (feel good) security measures may make the masses feel good but they are worthless. We need to profile, how many times does grandma pose a threat?
duff65 on December 29, 2009 at 6:44 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »