Could implementing Israeli airport security actually save Americans money?
I've been arguing for years that Americans would be safer at a lower cost if they adopted Israeli style airport security. Now, in a scathing indictment of the TSA and its creators (Congress with enhancements by the Obama administration), the same argument is being made by John Tierny.
It was the federal government, not the private screeners, that set
the policy allowing small knives and box cutters to be brought onto
planes. Federal guidelines prevented airlines from arming pilots and
reinforcing cockpit doors. The feds also stopped the private security
firms from using an existing system to identify high-risk passengers,
which would have singled out some of the hijackers for special
screening.
Instead of learning from those mistakes, the Senate doubled down on
central planning, voting unanimously to turn airport screening into a
federal monopoly. The only intelligent deliberation occurred in the
House of Representatives, where Republicans actually listened to experts
from countries with considerable experience in aviation terrorism.
Israel and European nations had learned the hard way that good security
requires a division of responsibility. An independent watchdog is
essential to ensure that screeners are doing their job, and the obvious
candidate for that role is the federal government. But that means that
someone else has to do the screening. The watchdog can’t watch itself.
House Republicans heeded the experts’ advice, and they had the votes
to trump House Democrats yearning for more federal workers. The House
passed a bill to establish a system modeled on the one used in Israel,
Canada, and Europe: each airport would run its own screening system, and
the feds would have wide authority to set standards, monitor
performance, and mandate improvements. When it came time to reconcile
the competing bills, however, Senate Democrats stood firm, and the House
Republicans were denounced for putting ideology above national
security. One of the loudest critics was New York Times columnist
Paul Krugman, who was such an ardent cheerleader for the TSA that he
deserves to have the line at Newark Airport named after him. “The
right’s fanatical distrust of government is the central fact of American
politics, even in a time of terror,” Krugman wrote. Exploiting the
public affection for firefighters after September 11, Krugman argued
that the Republicans’ anti-TSA ideology would logically call for the
elimination of the New York City Fire Department because fire protection
should be a purely private responsibility.
I actually part company with Tierny over the Europeans. In many ways, their security is worse than the Americans. First, like the Americans, they don't profile. Second, they don't screen their screeners well enough, with the result that their airport security is staffed by people who have gone on to commit terrorist attacks. Third, they don't take advantage of the possibility of keeping people with connecting flights in sterile areas, so they don't have to be re-screened. Instead, they throw you out of the sterile area (in many instances, even if you're changing planes in the same terminal), requiring you to go through security again.
Last month, I was 'randomly selected' at Paris-DeGaulle (despite only connecting there, and despite being an elite flyer and old enough not to fit anyone's terrorist profile) for 'extra screening' on my way to board a flight to Philadelphia. I was practically strip searched, and the idiot went through every one of the nearly 20 pockets in my backpack with obviously no clue of what it was he was supposed to look for.
So, no, I don't want a European system. I want an Israeli one where people who have training in psychology profile passengers instead of randomly picking people out of a line like me or like the lady at the top of this post.
Like all government monopolies, the TSA blames its failures on lack
of funding. But it’s already spending way too much, as demonstrated in a
congressional study
comparing TSA screeners in Los Angeles with non-TSA screeners in San
Francisco, one of the few airports allowed to run its own system,
contracting with a private company. If LAX switched to the San Francisco
model, the study concluded, it could cut its screening costs by more
than 40 percent.
The San Francisco private company’s screeners received the same
salary and benefits as TSA screeners, but they were so much better
trained and deployed that each one processed 65 percent more passengers
than a TSA screener in Los Angeles. They apparently enjoyed better
working conditions, too, because they were much less likely to quit
their jobs. And in tests by federal investigators, they were three times
better at detecting contraband.
As far as I am aware, Israel's system is all government run (although, come to think of it, I don't recall ever hearing that they went on strike, which all government unions do from time to time). But the key (other than the profiling) is that Israel's system has redundancy. They have more than one shot at catching terrorists. There's security before you ever get near the airport. If you arrive in a taxi, the security guard nearly always rolls down the window and asks where you're coming from - to hear your accent. If they're suspicious, the car is pulled over and searched. There's a security guard standing outside each door to the terminal, randomly pulling people over. You wait in a long line that moves VERY quickly to screen your checked baggage. Before they screen your checked baggage, they ask who packed it and where was it, and do you know why they're asking that question (Anne Murphy). They're looking for your manner (because they're trained in psychology) more than your answers. They always ask you if anyone gave you something to take with you. Usually, I just say no. A few months ago, I brought back a Torah scroll for someone and I spilled the beans to El Al (not Heathrow) security in London. They asked me who gave it to me and how well I knew the person. They were satisfied with my answers and let it go.
And then there's the security screening you're all used to abroad, which splits into 15-20 lines, most of which are not more than 10 minutes long. I usually get through all the security screening in 30-45 minutes and I have no priority status in Ben Gurion. That's no longer than anyplace else (one of the frequent excuses I hear why the Israeli system cannot be implemented elsewhere).
In Europe, when I'm not checking a bag, it takes about the same time (although in London that's only because I'm fast-tracked as an elite flyer with a British Airways partner - Heathrow is one of the worst airports in which to transfer if you have no privileges).
In the US, they don't screen checked bags until after they get them, and I get through security more quickly in most airports because (a) I'm an elite flyer (exception - Philadelphia where there's no such thing) or (b) I get TSA pre-cleared (always happens in Boston, usually in Chicago, rarely in Philadelphia).
TSA clearly needs to be reformed. It won't happen with Obama in power (he allowed them to unionize in 2011, which is what's preventing more airports from opting out) and it won't happen if Hillary Clinton wins the election either.
Israel's Supreme Court issues show cause order on profiling
And you thought we finished with this nonsense four years ago. The Israeli Supreme Court has issued a show cause order to the government, asking it to explain why it cannot conduct airport security without assuming that 'Israeli Arabs' are a security risk. (Duh - because they are one?).
Following a hearing on a discrimination suit last week, the Supreme Court issued a show-cause order demanding that the Airport Authority explain why it cannot run security checks based on equal, uniform and practical criteria, instead of the current situation, in which Israeli Arab citizens are automaticly labelled a security risk.
Ahead of the Airport Authority's formal response, a security figure told Arutz Sheva's Hebrew service Monday morning that he was "sorry to hear that Supreme Court judges sit in their air-conditioned rooms and do not understand the dangers posed by the debate." Referring to the September 11, 2001 attacks by Arab extremists on the United States, the source continued, "The Twin Towers tragedy took place, the danger has not disappeared and peace has not come. The court is endangering the security of the citizens of Israel."
The petition, which was submitted in May 2007 by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) against the Israel Airports Authority, the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) and the Transportation Ministry, says that Arab Israelis receive more thorough security inspections than Jewish ones before they board a flight at Israeli airports and when flying to Israel on Israeli airlines.
The petition said that this was the result of racial profiling practiced by the security authorities that designates Arabs as more dangerous, even if there is no indication that the individual Arab passenger poses a risk.
ACRI stated that the longer and more thorough security checks that the Arab passengers undergo create and encourage stigmas and negative attitudes towards Arabs and humiliate the Arabs whenever they fly.
The petitioners claimed that the practice was a violation of the Basic Law:Human Dignity and Freedom and laws ensuring free movement, protection from discrimination and protection of privacy.
The petition outlined numerous examples of cases where Arabs were forced to undergo rigorous questioning and luggage inspections, as well as instances where Arabs were barred from boarding their flights. It also told of instances when Arabs where singled out of the group they were traveling with and forced to undergo additional inspections.
The petition stressed that racial profiling took place on a daily basis and that Arabs were constantly under suspicion for no other reason than that they were Arabs.
...
In its response to the petition, which the state submitted in 2008, it wrote that based on security requirements, which are determined by the Shin Bet, every passenger, without exception, undergoes some form of security inspection before boarding an aircraft.
“However, the level of inspection passengers undergo is derived from a variety of details and characteristics, according to their potential risk evaluation,” the state said.
This evaluation, according to the state, “is based upon experience and risk assessment, which considers various details and characteristics that experience indicates have probable correlation to involvement in terrorist activities.”
The state’s attorneys stressed that the precise nature of the regulations and the reasoning that supports them is highly classified and volunteered to inform the court of them behind closed doors.
The lawyers added that the Israel Airports Authority had taken steps to reduce the friction between the passengers and the security inspectors, including the installation of new technological methods of inspection that are less intrusive, and have written a code of ethics and trained their employees to be more sensitive and polite in their treatment of passengers.
They also promised that additional changes that would improve the situation would be introduced in the future, citing an investment of more than NIS 300 million.
If the court makes the Airports Authority change its security procedures and God forbid there is a terror attack, the judges ought to be held personally liable. That would make them think twice about doing anything.
Why Israeli security doesn't need to touch your 'junk'
Jeff Dunetz describes Israeli airline security blow by blow for those of you who have never been through it before. I suggest that you read it. Yes, they do discriminate. In general, Jews get through more quickly. What Jeff's describing goes for every El Al flight anywhere in the World and for all flights that depart from Ben Gurion Airport. I have also told you in the past that if you fly from North America to Israel via Europe and connect to El Al in Europe, you almost always have to go identify your bag, open it up and make sure that no one has put anything inside (they are not particularly enamored of the notes from TSA that say "we went through your bag;" I once pointed out one of those in London and they had me go through the entire bag again). Here are some highlights and then I'll tell you a couple of stories.
The ISA (Israeli Security Agency) calls it “human factor.” Some part of that human factor would cause Al Sharpton to show up to picket the Airport if it was practiced in the US. Ethnic profiling of passengers plays a central role in Israel’s multi-level approach. Not just ethnicity is profile, race religion, general appearance and behavior are also part of the information used to profile. And wherever that profile is being made, no matter what country it is being made in, it is an Israeli doing the profile.
All passengers travelling to and from Israel are questioned by security staff. For Jewish Israelis, the process takes a couple of minutes at most, with passengers being asked whether they packed their luggage alone, and whether anyone had access to the luggage once it was packed. Jewish tourists also usually pass through security within a few minutes.
...
Non-Jewish tourists tend to be questioned a bit more thoroughly, and may be grilled over the purpose of their visit and about their accommodation…
… the procedure for Arabs and Muslims can often be lengthy and irritating, ending with a full body and baggage search. Visitors who have passport stamps from countries hostile to Israel are also questioned intensively in what can be a traumatic experience for the uninitiated.
….Anyone admitting to leaving their luggage at an airport or bus station left-luggage area before check-in will have their suitcases stripped, with each item individually checked and re-packed.
In 2008, Israel’s supreme court rejected a petition presented by a group of disgruntled Israeli Arab citizens, backed by the Association of Civil Rights in Israel, demanding an end to ethnic profiling as discriminatory and illegal.
...
“It is mindboggling for us Israelis to look at what happens in North America, because we went through this 50 years ago,” said Rafi Sela, the president of AR Challenges, a global transportation security consultancy.,.
Officers are looking for nervousness or other signs of “distress” — behavioral 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 behavior. So what kind of privacy am I really stepping on when I’m doing this?”
There are other differences, most importantly is that you don’t just come off the street and get a job with the ISA (Israel Security Agency). These security agents are all ex-military (as most of the country is) and they are selected based on their intelligence and their ability to behavior profile.
Shlomo Harnoy, vice president of the Sdema group, an Israeli security consultancy firm which specialises in aviation security, believes Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian who tried to blow up the Detroit-bound Northwest Airlines aircraft on Christmas Day, would have been detained “within seconds ” at Ben Gurion airport. According to Harnoy, a young Muslim traveling alone, on a one-way ticket, with no luggage, was an obvious suspect.
Harnoy, who once headed the Israel Security Agency’s aviation security department, believes investing millions in new technology is not the answer. “Whoever is concentrating on stopping old ladies bringing a bottle of mineral water on to the plane will not find the terrorist, or the bomb. The old lady is not a suicide bomber and the bottle of water is not a bomb component.”
Not only do most Israeli security selectors have degree-level education, they are trained to the highest standards. The most important element in the “human factor” is that the security guards understand the threat.
And of course, on every El Al flight there are armed air marshals. You won’t know who they are, but I do not recommended you making a fuss mid-air just to find out.
Two quick stories. When I first came on aliya, my boss had a Jewish Austrian client, who had a non-Jewish Austrian assistant. Once, the client sent the assistant back to Vienna early. In Israel, businesspeople routinely prepare 'To Whom It May Concern' letters for their visiting, non-Jewish counterparts, to make security go a little more smoothly, and we prepared such a letter for this woman. She called us from the airport in tears - she had been raked over the coals by security but was going to make her flight (this was 1991 and most people did not have cell phones, so she took the trouble of going to a payphone, which required a token at the time, to call us). When we told her boss what had happened, he snapped, "she's a fool. If she would just answer their questions, they would let her go."
Three years ago, I flew Tel Aviv - London - Boston and back with one of my children. Tel Aviv - London - Tel Aviv was El Al. On the way back, I had to go downstairs in London, identify my bags, open them, and ensure that nothing had been added during the courst of my first flight. They even made me open the box with my brand new computer (on which I am typing this post) because Homeland Security had put tape around the box indicating that they inspected it. When I asked the security personnel why I had to open the computer, she reminded me that "the people who blew up Mike's Place worked at Heathrow." She was right. But the Brits still haven't figured that out: Two weeks ago, it was reported that one of the terrorists who was arrested in connection with the plot to blow up planes flying between London and the US was a Heathrow employee with an all-area access pass.
The second story is a classic ait El Al, and will show you that while they profile terrorists and that helps, they also think. On 17 April 1986, semtex explosives were found in the bag of a pregnant Irishwoman attempting to board an El Al flight. The explosives had been given to her by her Jordanian boyfriend and father of their unborn child Nizar Hindawi, and the incident became known as the Hindawi Affair. The pregnant Irishwoman was obviously not an Arab and the Jordanian boyfriend was not with her on the flight.
Israeli security doesn't need to touch your 'junk' because they have far better methods. Maybe it's time for other countries to learn them.
70% of Americans want Israeli-style airport security
A new survey done by the Langer Group for the Washington Post and ABC News has found that an astounding 70% of Americans want TSA to use the 'profiling' methods used at Israel's Ben Gurion Airport, even though those methods have always been rejected by Americans until now as 'discriminatory.' This is from the first link (the original poll results).
As another tool in airport security efforts, this poll finds broad support for passenger profiling – but with that support heavily dependent on profile elements. Eighty-six percent say personal behavior should be a factor, and 78 percent say a passenger’s travel history should be included in his or her security profile. Fewer, but 55 percent, favor including a passenger’s nationality, and half would include his or her personal appearance.
Other potential elements, however, garner majority opposition as elements to include in a security profile. Fifty-nine percent oppose using a passenger’s race or religion, and 65 percent say sex should not be a factor.
There are differences among groups, with profiling generally winning more support from Republicans, conservatives, men and whites, as well as, naturally, among those who see security as a higher national priority than protecting privacy rights. But there are commonalities as well; racial profiling, for instance, is opposed by six in 10 whites and non-whites alike.
YNet (the third link above) adds:
In the past, Americans vetoed the security system used at Ben Gurion Airport claiming it casts suspicion on one sector in an inclusive fashion, namely, against Arabs and Muslims. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs explained on Monday that the reason US authorities refused to adopt Israeli methods was because "Israel has one international airport and we have 450 of them that makes all the difference".
And yet, it seems that the American public disagrees. A Washington Post and ABC network poll revealed that 70% of Americans support adopting the Israeli profiling system and its implementation in US airports.
I don't buy the 'too many airports' and 'too many passengers' arguments. With what the US government is spending on the full body scanners ($1 billion) it could hire and train a lot of bright Americans - many of whom are out of work anyway - and have airport security that looks for terrorists rather than things, is more effective, and is less personally invasive to ordinary citizens.
The poll also shows that 64% of Americans approve of the full body scanner, a steep decline of 17% in the last week (admittedly that may be somewhat inaccurate since last week's poll was done by CBS), and that more than half of all Americans think that the 'enhanced patdowns' go too far. And frequent fliers are even less supportive of the new measures. This is from the Washington Post (the second link above):
Two factors behind the public's reaction to the new airport-screening procedures: Few Americans fly regularly and their concern about the risk of terrorism on commercial aircraft remains muted.
Just 15 percent of those polled say they travel by plane every few months. Most say they fly less than once a year or never. Sixty-six percent say the risk of terrorism on airplanes is not that great.
Those who say they take flights at least once every year are less supportive of the new scanners than those who rarely or never fly, although most still like the idea. By 54 percent to 43 percent, those who fly at least once annually say the pat-down procedure goes too far.
One area where fliers and non-fliers agree is in their support for use of profiling at airports, where the TSA would single out specific people for extra screening based on available information. About seven in 10 in both groups back the idea.
In nine years, the TSA has not caught a single terrorist nor has it prevented any of the terror attacks that have been attempted against the US in that time. That may say it all.
Here's a report from a Philadelphia television station about the full body scanners.
Let's go to the videotape and then I'll have a comment.
There's one thing they don't tell you here and it's a crucial point. The video implies that the reason you have to go through the scanner is that it's the only way to uncover the likes of Omar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the 'underwear bomber,' who tried to blow up a Northwest Airlines flight over Detroit last Christmas Day. But it's doubtful whether Abdulmutallab would have been caught by a full body scan. And there are much better ways of doing airport security.
Of course, those only work if you're willing to give up your political correctness and use profiling like Israel does. (At that last link, you'll find a video in which an Israeli expert discusses profiling. Note that the way he describes it does not sound racist).
Warning: If you refuse the naked body scan, TSA inspectors will fondle you
This is unbelievable! This is a description (by someone who went through it two weeks ago) of what TSA is now doing to airline passengers in the US who refuse to go through the full body scanners (to which I have spoken out in opposition on many occasions).
Let's go to the videotape.
Anyone think this is better than profiling to find real terrorists and having only Muslims come up as meeting the profile?
A group that protects privacy rights has gone to court to prevent the deployment of full body scanners in airports across the United States. The US government plans to deploy 450 scanners in airports across the United States at a cost of more than $1 billion(!) (Hat Tip: Instapundit).
“The suspicionless search of all airport travelers in this most invasive way violates the reasonableness standard contained in the Fourth Amendment,” Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said Tuesday. He said the devices, costing $1 billion, were designed “to store and record and transmit the unfiltered image of the naked human body. ”
The government is expected to respond next month to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
A test image shown to reporters at Logan International this spring “showed the blurry outline of a female volunteer,” The Associated Press reported at the time. “None of her clothing was visible, nor were her genitals, but the broad contours of her chest and buttocks were. Her face also was blurred.”
The constitutional challenge aside, EPIC also charges that the Department of Homeland Security, in rolling out the devices, violated a host of bureaucratic policies requiring public review, including the Administrative Procedures Act.
What’s more, the group claims the machines, among other things, violate the federal Video Voyeurism Prevent Act, which protects against capturing improper images that violate one’s privacy.
And the scanners are useless anyway.
The so-called “backscatter machines,” however, cannot detect so-called “booty bombs” in which an explosive is inserted into the body.
Travelers can opt out of going through the imaging machines and instead undergo a pat-down, including the crotch area.
I find it amazing that there is no movement in America pushing for profiling passengers is as done in Israel. It's far more successful and far less invasive.
Airport security starts before you get into the building
Even I learned something new from this one.
I've told you all many times how good the security is at Ben Gurion Airport and how it's all done through profiling. This article talks about that too. But I misunderstood the purpose of stopping people before you ever enter the airport complex.
Until today, I thought the idea was that they stop you at a checkpoint that looks like a toll booth after you get off the highway but before you enter the airport complex so that security can see how you react to questions, and pull over anyone who arouses suspicion. Yes, they do pull people over. But there's more to it than that. Nachum Liss of the Airports Authority explained it to 50 'security experts' from around the world this week.
Liss said that heightened screening of passengers and carry-on luggage in international airports has pushed terror organizations to look for other vulnerable areas to attack at airports. He said many of the world's airports do not properly secure their perimeters.
"We need to protect our back door as well," said Liss, offering a look at an advanced technique the Israelis are working on.
The visitors, including experts from the U.S. and Europe, watched as security officers staged a live simulation, stopping three armed "terrorists" who broke through a rear gate.
Then they observed an unmanned vehicle patrolling the airport perimeter by remote control — a technology soon to be introduced at the Israeli airport.
Routine security procedures start far away from the terminal.
Before even entering the airport, all cars are stopped for a security check by armed guards. Cameras scan license plates to match them with a database of suspicious vehicles. Security officials said it's one of the many security filters passengers pass before boarding flights, some of them unknown to the passengers and many others still kept secret.
The Israeli airport's spokesman's unit said the main terminal is equipped with 700 closed-circuit cameras and is fortified against explosions. The large glass wall at the front and even the trash cans inside are bombproof, they said.
I wish I felt as safe in other airports as I do here.
I am an Orthodox Jew - some would even call me 'ultra-Orthodox.' Born in Boston, I was a corporate and securities attorney in New York City for seven years before making aliya to Israel in 1991 (I don't look it but I really am that old :-). I have been happily married to the same woman for thirty-five years, and we have eight children (bli ayin hara) ranging in age from 13 to 33 years and nine grandchildren. Four of our children are married! Before I started blogging I was a heavy contributor on a number of email lists and ran an email list called the Matzav from 2000-2004. You can contact me at: IsraelMatzav at gmail dot com
