Airport Behavior Profile Suggested

The new security consultant at Logan Airport wants to fight terrorists with a technique that some might call ``profiling,'' saying airport security can't coexist with political correctness.

Rafi Ron, former security director for the Israeli Airport Authority, would replace the long lines, inconvenience and expense of passenger screening with something he calls ``pattern behavior recognition.''

Ron will submit a report on March 15 that will recommend having behavior experts walk through the airport to single out suspicious travelers for comprehensive security checks and interviews, which could take up to an hour.

``The basic civil right is protecting human life, and this is the business we're in,'' Ron said Tuesday in an interview with The Associated Press.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/nati...n-Airport.html

---

Is real "security" truly on the way to US airports?

[This message has been edited by doc (edited 02-13-2002).]

Doubtful that any profiling will occur as long as Norman Mineta still has influence; he's said repeatedly since September 11 that random searches, not intelligent searches, are the way to go.

Yes, just look at how profiling has won the war on drugs. Profiles won't work because as soon as a profile is developed, terrorists will use people who don't fit the profile and we'll have nothing but innocent people getting hassled and a false sense of security.

Well, it makes sense considering that's how he seems to have gotten into ofice.

------------------
daniel baker -- [email protected]
Reliable, fast, and unmoderated forums at ITYT.

Wait a minute... Profiles don't work? That explains all the ELAL planes falling out of the sky.

Profiles DO work, but only if they are used. Some of the 9/11 terrorists fit a well known profile, but were never challenged before boarding. Middle Eastern decent, first class one-way, cash ticket, there were flags waving, yet nobody did anything!

You mention innocent people getting hassled, and a false sense of security. Isn't that where we are now? If you include a newfound propensity to over-react, I would say you've hit the nail on the head.

Here�s a hypothetical situation. Let�s say that you have a community where all of the people .. and I mean ALL --- 100% --- come from one of two different ethnic backgrounds. You have 50 percent Middle Eastern Muslims and 50% Pennsylvania Quakers living in this town. Nobody else. You�re the county sheriff. Tom Ridge calls and tells you that someone from this particular town is about to head for a big city where he will attempt to board an airliner with explosives and try to blow it up. Time is very limited. Your departmentonly has the resources to question half the residents of the community. You can either question all of the Muslims, all of the Quakers, or randomly pick among the entire community. What DO you do? You know that ALL acts of airline terrorism were committed by Muslims. You also know that Quakers have taken a vow of non-violence and live a completely passive lifestyle. Who are you going to question? If you tell me that you are going to try to question members from both groups because you don�t want to racially or ethnically profile the Muslims, than I will tell you that you would bear responsibilty if that act of terrorism happened because you didn't profile.

True, the profile may change. But you cannot use the fact that the profile MIGHT change as a reason not to implement it.

An answer to profiling would be to question, search, and CT bags for all passengers. The current system can barely screen all passengers for handguns, not to mention hidden bombs.

With limited resources, you have to use them wisely. To start with, you can give more scrutiny to non-US citizens. An non-Arab Muslim or Arab who are not US citizens are good places to start. (but shouldn't be limited to them).

Random searches don't work. If you scrutinize 10% of the passengers, you will miss the terrorist almost all the time.

Can we stop assuming that everyone who is a terrorist is going to be Muslim or Muslim looking? Richard Reid had a British passport. John Walker had a US passport, as did Tim McVeigh.

If we start "profiling" aka hassling arab looking people, terrorists will just choose white looking people for the job. Not to mention the fact that the FBI believes there are a lot of sleepers in the US who could eventually become US citizens. Or sleepers in other countries with easier citizenship requirements.

I'm not concerned with the political correctness here, I'm concerned with security. Most of the 9/11 terrorists looked like pretty normal guys in the pictures the FBI released of them. They didn't have terrorist written across their foreheads, which people with the "I don't look like a terrorist" mentality seem to expect.

In the future we're at risk of being terrorized by more than bin laden's people. We need to be prepared for anyone to be a terrorist, not just the same people who did it in the past. If we're only going to prevent exactly what happened before from happening again, why don't we put up a big net around the World Trade Center so that planes can't come and knock down the twin towers again?

And look at the other factors they use - one way tickets, paying cash, etc. These are so widely publicized that two year old in Pakistan probably knows about and could get around them.

Whenever you use a profile, you create large gaps in security. What's the point of security if you're going to put huge holes in it?

d

Oh no, not again. The terrorist profile in the past will not necessarily fit the terrorist profile in the future.

Did you folks notice that the former security director of Logan was "Joseph Lawless"? Maybe a job change is a good idea for this guy

Why do you all assume that the profile would never change? You don't think that those who have created the current profile wouldn't continue to research just who is most likely to cause us harm? Instead of inconveniencing all customers, the goal of profile should be to make it difficult for those who want to cause harm to do so....

Richard Anderson, the chief executive of Eagan, Minn.-based Northwest Airlines, complained that the time it takes to get through security checkpoints is too unpredictable, varying widely from one airport to the next.

He said common procedures like checking the insides of passengers shoes takes up precious time that " is not going to make our skies any more secure or any more safe."

But David Stempler, a Washington-based travel agent and lobbyist, said the airlines have nobody to blame but themselves for the current situation. After all, the industry asked the federal government to take over responsibility for airport security in the wake of Sept. 11.

http://www.startribune.com/stories/671/2900494.html