Someone walked the wrong way through a gate at Newark Airport and the Transportation Security Administration shut terminal C down for six hours. Someone put honey in their checked luggage at Bakersfield Airport and TSA shut the airport down for several hours. A dog barked when he sniffed an airline-owned suitcase and TSA evacuated the Minneapolis airport. Meanwhile, a kid in St. Louis loses his Christmas present because it looks a little like plastic explosive.
All of these are overreactions to the “Christmas bomber.” As many have pointed out, no one has any idea whether these increased security measures make sense — and many others doubt that they do.
Curiously, the Obama administration has made no secret of the fact that it thinks air travel is environmentally unsound (at least, air travel for everyone else — Obama still flies in his jumbo jets). If the administration wanted to reduce air travel, making it more uncertain through unexpected airport closures would be a powerful way to do it. And one of the biggest arguments made for high-speed rail is that, while slower and far more expensive than flying, at least travelers can avoid having to pass through security (until the first train is bombed).
But there is no real reason why people should have to put up with these lengthy security measures. As an article in the Toronto Star points out, security worries are far greater in Israel than in the U.S., yet screening is much faster and lines much shorter. That’s because Israeli security doesn’t focus on shoes and toothpaste and laptops, but on evaluating individuals by their behaviors and reactions to simple questions. And if they do find a problem, they don’t shut the airport down, but confine it to a secure (and bomb-proof) area.
Unfortunately, as the Washington Post‘s Anne Applebaum observes, no one in the TSA has an incentive to fix the problems. The airlines and airports do have such an incentive, but since we nationalized security, we’ve separated power from responsibility. And, like so many other government programs that grab power without taking responsibility, the result is high costs and tiny benefits.
If the terrorists’ goal was to foment chaos in the West, their victory must taste sweet indeed.
Agreed Mike,
But is America really ready to profile, search, pat down, disturb, slow down, etc, people on the basis of their skin color (which is essentially what happens in Israel)? American style civil liberties or Israeli style security, the choice is ours I suppose.
I’m also trying to figure out if the Antiplanner is suggesting we replace TSA with the likes of Blackwater. Do private international security companies really have a better track record than publicly operated ones?
bennett,
I’m going to sound like a bloodthirsty bastard here, when that’s not really my intent, but the systemic solution to the travel security issue lies in eliminating the threat. That means we need to either shit or get off the pot. We need to either eradicate (openly and alone) every Islamic country, or we need to sever ties, bring the boys back home, and leave those countries alone.
Before the local lefties get their panties in a bind, no, I do not hate Moslems. To the contrary: I respect them, because they seem to have no misapprehensions about the dimensions of this conflict, while most Westerners seem to think the Moslems are not to be taken seriously. They are a worthy adversary and it’s time we started treating them as such instead of insulting and angering them by treating them like a charity case. In their minds, Islam works, and we’re idiots for not comprehending that. If we would just wake up and convert to Islam, everything would be just fine.
Of course they hate us — if some nation treated us the way we treat the Moslems, we would hate that nation too. And right now, because we don’t seem ready to recognize that the Moslems can win if they keep doing what they’re doing, you’re going to see more absurdity like that cited in today’s post.
Antiplanner,
Years ago while I worked in China, I had a nerve racking experience when traveling to another country, where a bunch of Egyptian men got on board the plane and proceeded to make life miserable for everyone on that flight from the moment we were waiting in line to the moment we got off the plane.
I was web surfing the other day when I came across a blog entry written by airline pilot Randy Plante. For those of you who are too lazy, or don’t want to bother with reading what Mr. Plante has to say about flying and terrorism, I can summarize what he says as follows:
1) Just because the taxpayer sucking DHS Insecurity apparatus, whose FY 2010 budget request for Homeland Security is a petty $55 billion, is too scared or too politically correct to profile possible terrorists, doesn’t mean that YOU can’t profile them on your own! Practically all airline terrorist acts have been committed by – surprise, surprise – Arabic or Middle Eastern men between the ages of 18-40. When you are at the airport and about to check in, start looking at your fellow passengers are on the plane. If you note one or more such men, then start talking to your fellow passengers and the airline crew about them.
2) If you notice such men, look to see if they are doing something suspicious and tell the crew, if in flight.
3) If you notice such men, look for other able bodied adult men to be nearby in the event that you need to do something.
4) If some excitement does break out, then if these guys start heading for the cockpit, do everything in your worldly power to make sure they don’t get there! If they try to do something like what the “Crotch Bomber” did, then do what one of the passengers did and jump on that SOB and make sure he doesn’t light up the ignition source.
To hell with political correctness or complaints about “flying while Arab”. It’s your life that’s at stake! The Israelis are handling this the right way.
Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was Arabic? Last I checked he was from Nigeria which means he was most likely Yoruba or Igbo (sorry in advance for any misspellings or getting the form wrong).
Kafeel Ahmed was from India. Muslim but not Arabic nor “Middle Eastern”.
Bilal Abdullah was born in England. Is there scientific evidence that something in the DNA of Arabic people makes them commit terrorism, even when born 1/3 of the way across the globe from the Middle East?
OKC was not carried out by Arabic men. It was terrorism though. Is there evidence that non-arabic men will not and can not carry out terrorism via an airplane?
Randy Plante may mean well but he’s full of a bunch of bullshit. The problem isn’t the hint of racism but that the claims and conclusions are irrational. Yes, profiling is not wrong. Yes, profiling makes sense. It is NOT true that airline terrorism was committed by Arabs(for example, the first airline hijacking occurred in South American by Peruvian rebels). Even if it was, it would be incorrect for the profiling to be based on “18-40 + flying while arab” because there is nothing limiting it that; that’s just an arbitrary load of crap Plante pulled out of ass to help himself feel knowledgeable. His ignorance as inexcusable. As a pilot he should be quite aware of the Sikh terrorists that killed hundreds when they bombed an Air India flight. He should be also aware of the Korean Air flight bombed by North Korea. And there are others… but yes, if you stick your head up your ass with blinders and say “it’s always mulism and arabs” and not acknowledge anything else, well, then yes, it always has been. **ROLLEYES** But, like I said, even that doesn’t matter becaue ther is no reason why others wouldn’t go the same route.
Today it’s Nigerian trying to blow himself up on an airplane. Tomorrow it’s Alaskan separatists with a shoulder launched missle. The TSA’s wasted money but Plante’s recommendations are just as worthless.
Neal,
I think you and Plante make Mike’s point in #1 perfectly. Here is another question? Where do we draw the line? While I’m in an airport am I to size up every non-white person and try to determine how I will tackle them? It’s not a sarcastic question. If we are going to profile people where do we draw the line? All non-whites? People with beards? It seems simple… “just suspicious looking people,” but it’s not because we all have different opinions/fears. Plus how hard is it for a forgin terroist to put on some nike’s, levi’s and ray bans?
Again, at what point have the terrorist won by making us do seemingly irrational things (i.e continuing with the TSA model or living in a state of cat-like readiness)? Is living in fear the only way?
It should be noted that while a Nigerian guy tried to blow up a plane, his father tried to warn us about it. Maybe that should clue you in that not everybody in foreign countries are monsters.
“We need to either eradicate (openly and alone) every Islamic country”
Haha, we are not at war with Islam. Racial profiling does not work whether you are at an airport or pulling people over in a typical American city. The majority of Muslims in this country and around the world have no desire to blow shit up.
I agree with AP. I’ve been confounded by the complete lack of any pundit demanding security be placed where it is most likely to be done effectively: with the airlines.
If an airline fails to protect its customers, they’ll go bankrupt within months of an attack. The profit incentive will motivate them to find security solutions that are efficient in cost and time. The best solutions will quickly become standard as other airlines adopt those practices.
In fact, this is something airlines should be doing already and advertising their security. The TSA could be disbanded once airlines voluntarily stepped up.
If I were Southwest (or whichever), I’d advertise the hell out of our Safety Record right now.
Spokker,
“We need to either eradicate (openly and alone) every Islamic countryâ€
Haha, we are not at war with Islam. Racial profiling does not work whether you are at an airport or pulling people over in a typical American city. The majority of Muslims in this country and around the world have no desire to blow shit up.
If you’re going to quote me, finish the context. We need to either wipe them out — or not. It’s this hem-haw, half-assed, trying to have our cake and eat it too that is causing the problem. It’s the idea that we can treat them as kindof-sortof an enemy and kindof-sortof a friend.
The Koran clearly commands all Moslems to kill infidels unless the infidel renders the alms levy. In other words, submit, convert, or die. A rational policy approach takes the enemy at their word. If a secular Joe Punchclock type of Moslem is truly the predominant type, then either an outright attack or a complete withdrawal will still be the correct play, while Bush’s “spreading democracy” remains a blunder. Recall how things ended for Japan in 1945. For all we know, militaristic Islam only thrives to the degree it does because we haven’t had enough sack to call its bluff — or, alternately, the rank and file of Islam really are true believers, and we’ve been unwisely granting them quarter. By not attacking full-on and not withdrawing, we are screwing it up both ways. In fact, if we withdrew completely, our way forward would be chosen from among a different slate of options more appealing than the present course.
And to preempt the other inevitable ad-hominem… yes, I have served in the U.S. military, and would gladly do so again if called upon.
“The Koran clearly commands all Moslems to kill infidels unless the infidel renders the alms levy.”
If you took every religion literally they are all pretty stupid and crazy. Many people have been killed in the name of Jesus Christ by radicals.
Can the Antiplanner or anyone else speak to whether or not airline security in Israel is handled by private companies or by the state?
Spokker said: “The Koran clearly commands all Moslems to kill infidels unless the infidel renders the alms levy.â€
If you took every religion literally they are all pretty stupid and crazy. Many people have been killed in the name of Jesus Christ by radicals.
THWM: Yes, though most Christians aren’t exactly leading an Amish life style either.
Spokker and Highwayman,
Remember you are discussing this with an atheist, so “b-b-but Christianity…” is not a compelling argument.
The difference is that there is such a thing as a liberal or conservative Christian. John Kerry’s public disputes with the Catholic church over abortion doctrine come to mind. Islam leaves no room for such distinctions: submit to the will of Allah as expressed in the Koran or you are kuffar. It is very difficult to recognize how all-encompassing this is when you are thinking about religion from a Western perspective. Islam does not separate church and state, nor church and family or church and social interaction. All are one and the same in Islam. Those secular individuals in the West who call themselves “Moslems” are not considered Moslems by the mideastern adherents who do follow the Koran, and who are openly at war with the West. Kerry’s “heresy” would be unthinkable in Iran or Saudi Arabia. He would be brought in line with the imams’ position or he would be executed.
Without meaning to be snarky about it, your perspectives demonstrate part of my point about why they hate us. You don’t even care to understand what they believe and why. It is beneath notice to you. If you took the time to learn the doctrines and practices of Islam as they truly are, you would not be so dismissive about the Moslem peril. I understand who and what they are, and I respect the threat they represent. When will you do the same?
As to the Christian threat, it is incredibly insidious and will have to be dealt with sooner or later, but it is not a mere cancer that can be excised or tumor that can be amputated away. Christianity infests the West like a systemic disease, and must be cured through a wide-ranging application of reason.
Addendum: Just so we understand exactly what we’re discussing, here are some uplifting passages from the Koran:
– Koran, chapter V, verse 33-34 : “The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His Prophet and perpetrate corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land”
– Koran, chapter V, verse 51 : “O believers, do not hold Jews and Christians as your allies. They are allies of one another; and anyone who makes them his friends is surely one of them; and Allah does not guide the unjust.”
– Koran, chapter VIII, verse 12 : “And the Lord said to the angels: I am with you. Go and strengthen the faithful. I shall fill the hearts of infidels with terror. So smite them on their necks and every joint.”
– Koran, chapter VIII, verse 57 : “If you meet them in battle, inflict on them such a defeat as would be a lesson for those who come after them.”
– Koran, chapter VIII, verse 58 : “Prepare against them whatever army and cavalry you can muster, that you may strike terror in (the hearths of) the enemies of Allah and your own, and others besides them not known to you, but known to Allah.”
– Koran, chapter VIII, verse 65 : O Prophet, urge the believers to fight… So, If there are twenty steadfast men among you, they will beat two hundred, if there are a hundred, they will beat a thousand of the unbelievers, for they are men with no understanding.
– Koran, chapter IX, verse 5 : “Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the unbelievers wheresover ye find them, and take the captive, or besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every likely place. But if they repent and fulfill their devotional obligations, and pay the zagat (special tax), then let them go their way. Lo! Allah is forgiving and, merciful.”
– Koran, chapter VIII, verse 111: “Allah has verily bought the souls and possessions of the faithful in exchange for a promise of Paradise. They fight in the cause of Allah, and kill and are killed.”
– Koran, chapter XLV11, verse 4: “When you crash with the unbelievers, strike off their heads and, when you have laid them down, bind them tight”.
Emphasis on the most frequently quoted surah.
“He would be brought in line with the imams’ position or he would be executed.”
The citizens of a country do not necessarily feel the same way as their government. The Pakistani Youth Movement, for example, wishes to quell extremism in the country.
If you say that we should eradicate the extremist governments of Islamic countries, I wholeheartedly agree with you. But I do not think we are at war with the people who live in these countries as they do not all feel the same way as those who are portrayed in American media.
“B-b-b-but Christianity” is a compelling argument, because it seems like, at least to me, the majority of people who call themselves Christians in the U.S. really aren’t following the Christian doctrine literally despite the fact that the Bible has some wacky, fucked up shit in it. I believe the same situation can and does exist in the Islamic world.
While I do not believe in any of this bullshit, I do think the case can be made that both The Bible and The Koran were man’s interpretation or recording of God or Allah’s words, and therefore could have been tainted by man. This belief allows a justification for extracting the good parts of these scriptures and throwing away the rest.
Spokker,
While I do not believe in any of this bullshit, I do think the case can be made that both The Bible and The Koran were man’s interpretation or recording of God or Allah’s words, and therefore could have been tainted by man.
That case cannot be made because both God and Allah are entirely make-believe, and all scripture is man-made bullshit. All religions are absolutely wrong, and stand in opposition to rational thought. But that’s another argument for another day.
I know it’s make-believe. However, that scenario can possibly be pounded through their whacked-out skulls so everybody around the world might calm the fuck down for once.
If anti-terrorism officials were to use profiles to help identify potential terrorists they should include well-educated Muslims such as engineers (Osama bin Laden, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab) and doctors (Major Nidal Hasan, Humam Khalil Abu-Mulal al-Balawi). It is probably a myth that poor, uneducated people are more likely to be terrorists. They are more concerned with finding their next meal.
I agree with using the Israeli methods.
One of my interests is Christian apologetics and evangelism. I don’t like some of the antiChristian comments here, but it seems off-topic to Randal’s intent, so I will save further religious comments for a more relevant thread.
God bless you all.
AntiChristian Comments…the one thing shared by dems and libertarians. Christians…clearly good for something.
All organized religion is a cancer upon the world.
All organized religion is a cancer upon the world.
I disagree – rather the issue is best addressed thus:
“Lord! save us from your followers!”
DS
Mike said: Spokker,
While I do not believe in any of this bullshit, I do think the case can be made that both The Bible and The Koran were man’s interpretation or recording of God or Allah’s words, and therefore could have been tainted by man.
That case cannot be made because both God and Allah are entirely make-believe, and all scripture is man-made bullshit. All religions are absolutely wrong, and stand in opposition to rational thought. But that’s another argument for another day.
THWM: Though Mike, your pseudo libertarian political beliefs are bullshit & are not rational.
For that matter Communists hated God too.
Cosmology design argument for the existence of God –
Define “God” as an eternal being who created the universe as a place for us to live.
Things that have a beginning have a cause.
The universe began about 14 billion years ago, as measured by different astronomical methods, therefore the universe had a cause.
In order for life to exist the universe must have many attributes fine-tuned to very precise tolerances, beyond human capability to achieve. See http://www.reasons.org/design-evidences-cosmos-1998
Therefore the universe was created by God and God exists. See also http://www.existence-of-god.com/index.html
Alternative arguments from atheists –
The universe is eternal and had no beginning.
There were an infinite number of possible universes and we were infinitely lucky enough to have the one where we could live.
It takes more faith to be an atheist because the science and mathematics are on the side of God.
Sorry for being off topic, but I couldn’t resist answering atheists.
Falsifiability issues making consequent reasoning problematic notwithstanding, personally I applaud the Creation Care movement finally waking up and looking at the non-human world around them. Better late than never, I suppose.
I can overlook certain reasoning in matters that don’t concern me for more help in matters that do, as there are practical issues that prioritize unity over constructed division.
DS
Wow. So many atheists on this site, and several of them very hostile atheists. I suppose that offers insights into the planner vs. antiplanner debate, but I can’t think of a consistent one at this point.
I did have a funny thought about the irony of how evolution theory (i.e. free market) is favored by atheists, and intelligent design (i.e. central planning) is favored by the religious people.
Andy said: Wow. So many atheists on this site, and several of them very hostile
THWM: Well O’Toole, Cox, Cato, Reason & etc are very antagonistic too.
Andy: I did have a funny thought about the irony of how evolution theory (i.e. free market) is favored by atheists, and intelligent design (i.e. central planning) is favored by the religious people.
THWM: Though religion evolves and a lot of atheists are very myopic.
Here’s an interesting real life experience I wrote:
http://www.iocca.us/docs/100112_tale_of_two_airports.html
Love Liberty,
http://www.iocca.us