Source: Transportation Security Administration
We are afflicted by two kinds of terrorism: The actual attacks, and the fear of attacks. Attacks on the United States itself have been severely curtailed. But the fear of attacks is far more devastating and enduring in its effects. Al Qaeda long ago understood the power of mass psychology and has used it expertly. As a result, the real scale of their threat has been multiplied many times in the American public’s post-9/11 mindset.
The economic cost of this has been incalculable. We have invested in huge new federal bureaucracies. We have dedicated cost-is-no-object resources to the intelligence gathering agencies. And the burden now carried by the travel industry, including the reinforcement of airports, the security surcharges made by airlines and the repeated blows to the prospects of the hotel industry all add up to many billions annually.
If the ultimate effect of this is to inhibit our ability to travel
abroad the terrorists will have achieved a political, not just an
economic, result. We need the enlightenment that travel brings more
than ever. A fortress America mentality, with its paranoia and
xenophobia, turns us into the kind of nation the terrorists describe,
not the kind of nation we really are. This is why travelers, and our
continued freedom to fly, are on the front line in this war.
Looked at in purely military terms, the targeting of airliners doesn’t make a lot of sense if what you really want to achieve is to paralyze a country and spread panic. Blowing up a nuclear power plant, sabotaging the master controls of the national power grid or a skilled cyber attack on our communications networks would present real threats to public order and confidence.
The 9/11 plan to use airliners as bombs to strike national icons in New York and Washington did show a far larger ambition than just taking out the airliners. Since then, however, it seems that Al Qaeda has realized what a force-multiplier it would be to bring down just one jet--particularly if it happened on Christmas Day. They watch our dependence on flying, see the vulnerabilities and keep on trying: Mixing two seemingly harmless liquids to make a bomb; converting a sneaker into a grenade; arming a jockstrap. The technology is widely touted on the Internet, and all it takes is one carefully indoctrinated and trained recruit to carry out the operation.
But what is it that really makes us more jumpy these days--the fear of one of these attackers succeeding, or the spectacle of federal agencies once more failing to connect the intelligence tips and the endless confusions of airport security and the rules about when we can and cannot use a toilet on the airplane?
Let’s try to get this in perspective. There is a little-known but crucial government agency called the National Targeting Center, based in a Washington suburb. Each day it alone is responsible for looking at the passenger lists of every flight originating abroad that’s headed for the U.S. None of these flights can leave the gate until the passenger list has been cleared by the NTC within two hours of departure time. When you buy a seat on those flights you submit what is called your API - advance passenger information. If my own experience is anything to go by, this is constantly scrutinized because each time I make a reservation I have either to confirm that there has been no change in my status or revise the details.
In a hearing before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security that went largely unnoticed on December 9, last year, a statement by the NTC revealed that on any one day the Center identified 178 (strangely exact number, right?) “targets of interest” on the passenger lists they screened, and “initiated and completed research on approximately 328 individuals.”
This is where the rubber really hits the road. If the rest of the intelligence system works, and this means especially the efficacy of the watch and no-fly lists, it’s the NTC (which from sheer guesswork I would say probably doesn’t have more than 100 screeners) that is the last line of defense, where the red flag goes up and the ominous passenger is intercepted. Of course, my caveat is huge. But at least the diagram is exact-instead of hundreds of thousands of turf-conscious bureaucrats creating organized chaos, here is one coherently designed gate to do the job that can’t be done with pat-downs or even full body screening.
And, by the way, when it comes to that full body screening. If anyone remains so convinced of the uniqueness of their own private parts that they would rather not have them innocuously scanned at an airport they should just stay home. The rest of us want to keep flying.
Related:
On the Fly's Barbara Peterson goes undercover as a TSA screener
The TSA's new guidelines for international flights to the U.S.
Looked at in purely military terms, the targeting of airliners doesn’t make a lot of sense if what you really want to achieve is to paralyze a country and spread panic. Blowing up a nuclear power plant, sabotaging the master controls of the national power grid or a skilled cyber attack on our communications networks would present real threats to public order and confidence.
The 9/11 plan to use airliners as bombs to strike national icons in New York and Washington did show a far larger ambition than just taking out the airliners. Since then, however, it seems that Al Qaeda has realized what a force-multiplier it would be to bring down just one jet--particularly if it happened on Christmas Day. They watch our dependence on flying, see the vulnerabilities and keep on trying: Mixing two seemingly harmless liquids to make a bomb; converting a sneaker into a grenade; arming a jockstrap. The technology is widely touted on the Internet, and all it takes is one carefully indoctrinated and trained recruit to carry out the operation.
But what is it that really makes us more jumpy these days--the fear of one of these attackers succeeding, or the spectacle of federal agencies once more failing to connect the intelligence tips and the endless confusions of airport security and the rules about when we can and cannot use a toilet on the airplane?
Let’s try to get this in perspective. There is a little-known but crucial government agency called the National Targeting Center, based in a Washington suburb. Each day it alone is responsible for looking at the passenger lists of every flight originating abroad that’s headed for the U.S. None of these flights can leave the gate until the passenger list has been cleared by the NTC within two hours of departure time. When you buy a seat on those flights you submit what is called your API - advance passenger information. If my own experience is anything to go by, this is constantly scrutinized because each time I make a reservation I have either to confirm that there has been no change in my status or revise the details.
In a hearing before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security that went largely unnoticed on December 9, last year, a statement by the NTC revealed that on any one day the Center identified 178 (strangely exact number, right?) “targets of interest” on the passenger lists they screened, and “initiated and completed research on approximately 328 individuals.”
This is where the rubber really hits the road. If the rest of the intelligence system works, and this means especially the efficacy of the watch and no-fly lists, it’s the NTC (which from sheer guesswork I would say probably doesn’t have more than 100 screeners) that is the last line of defense, where the red flag goes up and the ominous passenger is intercepted. Of course, my caveat is huge. But at least the diagram is exact-instead of hundreds of thousands of turf-conscious bureaucrats creating organized chaos, here is one coherently designed gate to do the job that can’t be done with pat-downs or even full body screening.
And, by the way, when it comes to that full body screening. If anyone remains so convinced of the uniqueness of their own private parts that they would rather not have them innocuously scanned at an airport they should just stay home. The rest of us want to keep flying.
Related:
On the Fly's Barbara Peterson goes undercover as a TSA screener
The TSA's new guidelines for international flights to the U.S.
Leave a comment