from Liberty Maven:
How to Cook a Frog – A Short History of Airport (in)Security
November 18th, 2010 10:22 pm
by Marc Gallagher
Published in Civil Liberties, Commentary, Liberty, privacy, rule of law, terrorism
1 Comment
By Craig Hensler
They say, “To cook a frog, don’t toss it into boiling water, put it into cool water and turn the heat up slowly”.
Our government would tell us that for the right (they call it a privilege) to fly on a commercial flight, we must submit either to a dose of radiation and provide a naked rendering of our body or submit to a government groping. . . or both. Either option, would be considered a crime if committed without a claimed “government authority”. The history of airline/airport security for the past forty years clearly shows that security is not the goal
Although airline hijackings have existed since, at least, the 1930′s, they didn’t “come into vogue” until the 1960′s with demands from hijackers to be taken to Cuba or some other political venue or for the payment of a ransom. This changed in 1970 when three airliners were hijacked by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. The aircraft were forced to fly to Jordan where the passengers were ultimately released and the aircraft were destroyed. Today, this would be classified as a major “terrorist” event. In reality, they were political hijackings, which occurred only because they were allowed to occur. In 1970, as today, the existing security measures did not address the problem nor were they meant to correct the problem. At best, they were (and are) all theater meant to provide a sense of security.
Each of these hijackings could have been prevented – at minimal cost, without government involvement and without the sacrifice of personal liberties. Simple: lock and reinforce the cockpit door. Although, we’ve all been herded through metal detectors, emptied our pockets and had our bags x-rayed, nobody thought to “lock the door” for more than thirty years; until after 9/11.
IS ADDITIONAL SECURITY MEANT TO MAKE US MORE SECURE?
Prior to 1970, most passengers were either not screened or were screened by magnetometers. The magnetometers may have offered a sense of security but in reality, they offered no security. Magnetometers will not detect non-ferrous metals; knives as well as aluminum-frame handguns could walk right through.
With the development of “second-generation” metal detectors (those that detected any metal and which remain in use today), this gap could have been plugged. This equipment was/is sensitive enough that it can almost count the number of teeth on your zipper or the number of fillings in your mouth. Could, but didn’t. Anyone who flew prior to 911 probably remembers that you could walk through a metal detector with your belt on, keys in your pocket or with a pack of cigarettes. Yes, cigarettes; because of the foil wrapper, a pack of cigarettes would have the same signature as a small handgun and yet, you could walk right through. Worse yet, the government knew, the airlines knew, the airports knew and security professionals knew that the metal detectors were intentionally designed to ignore the area below the calf. Many shoes have metal toes or metal arch shanks and they didn’t want to “inconvenience” us by having us remove our shoes – that is until Richard Reid, the “Shoe Bomber” in 2001. Simply put, until 2001 if you wanted a weapon on a plane you could just put it in your boot. We were told that if we queued-up like cattle, we would be secure; but 9/11 happened, with metal weapons. Were we more secure or was this all about perceptions?
THE UNDERWEAR BOMBER & ADVANCED SCREENING or “LET ME LOOK IN YOUR PANTS”
In December, 2009 Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab boarded a plane in Lagos, Nigeria , ultimately bound for Detroit. More than a month prior to the flight, his father reported to the CIA that his son held “extreme religious views”. He had no passport, had had trained in Yemen. and his name was on the Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment. Nevertheless, he was allowed to fly, was not subjected to secondary screening and US Intelligence even requested that his visa not be revoked. Somewhere over Detroit he attempted to detonate a bomb sewn into his underwear. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano later said that “the system worked.” Really?
Within days, former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff was making the media rounds promoting new x-ray scanners for a company in which he has a financial interest. The machines were paid for with federal “stimulus” money and have never been medically reviewed. Scientists have routinely reported that x-ray screenings WILL result in increased skin cancer. Amazingly, US Intelligence could have stopped the Underwear Bomber but didn’t. The Underwear Bomber flew TO the US and most countries do not require this “advanced” screening. So even with this invasive screening in place, within the United States, his attempt would not have been prevented. Italy, after testing, has abandoned the equipment stating that it is ineffective. So, why here? Does this make us safe?
Where do we go from here? How much are we willing to endure in the name of security? There’s already been at least one terrorist bombing where the bomb was hidden in a body cavity of the bomber. Based on the government’s modus operandi. . . event = response. . . are body cavity searches next? Are we ready for that? Don’t count it out. They’re already irradiating us, seeing us naked and sexually assaulting us.
Bottom line? If someone wants to take down an aircraft they can still do it. People are screened but parcels aren’t. And, routinely parcels are loaded onto commercial aircraft. If someone wants to use an aircraft as a “weapon”, why bother with a commercial flight – private and charter flights aren’t screened. At best, we’re being queued-up, irradiated, viewed naked, groped, questioned and our rights violated for perceptions only, not security. Theater, at our expense.
We’re the frogs. Do you feel the heat?
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. – Benjamin Franklin
———————————————————-
Craig Hensler is a co-developer of second-generation weapon detection systems, has screened international flights and conducted demonstrations for US air carriers, the FAA, New York Port Authority and US Sky Marshals.
No comments:
Post a Comment