GUWonder

Good luck trying to conceal an ordinary gun in a turban at an security screening checkpoint that has any high degree of effectively interdicting guns.

And to use headgear to conceal explosives for getting beyond the airport security screeners at MEX is a rather lame attempt to smuggle contraband WEI into the passenger cabin. Far easier to check-in first and use body cavities/GI tract for concealment of far more explosives with far less likelihood of discovery of the contraband explosives. And then there are the smuggling networks that can rather easily work MEX to compromise flight security if they so wished to do so.

Boggie Dog

TSA (yes I know this was Mexico) does not require the removal of head wear.

At some point in the past the individual was directed to run their hands of the item and then the hands were swabbed and test by ETD. Not sure if that policy has changed or not.

https://www.tsa.gov/data/guide/DressSmart.html

GUWonder

And what has been the probability that any given Catholic nun passenger at MEX would be required to publicly remove religious headcovering compared to the probability of say a turbaned Sikh passenger being required to publicly remove religious head-covering at MEX? My bet is that the frequency varies based on sexism and racism.

What do the screeners at MEX do to passengers with big so-called "afros" as part of natural hair growth or those with some mega dread-locks?

sw3

However, I don't think that any swabbing or any metal detectors would find weapons or weapon-like objects made of hard non-metal materials. Those should be detected by body scanners, but then what about airports that don't have this kind of equipment.

Boggie Dog

I think that governments should do security the way they think is appropriate and by the laws of that country. I don't know Mexico's screening policies and don't really care to learn.

A Sikh dress in full religious clothing would likely have a kirpan as it is a part of that dress and to be worn at all times. Should any screening authority turn a blind eye to that just because it is part of religious apparel?

chollie

We know - lots and lots of well-documented evidence - that people can conceal astonishing things in body cavities - they get caught at prisons and jails every day.

In one crazy instance, IIRC, the guy had more than one cellphone and a charger concealed in his posterior.

No airport has the equipment and processes to detect these things without a physical cavity search.

Do you feel uncomfortable knowing that there's a long history of people smuggling contraband in their body cavities and unless they're carrying explosives AND were sloppy AND get selected for a swabbing, airport security isn't going to discover it.

The recent incident in Somalia, coupled with multiple US instances of gangs of TSOs working together to smuggle contraband guns, money and drugs has only reinforced my personal belief - the greatest threat to my safety is from the slack security surrounding TSOs and airport employees.

YMMV.

GUWonder

Barking up the wrong tree, as a kirpan has nothing to do with this incident.

A "kirpan" used by frequent-flying American Sikhs like Waris Ahluwalia aren't actual kirpans when flying on planes or going to any other place where knives of the sort are prohibited. He had no prohibited kirpan nor any other prohibited weapon. Last I checked, a turban is not a prohibited weapon -- and it is not prohibited in Mexico, nor is it prohibited in the US, as such when flying.

Boggie Dog

The point was should the screening authority turn a blind eye (not screen fully) just because the person is dressed in religious clothing?

sw3

Not likely that on a commercial scale, but efficient international air traffic requires that authorities from one country trust those of the countries they are linked to as well as the individual airlines; if passengers from Country A to Country B start to show up frequently at Country B with prohibited items just because Country A security didn't bother to ask passengers simple things such as taking off their jackets, coats, hats and shoes, or emptying their pockets, it's likely that Country B will decide they can't trust Country A's screening procedures and staff and will take action on that.

GUWonder

They don't, and kirpans are already restricted when it comes to air travel in the two countries of relevance to this trip of Waris Ahluwalia. But screening authorities being paranoid about religious headwear and big hair to the point of denying a private screening and use of the same machine screening use as that applicable to the rest of the body of most other passengers is rather ridiculous on its face if securing the plane against contraband WEIs is the objective more than some public "security" theater.

Section 107

sheesh, so much argument that misses the forest for trees. This is not about policy and procedures - such things are established and settled, even in Mexico.

This is a simple case of airline employees either not being trained in, or failing to implement, the standard procedures in place for such a situation as this (swab pax's hands after running them across the apparel items or provide screening in an private area.

I have not seen anything that provides credible insight into whether they did not do it because of bigotry although it is certainly possible. I suspect they 1) were simply not well trained, 2) mostly forgot whatever training they did have, 3) have had little or not experience with such a situation, and 4) got "nervous" because of the SSSS designation and just really screwed the pooch.

WillCAD

So, then, since your pants and underwear can be used to conceal anything, including weapons and explosives that can't be detected by metal detectors, you would be okay with an order to remove your pants and underwear?

Of course, to prevent embarrassment, you'll be allowed to go to a locked private room with several screeners when you take your pants off. After all, the security of the airport, the aircraft, the crew and the passengers should trump every kind of personal belief, religious or not.

Or, how about your toddler's diaper. Diapers are bulky - you could hide ANYTHING in there! So you'd be okay with airport screeners ordering the removal of your toddler's diaper to check for weapons and explosives, right? Step back, ma'am, if you touch your child you'll be arrested for interfering with the screening process! She touched him! Get into that glass box, ma'am, we're going to screen you again.

The "anything is okay in the name of security" attitude is a despicable, cowardly reaction to an overblown threat. Yes, there are genuine bad guys who have genuinely attacked airplanes and killed people, but no, I would not feel differently if my wife, mother, father, or child were killed on 9/11.

You don't defeat the bad guys by doing exactly what the bad guys want you to do out of cowardice.

chollie

Frankly, if TSA was really that concerned, there would be random cavity searches.

Boggie Dog

Here ya go.

http://www.bodyorificescanner.com/us...oss-ii-5-zone/

GUWonder

If the TSA had those and had to deal with all the alarms that went off on passengers, there would be some massive PR headaches for the TSA after a series of body orifice "resolution" searches that resulted in no finding of contraband WEIs.