Security  Theater Now Playing at Your Airport
by Daniel  Pipes
Jerusalem  Post
January 6,  2010
As hands are wrung in the  aftermath of the near-tragedy on a Northwest Airlines flight approaching  Detroit, a conversation from London’s Heathrow airport in 1986 comes to  mind.
It consisted of an El  Al security agent quizzing one Ann-Marie Doreen Murphy, a 32-year-old recent  arrival in London from Sallynoggin, Ireland. While working as a chambermaid at  the Hilton Hotel on Park Lane Murphy met Nizar al-Hindawi, a far-leftist  Palestinian who impregnated her. After instructing her to “get rid of the  thing,” he abruptly changed his tune and insisted on immediate marriage in “the  Holy Land.” He also insisted on their traveling  separately.
Murphy, later described by  the prosecutor as a “simple, unsophisticated Irish lass and a Catholic,”  accepted unquestioningly Hindawi’s arrangements for her to fly to Israel on El  Al on April 17. She also accepted a wheeled suitcase with, unbeknown to her, a  false bottom containing nearly 2 kilograms of Semtex, a powerful plastic  explosive, and she agreed to be coached by him to answer questions posed by  airport security.
Murphy successfully passed  through the standard Heathrow security inspection and reached the gate with her  bag, where an El Al agent questioned her. As reconstructed by Neil C.  Livingstone and David Halevy in Washingtonian magazine, he started by  asking whether she had packed her bags herself. She replied in the negative.  Then:
“What is the purpose of your  trip to Israel?” Recalling Hindawi’s instructions, Murphy answered, “For a  vacation.”
“Are you married, Miss  Murphy?” “No.”
“Traveling alone?”  “Yes.”
“Is this your first trip  abroad?” “Yes.”
“Do you have relatives in  Israel?” “No.”
“Are you going to meet  someone in Israel?” “No.
“Has your vacation been  planned for a long time?” “No.”
“Where will you stay while  you’re in Israel?” “The Tel Aviv Hilton.”
“How much money do you have  with you?” “Fifty pounds.” The Hilton at that time costing at least £70 a night,  he asked:
“Do you have a credit card?”  “Oh, yes,” she replied, showing him an ID for cashing  checks.
That did it, and the agent  sent her bag for additional inspection, where the bombing apparatus was  discovered.
Had El Al followed the usual  Western security procedures, 375 lives would surely have been lost somewhere  over Austria. The bombing plot came to light, in other words, through a  non-technical intervention, relying on conversation, perception, common sense,  and (yes) profiling. The agent focused on the passenger, not the weaponry.  Israeli counterterrorism takes passengers’ identities into account; accordingly,  Arabs endure  an especially tough inspection. “In Israel, security comes first,” David  Harris of the American Jewish Committee  explains.
Obvious as this sounds,  overconfidence, political correctness, and legal liability render such an  approach impossible anywhere else in the West. In the United States, for  example, one month after 9/11, the Department of  Transportation issued guidelines forbidding its personnel from generalizing  “about the propensity of members of any racial, ethnic, religious, or national  origin group to engage in unlawful activity.” (Wear a hijab, I semi-jokingly advise women  wanting to avoid secondary screening at airport  security.)
Worse yet, consider the  panicky Mickey-Mouse, and embarrassing  steps the U.S. Transportation  Security Administration implemented hours after the Detroit bombing attempt:  no crew announcements “concerning flight path or position over cities or  landmarks,” and disabling all passenger communications services. During a  flight’s final hour, passengers may not stand up, access carry-on baggage, nor  “have any blankets, pillows, or personal belongings on the  lap.”
Some crews went yet further,  keeping cabin lights on throughout the night while turning off the in-flight  entertainment, prohibiting all electronic devices, and, during the final hour,  requiring passengers to keep hands visible and neither eat nor drink. Things got  so bad, the Associated  Press reports, “A demand by one attendant that no one could read anything …  elicited gasps of disbelief and howls of laughter.”
Widely criticized for these  Clouseau-like  measures, TSA eventually decided to add “enhanced screening” for travelers  passing through or originating from fourteen  “countries of interest” – as though one’s choice of departure airport  indicates a propensity for suicide bombing.
The TSA engages in “security  theater” – bumbling pretend-steps that treat all passengers equally rather  than risk offending anyone by focusing, say, on religion. The alternative  approach is Israelification, defined by Toronto’s  Star newspaper as “a system that  protects life and limb without annoying you to  death.”
Which do we want – theatrics  or safety?
Mr.  Pipes, director of the Middle East Forum and Taube fellow at the Hoover  Institution, has super-elite status at two  airlines.
Jan. 6,  2010 update: I lacked  space in the column to play out this ultimate scenario: What if a very large  group of hijackers gets on a plane, enough of them so that with muscle alone –  no knives, guns, or bombs – they overpower the passengers and crew? What if they  threaten the pilots to strangle one person after another until the plane comes  under their control? No amount of technology can prevent such a scenario; only  scrutiny of who is getting aboard can do so.
And while there has been no  such large group, “Those Fourteen Syrians on Northwest Airlines Flight #327”  represented a possible step in that direction.   
This text may be reposted or  forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete  information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original  URL. 
Gill  Rapoza
Veritas Vos  Liberabit

No comments:
Post a Comment