PDA

View Full Version : Someone should make a page....




malkusm
11-24-2010, 07:30 AM
...which takes 10 prominent/semi-prominent people and lines their pictures up next to each other, with the title "Which one is Muslim?"

Since Muslims come from Asia, Africa, and Europe in addition to the Middle East, I think this would shut everyone up who discusses "profiling" as the answer to the TSA problem. If we should just "profile" Muslims, but you can't pick a Muslim out of a crowd, how's that going to work?

Of course, the emphasis at that point needs to be placed on the fact that taking rights away from any particular person should not be tolerated.

teacherone
11-24-2010, 07:34 AM
most who are discussing profiling are not talking about racial profiling.

they are talking about the israeli method-- not looking for weapons but looking for certain personality and behavioral traits (nervousness, sweat, avoiding eye contact) and others peculiarities (cash for a ticket, last name, one way ticket etc ) in order to discover the terrorist, not the weapon.

this would hopefully exempt grandmas, three year olds, and nuns from the strip search.

malkusm
11-24-2010, 07:40 AM
most who are discussing profiling are not talking about racial profiling.

they are talking about the israeli method-- not looking for weapons but looking for certain personality and behavioral traits (nervousness, sweat, avoiding eye contact) and others peculiarities (cash for a ticket, last name, one way ticket etc ) in order to discover the terrorist, not the weapon.

this would hopefully exempt grandmas, three year olds, and nuns from the strip search.

That's not what I've been hearing; specifically, if you watched Bill O'Reilly last night or read any of the comments on Fox News' webpage, the focus of many has been on the Islamic faith rather than clues that could be classified as "probable cause" for a search.

teacherone
11-24-2010, 07:43 AM
That's not what I've been hearing; specifically, if you watched Bill O'Reilly last night or read any of the comments on Fox News' webpage, the focus of many has been on the Islamic faith rather than clues that could be classified as "probable cause" for a search.

hmmm.. wouldn't know don't watch o'reilly.

seen a lot of discussion about the "israeli method" lately though.

basically, agents trained in behavioral psychology + prior intelligence gathering on passengers = less invasive and more effective security.

specsaregood
11-24-2010, 07:44 AM
That's not what I've been hearing; specifically, if you watched Bill O'Reilly last night or read any of the comments on Fox News' webpage, the focus of many has been on the Islamic faith rather than clues that could be classified as "probable cause" for a search.

Perhaps it is because those people have an ulterior motive, which is to really keep the current TSA system/rules in place?

specsaregood
11-24-2010, 07:45 AM
seen a lot of discussion about the "israeli method" lately though.

basically, agents trained in behavioral psychology + prior intelligence gathering on passengers = less invasive and more effective security.

right and they don't use these fancy scanners or penis fondling methods.

Elwar
11-24-2010, 07:49 AM
I'm thinking that those who are jumping on the bandwagon to oppose the TSA scanners who are otherwise just fine with the Patriot Act are just hoping that they'll be able to walk through with no problems while brown people will be strip searched and flogged.

The real solution is not giving up your 2nd Amendment rights to bear arms.

Yieu
11-24-2010, 07:50 AM
basically, agents trained in behavioral psychology + prior intelligence gathering on passengers = less invasive and more effective security.

That doesn't sound less invasive or more free... intelligence gathering means we'd have to be spied on, and "agents trained in behavioral psychology" sounds like psyops agents staring you down, which doesn't sound like fun either.

teacherone
11-24-2010, 07:55 AM
you make your own opinion. i'll wager that if airport security were privatized it would look something like this since it is so effective.


From the archives, Toronto Star, 30 Dec 2009 (http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/744199---israelification-high-security-little-bother): . . . Despite facing dozens of potential threats each day, the security set-up at Israel’s largest hub, Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion Airport, has not been breached since 2002, when a passenger mistakenly carried a handgun onto a flight. How do they manage that?


“The first thing you do is to look at who is coming into your airport,” said Sela.
The first layer of actual security that greets travellers at Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion International Airport is a roadside check. All drivers are stopped and asked two questions: How are you? Where are you coming from?


“Two benign questions. The questions aren’t important. The way people act when they answer them is,” Sela said.


Officers are looking for nervousness or other signs of “distress” — behavioural 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 behaviour. So what kind of privacy am I really stepping on when I’m doing this?”
Once you’ve parked your car or gotten off your bus, you pass through the second and third security perimeters.


Armed guards outside the terminal are trained to observe passengers as they move toward the doors, again looking for odd behaviour. At Ben Gurion’s half-dozen entrances, another layer of security are watching. At this point, some travellers will be randomly taken aside, and their person and their luggage run through a magnometer.


“This is to see that you don’t have heavy metals on you or something that looks suspicious,” said Sela.


You are now in the terminal. As you approach your airline check-in desk, a trained interviewer takes your passport and ticket. They ask a series of questions: Who packed your luggage? Has it left your side?


“The whole time, they are looking into your eyes — which is very embarrassing. But this is one of the ways they figure out if you are suspicious or not. It takes 20, 25 seconds,” said Sela.


Lines are staggered. People are not allowed to bunch up into inviting targets for a bomber who has gotten this far.


At the check-in desk, your luggage is scanned immediately in a purpose-built area. Sela plays devil’s advocate — what if you have escaped the attention of the first four layers of security, and now try to pass a bag with a bomb in it?


“I once put this question to Jacques Duchesneau (the former head of the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority): say there is a bag with play-doh in it and two pens stuck in the play-doh. That is ‘Bombs 101′ to a screener. I asked Ducheneau, ‘What would you do?’ And he said, ‘Evacuate the terminal.’ And I said, ‘Oh. My. God.’


“Take Pearson. Do you know how many people are in the terminal at all times? Many thousands. Let’s say I’m (doing an evacuation) without panic — which will never happen. But let’s say this is the case. How long will it take? Nobody thought about it. I said, ‘Two days.’”


A screener at Ben-Gurion has a pair of better options.


First, the screening area is surrounded by contoured, blast-proof glass that can contain the detonation of up to 100 kilos of plastic explosive. Only the few dozen people within the screening area need be removed, and only to a point a few metres away.
Second, all the screening areas contain ‘bomb boxes’. If a screener spots a suspect bag, he/she is trained to pick it up and place it in the box, which is blast proof. A bomb squad arrives shortly and wheels the box away for further investigation.


“This is a very small simple example of how we can simply stop a problem that would cripple

one of your airports,” Sela said.


Five security layers down: you now finally arrive at the only one which Ben-Gurion Airport shares with Pearson — the body and hand-luggage check.
“But here it is done completely, absolutely 180 degrees differently than it is done in North America,” Sela said.
“First, it’s fast — there’s almost no line. That’s because they’re not looking for liquids, they’re not looking at your shoes. They’re not looking for everything they look for in North America. They just look at you,” said Sela. “Even today with the heightened security in North America, they will check your items to death. But they will never look at you, at how you behave. They will never look into your eyes … and that’s how you figure out the bad guys from the good guys.”


That’s the process — six layers, four hard, two soft. The goal at Ben-Gurion is to move fliers from the parking lot to the airport lounge in a maximum of 25 minutes.

This doesn’t begin to cover the off-site security net that failed so spectacularly in targeting would-be Flight 253 bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab — intelligence. In Israel, Sela said, a coordinated intelligence gathering operation produces a constantly evolving series of threat analyses and vulnerability studies.
“There is absolutely no intelligence and threat analysis done in Canada or the United States,” Sela said. “Absolutely none.”
But even without the intelligence, Sela maintains, Abdulmutallab would not have gotten past Ben Gurion Airport’s behavioural profilers.
So. Eight years after 9/11, why are we still so reactive, so un-Israelified?
Working hard to dampen his outrage, Sela first blames our leaders, and then ourselves.


“We have a saying in Hebrew that it’s much easier to look for a lost key under the light, than to look for the key where you actually lost it, because it’s dark over there. That’s exactly how (North American airport security officials) act,” Sela said. “You can easily do what we do. You don’t have to replace anything. You have to add just a little bit — technology, training. But you have to completely change the way you go about doing airport security. And that is something that the bureaucrats have a problem with. They are very well enclosed in their own concept.”
And rather than fear, he suggests that outrage would be a far more powerful spur to provoking that change.


“Do you know why Israelis are so calm? We have brutal terror attacks on our civilians and still, life in Israel is pretty good. The reason is that people trust their defence forces, their police, their response teams and the security agencies. They know they’re doing a good job. You can’t say the same thing about Americans and Canadians. They don’t trust anybody,” Sela said. “But they say, ‘So far, so good’. Then if something happens, all hell breaks loose and you’ve spent eight hours in an airport. Which is ridiculous. Not justifiable
“But, what can you do? Americans and Canadians are nice people and they will do anything because they were told to do so and because they don’t know any different.”

malkusm
11-24-2010, 07:59 AM
you make your own opinion. i'll wager that if airport security were privatized it would look something like this since it is so effective.

I've said that I have no issue with this, as it's based on probable cause.

Many people, when they hear "profiling," equate the term to "racial" profiling, or profiling on a physical characteristic. I don't have time to look up the countless examples that I've seen of people insisting that the Muslims are the terrorists, etc. This is what I take issue with, and I think that something like what I describe in the OP would be effective in countering that.

Yieu
11-24-2010, 08:16 AM
I imagine that if they start asking questions to people who don't like to interact with "authority figures" and who like the 5th Amendment, those sorts of innocent people could get detained and questioned for a long time even though they aren't a threat. That might be a flaw in such a system.

newbitech
11-24-2010, 08:57 AM
I imagine that if they start asking questions to people who don't like to interact with "authority figures" and who like the 5th Amendment, those sorts of innocent people could get detained and questioned for a long time even though they aren't a threat. That might be a flaw in such a system.

the most important thing I read in that article up there is that israeli's trust their defense forces and cops. American's don't.

I say bingo right there. All my life I have watched cops disrespect the shit out of anyone and everyone they have come across. I'm not surprised in the slightest that American's are perceived from the outside as not trusting their defense forces, aka cops or TSA agents.

These fuckers will do anything and everything asked of them and not bat an eye at the chance to humiliate and basically stomp on American's rights.

Slutter McGee
11-24-2010, 09:05 AM
The answer is pretty simple. Look at somebodies passport. If they have been to Yemen lately, give them extra scrutiny. Profile based on somebodies travels and actions, not their skin color or religion.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

oyarde
11-24-2010, 08:41 PM
The answer is pretty simple. Look at somebodies passport. If they have been to Yemen lately, give them extra scrutiny. Profile based on somebodies travels and actions, not their skin color or religion.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

A big part of what they do is what you suggest . Where are you from , where have you been , what were you doing there kind of thing .

Yieu
11-25-2010, 03:19 AM
A big part of what they do is what you suggest . Where are you from , where have you been , what were you doing there kind of thing .

It's not anyone's business where I'm from, where I have been, what I was doing there. I shouldn't have to explain myself to anyone. We have the 4th and 5th Amendments.

teacherone
11-25-2010, 06:58 AM
It's not anyone's business where I'm from, where I have been, what I was doing there. I shouldn't have to explain myself to anyone. We have the 4th and 5th Amendments.

a private company could legally and rightfully require you disclose this information before boarding their aircraft.

this would in no way violate the 4th or 5th amendments but would rather be a condition of completing a contract-- you boarding their aircraft.

Yieu
11-25-2010, 07:52 AM
a private company could legally and rightfully require you disclose this information before boarding their aircraft.

this would in no way violate the 4th or 5th amendments but would rather be a condition of completing a contract-- you boarding their aircraft.

Some have an aversion to being listed in any system that tracks and monitors you, or builds a profile on you. It just seems like a step in the wrong direction, against privacy.

Thomas
11-25-2010, 08:19 AM
great idea malkusm!

legion
11-25-2010, 08:42 AM
The answer is pretty simple. Look at somebodies passport. If they have been to Yemen lately, give them extra scrutiny. Profile based on somebodies travels and actions, not their skin color or religion.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

OH, and now you're expecting TSA "agents" to know geography?

teacherone
11-25-2010, 10:03 AM
Some have an aversion to being listed in any system that tracks and monitors you, or builds a profile on you. It just seems like a step in the wrong direction, against privacy.

which is why airport security should be privatized and not centralized in the government's hands.

then you could pick your airline based on your risk aversion and desire for privacy.