This is another step up for big brother and the NWO.
"Or if a passenger has a credit card stolen, and the thief uses the card to buy a gun, the traveler might be questioned."
So now purchasing a gun is grounds for suspicion too? The time is coming....
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/lo...7mar17,0,2973654.story?coll=sfla-news-broward
Airline security experts want to know whether you have evil in your heart
BY Ken Kaye
Staff Writer
Posted March 17 2003
Forget about what's in your suitcase. What the government really wants to know is whether you have evil in your mind.
Within the next decade, federal security agencies intend to dig deep into your past, probe your present and analyze whether you are a terrorist masquerading as a tourist or business traveler.
The moment you purchase an electronic ticket, which eventually will be the only way to make a reservation, a network of computer databases would immediately reveal your spending habits, driver's record, criminal record, credit history, past addresses, business associations and hundreds of other indicators.
All of this would be boiled down to a threat index -- the higher the score, the greater the chance you could spell trouble.
With a high enough score, federal agents, likely from the FBI or the Transportation Security Administration, would seek to question you long before you got to the airport.
"If this technology were in place on Sept. 11, all 19 terrorists would have stood out and been identified as terrorists," says Joseph Del Balzo, a former acting administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration and a security consultant.
Right now, it's mostly guesswork whether a passenger has sinister motives.
Airlines screen travelers based on how often they have purchased tickets, the method of purchase and whether tickets were one-way. But experts consider this system ineffective because each airline is unwilling to share its database.
Under a much tougher system, the government would develop a super-network linking every reservation system in the United States as well as government databases, showing criminal history, driver's license data and property records.
These would paint a comprehensive picture of each passenger and would help determine whether a passenger has links to others on any given flight.
For instance, the system might find a passenger at one time lived with two or three other passengers on the same flight. It might find one passenger purchased tickets for three or four other passengers, but all are sitting apart. Or, the program might find a passenger took the exact same flight seven or eight times.
Ideally, harmless arrangements, such as a family of six flying to a wedding, shouldn't set off alarms because the threat index would rely on a mix of indicators.
However, if one member of that family has a criminal history or association with a known terrorist, the entire group might come under suspicion.
Or if a passenger has a credit card stolen, and the thief uses the card to buy a gun, the traveler might be questioned.
The system would be financed through passenger surcharges of less than $2 a ticket, industry experts say. The government this month started testing what's officially called CAPPSII -- Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening -- allowing Delta Airlines to employ the system at three airports. It could be more widely installed by the end of this year.
Civil libertarians warn such massive surveillance systems violate the right to privacy and too often are built on false or even fraudulent information.
"It's too Big Brother," said Bill Comeaux, of Atlanta, who had stopped in Fort Lauderdale after taking a cruise. "I'd have to be convinced the benefits outweigh the potential loss."
Another fear is the government could use it to build cases against criminal suspects, in addition to bolstering airline security.
"We're fooling ourselves if we think that's going to make us safer," said Barry Steinhardt, the American Civil Liberties Union's director of technology and liberty program.
More fundamentally, the ACLU says, performing extensive background checks on a large percentage of travelers will lead to more intrusions into the average person's life.
For example, at one time the government promised Social Security numbers would be strictly private.
"They were only supposed to be used for that new pension program in the 1940s," Steinhardt said. "Now they're the glue that holds databases together."
Those in favor of more careful profiling say passengers must expect to give up a certain level of privacy if they want to be safe.
"Because of Sept. 11, some of our civil liberties have to be dented or pushed aside a little," said John Becker, of Tyco Security Products of Boca Raton, which provides video surveillance and manufactures access control systems. "I have no doubt that passengers don't want to be strip-searched. But I also think passengers are conscious enough to know that more needs to be done.''
Many passengers agree.
"Security is more important than your privacy," said Ed Spinn, a Queens, N.Y., retiree who flies frequently to Fort Lauderdale. "You can often recognize terrorists because they have a certain profile."
Brian Doyle, spokesman for the Transportation Security Administration, stressed that profiling never will replace explosive-detection equipment and other devices that check baggage for dangerous items. Such machinery, now being amassed in airport terminals, is here to stay, he said.
"One of the things about security, it has to be multilayered from the curbside to the cockpit," he said. "To put all your eggs in one basket would be foolhardy."
Other solutions
Aviation security is highly dependent on immediate advances in technology for two major reasons, authorities say.
First, if terrorists pull off another attack similar to Sept. 11, using airplanes as missiles, few airlines would survive, and those left likely would need government support.
Second, security-wary passengers already are turning to cars, buses and trains for shorter trips, stinging the financially strapped airlines.
Although long lines generally have shrunk at security checkpoints, passengers still are advised to arrive two hours before flight time for domestic flights and longer for international flights.
The Transportation Security Administration would like to see passengers spend 10 minutes or less getting through checkpoints.
"People pay a premium for the speed of travel," said David Stempler, president of the Air Travelers Association. "But if the cost benefit isn't there, they'll look at alternate means."
Dozens of companies are already developing airport security devices, from machines that perform full-body scans to systems that confirm identities through biometrics, including iris scans and fingerprints.
One solution being widely used by airport workers and government employees is a smart card, which can be obtained only after an extensive background check. Such cards allow workers quick access into secure areas.
Eventually, such cards would allow an airline to track a passenger's travel habits and financial transactions through small built-in computer chips. Trusted travelers would be allowed to move through security lines faster.
Sun Microsystems of Santa Clara, Calif., has developed technology that would provide impregnable security in a smart card through a series of personal identification markers.
The same card could be used as a security pass for the airlines, a credit card for a bank or an identification card for a health insurance company, said Albert Leung, the company's group marketing manager.
"You have all these different cards in your wallet and they're all different functions," he said. "Now, you can have a card that acts as your wallet. It firewalls and separates the various applications."
But critics warn that a person with terrorist intent could land a respectable job, settle into a community and wait 10 to 15 years before attempting an attack. Until then, he or she might not raise any suspicions.
For that reason, human beings need to double check airport workers with smart cards, says Douglas Laird, vice president of Washington, D.C.-based BGI International Consulting Services, a counterterrorism and aviation security firm.
"We need to have everyone enter a secure-area screen," he said. "You shouldn't be able to swipe in just because you're an employee."
Other security measures being tested or developed:
A heat lie detector would use an infrared image of the face, the theory being that if someone is telling a lie, the face gets hotter around the eyes and the image turns orange or another color.
A high-tech body-scan X-ray would subject passengers to a low dose of radiation, X-raying through their clothing to check for weapons but also revealing a person's naked body on a computer screen. Although critics say this is an extreme invasion of privacy, companies say they are developing software that would eliminate the nude images.
A particle blaster would blast a passenger with air to knock microscopic particles off clothes, which are then analyzed for explosives.
Video surveillance is already in heavy use in many public and private buildings. Closed-circuit security cameras would videotape passengers from the time they park their cars until they take a seat inside the plane. Some airlines have already installed cabin cameras.
Mix of measures
For now, aviation security relies on measures from airport screeners to impregnable cockpit doors. Unseen air marshals and airport security agents constantly monitor passengers, looking for suspicious behavior.
But the primary method continues to be searching carry-on items with X-ray machines, or using explosive-detection equipment, hand searches and bomb-sniffing dogs for checked luggage.
The Transportation Security Administration says about 90 percent of the 1.5 billion bags a year are electronically examined. Before Sept. 11, only 5 percent were inspected.
The agency boasts that after being in existence for little more than a year, its efforts have been highly effective, as evidenced by the 4.2 million dangerous items confiscated at security checkpoints between February and December of 2002.
Looking at knives alone: The TSA confiscated about 111,000 in March 2002, 113,000 in April and 130,000 in May.
"Then people started to catch on," Doyle said, adding that the number of confiscated knives dropped to about 100,000 in July and August.
In addition, the TSA last year prevented 983 firearms from getting on board airlines and it arrested 920 people on charges stemming from security concerns.
Doyle said the TSA expects the number of confiscated items to continue decreasing as passengers become better educated. The TSA Web site, www.tsa.gov, gives a complete list of permitted and prohibited items.
As it did with screeners, the TSA also built up and quickly installed a strong force of federal air marshals. It had 197,000 applicants, many with law enforcement and firearms experience.
On Sept. 11, 2001, only 33 air marshals were riding on U.S. airliners, the vast majority on international flights. Today, the air marshal program is fully staffed, although the total number of marshals is "classified," Doyle said.
Frequent fliers say they generally feel more secure.
"It's a pain in the ***. But it's a lot more diligent than it was before 9/11," said Steve Landes, a businessman who commutes between his home in Boynton Beach and New York City.
Don Coholan, of Boca Raton, who flies frequently to New York on business, said he no longer worries about a terrorist hijacking.
"You don't think about it; otherwise, you wouldn't get on the plane," he said.
Still, some security experts say continuing breaches, such as passengers slipping past checkpoints or sneaking guns and knives into suitcases, show the security net still has holes.
In only one example, a man walked away before screeners could pass a wand over him at Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport in January, forcing a concourse to be evacuated for 90 minutes.
Laird, for one, said the TSA is just barely meeting its obligations because it was rushed into meeting a Dec. 31 congressional deadline to scrutinize all checked bags for explosives.
It needs 1,100 explosive-detection machines at the nation's 429 commercial airports because they are the only machines that can discern a range of explosives, Laird said. Hundreds of the machines still need to be put in place.
Trace detection equipment, which relies on swabbing bags and then checking for explosive particles, are not nearly as effective and compromise true security, Laird said.
To complicate matters, many airports need to redesign terminals to accept the minivan-sized explosive detection machines and place them "in-line" with the normal flow of baggage handling.
Despite the naysayers, the TSA says in time, explosive-detection equipment will be installed in a more organized fashion and overall security systems are bound to improve.
"One thing TSA does and will continue to do is take today's security, refine the system and make improvements wherever we can," said Doyle, the agency spokesman. "And that will be an ongoing effort."
Ken Kaye can be reached at 954-385-7911 or [email protected].
1984