What Price Are We Willing To Pay For Thai Airport Security?

[webfact]

EDITORIAL

What price are we willing to pay for security?

By The Nation

The US debate on full-body scanners at airports will eventually reach Thailand, but corruption, not privacy, is likely to be the main issue

Three decades ago, terrorists hijacked planes for political ransom. In 2001, they turned passenger jets into missiles, and crashed them into skyscrapers to make their point. Not long after that, they smuggled explosives onto planes and tried to detonate them. And just weeks ago, they reportedly tried to remotely set off explosives shipped as cargo.

As governments around the world do their best to crack down on the terrorist networks that know no boundaries or are confined to any single nation, security officials and airport authorities also play their part by coming up with new measures to ensure safety for pilots, air crews and passengers.

But no technology is perfect. In the United States, advanced imaging technology - the use of full-body scans - is said to be the most effective method for detecting explosives and other dangerous materials hidden on, or in, human bodies. As technology evolves, however, one can be certain that a new-and-improved scanner or detection method will surface and take the place of advanced imaging technology (AIT).

Naturally, given the United States' strong tradition of individual rights protection, a high degree of resistance from civic groups was expected toward the imaging technology. Some oppose the full-body scan on the grounds of health, saying they aren't convinced that the new technology is 100-per-cent safe, citing radiation emissions from the machine. But this heated debate pretty much centres on the issue of privacy. Authorities counter this concern by saying that the electronic images are viewed in a private room. Moreover, individual passengers' faces and identities are not known to the screener, who is supposed to delete the images immediately after the passenger has been cleared to proceed.

But in this day and age, when global terrorism is not confined to any one country, terrorists will probably not put all their eggs in one basket. If they can't get into American airports, they will look for other American targets worldwide. And let's not forget America's allies, like Thailand. We like to think that we are out of the loop, but in reality we are not. Our borders are porous, and almost anybody can get a visa for a temporary visit or to lay low here. That's the price we pay for the tourist dollar, which, by the way, is the biggest industry in the country. It puts rice in bowls for a huge number of people in this country.

Shortly after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States, Thailand took a very selfish attitude toward global terrorism. We insisted that there were no terrorist cells in the country. We claimed, as if with a crystal ball, that we could track the movement of terrorists. But all that changed after the Hambali arrest just north of Bangkok.

Like everybody else, Thais get annoyed at having to remove belts and shoes, toss away bottles of water, and remove one item after another as alarm bells go off at airport security checks. But most of us also understand that this is the price we pay for safety. The stakes are too high to take chances.

The AIT scanners are the quickest, most efficient means to check people for concealed threats, and Thailand will probably one day debate whether to install the machines at our airports. Our debate may not centre on the issue of privacy. The past issue with the CTC bomb scanners was about corruption and kickbacks. But that didn't say anything about the quality of Thai officials and the irregularities that go on daily at and around our airports.

There are illegal taxis. There are officials demanding bribes from passengers in exchange for their release for shoplifting crimes they didn't commit. There are people going through luggage to look for things they can steal. We've got all this at Thai airports, not to mention other transportation hubs such as train and bus stations. A body scanner, no matter how good it is, can only do one thing. The rest is really up to us.

-- The Nation 2010-11-27

[swifty5x5]

What price are we willing to pay without added security?

[kuffki]

"There are illegal taxis. There are officials demanding bribes from passengers in exchange for their release for shoplifting crimes they didn't commit. There are people going through luggage to look for things they can steal. We've got all this at Thai airports, not to mention other transportation hubs such as train and bus stations. A body scanner, no matter how good it is, can only do one thing. The rest is really up to us."

Yeah a body scanner can ONLY save your life from being blown up in the mid air or be taken as a hostage.

I am sure dealing with illegal taxis and everything else is much more important then air safety. DUH!!!

[Crushdepth]

A more effective approach would be to require passengers to board the plane naked and with no hand luggage. They could be handcuffed to their seats for the duration of the flight. Toilet stops could be managed with chamber pots.

[kuffki]

A more effective approach would be to require passengers to board the plane naked and with no hand luggage. They could be handcuffed to their seats for the duration of the flight. Toilet stops could be managed with chamber pots.

To do that, they will need to change the name of the airline to Sexy Airlines and provide free condoms, as many will get bored and may start to get frisky with neighbors.

[Crushdepth]

Good point. A bag over everyone's head should solve that problem and increase safety still further.

[whybother]

Travelling by plane isn't really a human right, is it?

People do have a choice.

[kuffki]

Good point. A bag over everyone's head should solve that problem and increase safety still further.

In that case, it will need to be Sexy Bondage Airlines.

Perhaps cabin crew could give handjobs rather then food

[kuffki]

Travelling by plane isn't really a human right, is it?

People do have a choice.

I personally have no problems at all if any and all scanners are used to ensure the safety in the air.

If you want real security, try to fly with El Al, Israeli airline.You go through the scanners, then hand held scanners then body touch and only then you can board the plane. While some may find it harsh,but i sure felt safe that i would not be blown up or taken as a hostage somewhere in the dessert.

For many it sounds like a long shot, but i think better being pro-active then sorry

[geriatrickid]

"There are illegal taxis. There are officials demanding bribes from passengers in exchange for their release for shoplifting crimes they didn't commit. There are people going through luggage to look for things they can steal. We've got all this at Thai airports, not to mention other transportation hubs such as train and bus stations. A body scanner, no matter how good it is, can only do one thing. The rest is really up to us."

Yeah a body scanner can ONLY save your life from being blown up in the mid air or be taken as a hostage.

I am sure dealing with illegal taxis and everything else is much more important then air safety. DUH!!!

Well, the body scanners selected in the USA were not the most intelligent option. I believe it was a stupid decision. There were two options; millimetre-wave technology and the x-ray technology. Canada and and most of the EU rely on millimetre wave technology for the simple reason that the less radiation exposure, the better. There are plenty of "experts" that say the xray technology is safe, but there are enough dissenting views from those health scientists that know the human body to convince me to opt for a pat down if I can. Appreciably, the radiation emitted is minimal, but the problem isn't the xrays themselves, it's the machinery upkeep. A machine is only as safe as the people that operate and maintain it. Does anyone really believe that if Thailand installs these xray devices at the airports that the Thais are going to maintain the equipment? Will the shielding and the monitoring be put in place? I don't think so. I don't care if someone touches me. Touch away I say.

The issue with the illegal taxis and the easy access of touts to the terminal highlights the fact that the Thai airport authority cannot secure its own facilities. If a tout can do as he pleases, what do you think will happen in supposedly secure cargo areas or in areas proximate to the tarmac? When PAD over ran the airport, there was easy access to the tower and the cargo facilities. Next time it might not be PAD, but it just might be southern insurgents or some other violent group. The airport seizure by PAD did a service for Thailand in that it exposed the porous nature of the airport. And yet, has security been improved since then? One need only recall the recent parking garage idiocy to see that nothing really changed. To be blunt, I always scope out the cabin when I get on a flight. its a bit reassuring to get on a domestic Thai flight and see some Russians or Americans onboard. The Russians and Americans are my security policy. If some nut decides to pull something, these passengers are likely going to take the person down if they can. I put my faith in those passengers over the screening process. Sad, but true. The last line of defense in airline safety are alert and proactive passengers.

[cup-O-coffee]

This is a really tough question to answer. I believe there can be no solution that removes all risk and collateral damage from the picture.

On the one hand you have people who want to hurt and kill others to make a point.

On the other hand you have governments who make the calls without first asking the people if this is a good idea

And in the middle you have the cannon fodder who either get hurt, killed or encumbered with numerous stupid laws that do nothing to reduce the risk of getting hurt or killed. All they end up getting is having to prove more and more that they are good citizens by subjecting themselves to more paperwork, examinations, id cards, background checks, fingerprinting, retinal eye scans, x-ray scans, rude treatment by asshol_e law enforcement thugs on power trips, questioning looks from their own neighbors, and so on.

At the end of the day, I see nothing but trouble for the people; and until they rise up and tell the governments enough is enough then eventually no one will be able to step outside their own homes without law enforcement approval and carry with the proper papers, and accept the fact that they will be subject to routine body and property searches by goose-stepping government workers, mercenaries and privately owned "security forces". But maybe the day of rising up is past, due to not wanting to be labeled an enemy combatant.

I believe this is the eventual reality, simply because there is not any government that can stop someone from hurting or killing people if there are enough of them willing to give up their lives.

With the availability of nano-technology in explosives, and super volatile, clear liquid explosives that can be ingested and triggered while in the body; it is not a question of if but when it will happen again.

And then there is the other equation to consider that countries like the USA need war and fear in order to make money. This gives plausible thought to the fact that some consider the USA a country that will stoop to committing false flag terrorist attacks against their own people in order to bring about further draconian laws to coral the sheep in a tighter pen. I am not saying I agree with this, but it certainly is plausible, and I am sure that other countries use the USA as a blueprint.

Terrorists have their agenda; governments have their agenda, and dam_n the people caught up in the middle. I typed a lot about the USA and its policies, but this story about Thai security is an oxymoron that is probably not far off from copying the USA system of trying to badger and harass people with stupid routines that avail nothing in preventing pain and death; but only create delay and headaches.

There is NO WAY to stop people from hurting and killing people in one single event. The choice should be up to the sacrificial lambs, and not the overzealous governments who think they know what's best for everyone.

Law enforcement is not far off from profiling people and doing away with circumstantial evidence (i.e. you are guilty because you fit a profile, and not because there is evidence against you).

But that won't do anything but delay the crimes from beginning again. Crime and law enforcement seem to play a game of leap-frog, The criminals wait when the new rtechnology comes out, and then after they get a handle on it, they always seem to find a way around it. And then government has to come up with another way to curb the method the criminals got around the last way.

Each time this happens, the people get squeezed more and more.

This is definitely a tough question to answer; but I think the people should have a say in how much is enough. After all, when does life lose its joy because you are living like an <deleted> automaton of the State, or tossing in your sleep worrying about the bogeyman?

Death is not an option and life should not be like it is getting to be.

[kuffki]

"There are illegal taxis. There are officials demanding bribes from passengers in exchange for their release for shoplifting crimes they didn't commit. There are people going through luggage to look for things they can steal. We've got all this at Thai airports, not to mention other transportation hubs such as train and bus stations. A body scanner, no matter how good it is, can only do one thing. The rest is really up to us."

Yeah a body scanner can ONLY save your life from being blown up in the mid air or be taken as a hostage.

I am sure dealing with illegal taxis and everything else is much more important then air safety. DUH!!!

Well, the body scanners selected in the USA were not the most intelligent option. I believe it was a stupid decision. There were two options; millimetre-wave technology and the x-ray technology. Canada and and most of the EU rely on millimetre wave technology for the simple reason that the less radiation exposure, the better. There are plenty of "experts" that say the xray technology is safe, but there are enough dissenting views from those health scientists that know the human body to convince me to opt for a pat down if I can. Appreciably, the radiation emitted is minimal, but the problem isn't the xrays themselves, it's the machinery upkeep. A machine is only as safe as the people that operate and maintain it. Does anyone really believe that if Thailand installs these xray devices at the airports that the Thais are going to maintain the equipment? Will the shielding and the monitoring be put in place? I don't think so. I don't care if someone touches me. Touch away I say.

The issue with the illegal taxis and the easy access of touts to the terminal highlights the fact that the Thai airport authority cannot secure its own facilities. If a tout can do as he pleases, what do you think will happen in supposedly secure cargo areas or in areas proximate to the tarmac? When PAD over ran the airport, there was easy access to the tower and the cargo facilities. Next time it might not be PAD, but it just might be southern insurgents or some other violent group. The airport seizure by PAD did a service for Thailand in that it exposed the porous nature of the airport. And yet, has security been improved since then? One need only recall the recent parking garage idiocy to see that nothing really changed. To be blunt, I always scope out the cabin when I get on a flight. its a bit reassuring to get on a domestic Thai flight and see some Russians or Americans onboard. The Russians and Americans are my security policy. If some nut decides to pull something, these passengers are likely going to take the person down if they can. I put my faith in those passengers over the screening process. Sad, but true. The last line of defense in airline safety are alert and proactive passengers.

You are cup of coffee have very valid points, but i think its better to do something then just do nothing.

May be even if those scanner did not work but were there, it may deter one nutcase and even that makes the difference.

What i find amazing is the training security guards have received. Every time i been patted down in Thailand, they never checked underarms, inner thighs or ankle and i mean never.

There are ceramic guns which do not buzz so anyone can just strap one to their ankle and off they go boarding the plane

[cup-O-coffee]

"There are illegal taxis. There are officials demanding bribes from passengers in exchange for their release for shoplifting crimes they didn't commit. There are people going through luggage to look for things they can steal. We've got all this at Thai airports, not to mention other transportation hubs such as train and bus stations. A body scanner, no matter how good it is, can only do one thing. The rest is really up to us."

Yeah a body scanner can ONLY save your life from being blown up in the mid air or be taken as a hostage.

I am sure dealing with illegal taxis and everything else is much more important then air safety. DUH!!!

Well, the body scanners selected in the USA were not the most intelligent option. I believe it was a stupid decision. There were two options; millimetre-wave technology and the x-ray technology. Canada and and most of the EU rely on millimetre wave technology for the simple reason that the less radiation exposure, the better. There are plenty of "experts" that say the xray technology is safe, but there are enough dissenting views from those health scientists that know the human body to convince me to opt for a pat down if I can. Appreciably, the radiation emitted is minimal, but the problem isn't the xrays themselves, it's the machinery upkeep. A machine is only as safe as the people that operate and maintain it. Does anyone really believe that if Thailand installs these xray devices at the airports that the Thais are going to maintain the equipment? Will the shielding and the monitoring be put in place? I don't think so. I don't care if someone touches me. Touch away I say.

The issue with the illegal taxis and the easy access of touts to the terminal highlights the fact that the Thai airport authority cannot secure its own facilities. If a tout can do as he pleases, what do you think will happen in supposedly secure cargo areas or in areas proximate to the tarmac? When PAD over ran the airport, there was easy access to the tower and the cargo facilities. Next time it might not be PAD, but it just might be southern insurgents or some other violent group. The airport seizure by PAD did a service for Thailand in that it exposed the porous nature of the airport. And yet, has security been improved since then? One need only recall the recent parking garage idiocy to see that nothing really changed. To be blunt, I always scope out the cabin when I get on a flight. its a bit reassuring to get on a domestic Thai flight and see some Russians or Americans onboard. The Russians and Americans are my security policy. If some nut decides to pull something, these passengers are likely going to take the person down if they can. I put my faith in those passengers over the screening process. Sad, but true. The last line of defense in airline safety are alert and proactive passengers.

You are cup of coffee have very valid points, but i think its better to do something then just do nothing.

May be even if those scanner did not work but were there, it may deter one nutcase and even that makes the difference.

What i find amazing is the training security guards have received. Every time i been patted down in Thailand, they never checked underarms, inner thighs or ankle and i mean never.

There are ceramic guns which do not buzz so anyone can just strap one to their ankle and off they go boarding the plane

Giving thought to what amazes you, then perhaps one should consider the integrity and intentions of governments who want to supplement their annual budget with protocols that only go so far, but not all the way.

I detect insincerity in these measures that only go to lengths that increase the budget and the salary, and end there; using a bogeyman to pull the fleece over the sheep's eyes and make them come-a-runnin to Big Brother so they can be saved. Let's make a big production and demonstration out of this and give the people something so they can feel safe; and you are not safe unless you have a government official's latex-gloved hand up your ass, or have some pervert in a private room looking at your wife's and children's naked bodies on a scanner!

People are so afraid of dying and being hurt, and this fear has created a cottage industry that is ripe for making a fast buck! It's a beautiful thing, because those who are against the tactics are labeled as black sheep. Those who get a business license to "save the one" are heros and above reproach, criticism, or question. Never question how the government protects you, because even if they spend billions and get just one! Never question the efforts of people who save children, because even if they spend billions and save just one!

Judging by the results, as far as I know, there has been no slow down in people dying, and pain being handed out in the world. But I sure do see a lot of everyday people performing like circus animals any time they want to go through a law enforcement check point. Those check points are popping up more and more every day. Believe me, they aren't there to catch the bad'uns. It's that they place themselves in the normal flow of people traffic in order to make a buck all for "the good of the cause".

[User3]

Mildly interesting that the only country that is facing this 'problem' is the USA. (Yeah Yeah, Russia too....) So is also mildly interesting that any other country in the world would consider using them.

Makes one wonder how many countries have been targets of TERRORISTS, and how many 'attacks' have been averted by the use of these full body scanners. Two?

Or how many will be in the future.

Or who is going to profit by the use of this 'service to the air traveler'.

Nah. not interesting.

[geriatrickid]

Mildly interesting that the only country that is facing this 'problem' is the USA. (Yeah Yeah, Russia too....) So is also mildly interesting that any other country in the world would consider using them.

Makes one wonder how many countries have been targets of TERRORISTS, and how many 'attacks' have been averted by the use of these full body scanners. Two?

Or how many will be in the future.

Or who is going to profit by the use of this 'service to the air traveler'.

Nah. not interesting.

Wrong.

You know that ban on liquids? It was not imposed by US authorities. It came about because in 2006 UK authorities detained 8 British men who planned to detonate bombs aboard airliners bound for the US and Canada. They targeted United Airlines, American Airlines (code sharing with BA) and Air Canada flights at the height of the summer holiday. 7 flights from LHR to Chicago, New York, San Francisco, Washington, DC, Toronto and Montreal were targeted. The flights would have all departed within three hours from London on any given afternoon and been in the air simultaneously. Each would have carried between 240 and 285 people.The suspects hoped to smuggle hydrogen peroxide explosives on board, disguised as soft drinks or mouthwash by using empty bottles and adding food dye to the mixture. The explosives would then be assembled and detonated in mid-flight.

Look at the trial reports. I don't think these events are "false flag" events. Rringleader Abdulla Ahmed Ali got a minimum of 40 years. Accomplices Assad Sarwar and Tanvir Hussain were given life sentences. Mr Justice Henriques said: "The intention was to perpetrate a terrorist outrage that would stand alongside the events of September 11, 2001 in history" and "I'm satisfied that there is every likelihood that this plot would have succeeded but for the intervention of the police and the security service,"

The targets may have included some American aircraft, but the 3 flights were Canadian, and the AA flight was a BA codeshare. Passengers included multiple nationalities. The scanners and pat downs would not have stopped the plot then, but they would now if someone tried to sneak liquids on.

Many countries are under attack by terrorists around the world. In case you didn't know Somali separtists have declared a jihad on Uganda and Kenya For example, according to the Australian government travel advisory; Foreign embassies, hotels and commercial airlines in Kenya have been targeted by terrorists in the past and remain potential targets. The terrorists have already struck in these countries. Many of the Gulf state airlines are also targeted by various terrorist groups since these groups want to overthrow the governments. Qatar, Emirates and others fly in to Thailand. If there has not been an attack to date, it is because those airlines have acted effectively to thwart the attacks. The world is filled with sick people who have no problem making things go boom.

[H2oDunc]

The flight paths aircraft take whilst flying is essential for the security of the said aircraft. That is why air traffic control of these aircraft is done by well trained professionals paid very well for the essential job they do.

We are forever being told that the searching of passengers boarding the aircraft is essential to the security of the aircraft yet with the passenger searching it is done by companies that have put in the lowest tender for the job and is done by employees on the minimum wage. Now am I missing somethinghere or what ? Why is it that none of these invasive searches has ever picked up anything ?

This has nothing to do with safety and all about control and keeping the public scared.

[meom]

Many countries are under attack by terrorists around the world. In case you didn't know Somali separtists have declared a jihad on Uganda and Kenya For example, according to the Australian government travel advisory; Foreign embassies, hotels and commercial airlines in Kenya have been targeted by terrorists in the past and remain potential targets. The terrorists have already struck in these countries. Many of the Gulf state airlines are also targeted by various terrorist groups since these groups want to overthrow the governments. Qatar, Emirates and others fly in to Thailand. If there has not been an attack to date, it is because those airlines have acted effectively to thwart the attacks. The world is filled with sick people who have no problem making things go boom.[/size]

I think profiling works better than an outright banning of liquids, boxcutters etc. We all know who are the terrorists among us and it isn't joe average going on holiday with his wife and 4 year old kid.

[mca]

I think profiling works better than an outright banning of liquids, boxcutters etc. We all know who are the terrorists among us and it isn't joe average going on holiday with his wife and 4 year old kid.

Yeah. When I picture my mum and dad coming to visit me with my dad pushing a wonky airport trolley with his glasses perched on the end of his nose as my mum mutters " I think I forgot to cancel the papers " and " Did you pack the Imodium? You know how your tummy gets Peter " the last thing that crosses my mind is " Holy War "

[DP25]

If you want real security, try to fly with El Al, Israeli airline.You go through the scanners, then hand held scanners then body touch and only then you can board the plane. While some may find it harsh,but i sure felt safe that i would not be blown up or taken as a hostage somewhere in the dessert.

Actually El Al doesn't use these scanners nor do they randomly select people for testicle and vaginal pat downs. In fact they've said the TSA approach doesn't work. One of the primary methods of El Al security is a personal interview of every passenger by a trained agent, TSA agents couldn't even ask if you wanted fries with that. Furthermore the planes themselves are secure, undercover armed agents, reinforced double doors that require the Captain to enter the cockpit, etc. The TSA's approach is nothing but security THEATRE performed by Burger King rejects that adds nothing to safety.

Edited November 27, 2010 by DP25

[neverdie]

If you want real security, try to fly with El Al, Israeli airline.You go through the scanners, then hand held scanners then body touch and only then you can board the plane. While some may find it harsh,but i sure felt safe that i would not be blown up or taken as a hostage somewhere in the dessert.

Actually El Al doesn't use these scanners nor do they randomly select people for testicle and vaginal pat downs. In fact they've said the TSA approach doesn't work. One of the primary methods of El Al security is a personal interview of every passenger by a trained agent, TSA agents couldn't even ask if you wanted fries with that. Furthermore the planes themselves are secure, undercover armed agents, reinforced double doors that require the Captain to enter the cockpit, etc. The TSA's approach is nothing but security THEATRE performed by Burger King rejects that adds nothing to safety.

Now now DP, theres no point letting the truth get in the way of a good story

[jayjay0]

I have taken this out of one paragraph in the nation's article.

["As governments around the world do their best to crack down on the  terrorist networks that know no boundaries ."]

There in lies the problem it is not true.

They are wasting there time with Christians Jew's and other religions.

The kind of thinking that it is OK to kill any one if they are not a member of that religion is confined to one religion.<br>

Concentrate on that and most of the problem will go away.

Notice I said most not all. That is because there will always be those who are mentally challenged in one way or another. These people need help.

Edited November 27, 2010 by jayjay0

[yermanee]

Mildly interesting that the only country that is facing this 'problem' is the USA. (Yeah Yeah, Russia too....) So is also mildly interesting that any other country in the world would consider using them.

Makes one wonder how many countries have been targets of TERRORISTS, and how many 'attacks' have been averted by the use of these full body scanners. Two?

Or how many will be in the future.

Or who is going to profit by the use of this 'service to the air traveler'.

Nah. not interesting.

Wrong.

You know that ban on liquids? It was not imposed by US authorities. It came about because in 2006 UK authorities detained 8 British men who planned to detonate bombs aboard airliners bound for the US and Canada. They targeted United Airlines, American Airlines (code sharing with BA) and Air Canada flights at the height of the summer holiday. 7 flights from LHR to Chicago, New York, San Francisco, Washington, DC, Toronto and Montreal were targeted. The flights would have all departed within three hours from London on any given afternoon and been in the air simultaneously. Each would have carried between 240 and 285 people.The suspects hoped to smuggle hydrogen peroxide explosives on board, disguised as soft drinks or mouthwash by using empty bottles and adding food dye to the mixture. The explosives would then be assembled and detonated in mid-flight.

Look at the trial reports. I don't think these events are "false flag" events. Rringleader Abdulla Ahmed Ali got a minimum of 40 years. Accomplices Assad Sarwar and Tanvir Hussain were given life sentences. Mr Justice Henriques said: "The intention was to perpetrate a terrorist outrage that would stand alongside the events of September 11, 2001 in history" and "I'm satisfied that there is every likelihood that this plot would have succeeded but for the intervention of the police and the security service,"

The targets may have included some American aircraft, but the 3 flights were Canadian, and the AA flight was a BA codeshare. Passengers included multiple nationalities. The scanners and pat downs would not have stopped the plot then, but they would now if someone tried to sneak liquids on.

Many countries are under attack by terrorists around the world. In case you didn't know Somali separtists have declared a jihad on Uganda and Kenya For example, according to the Australian government travel advisory; Foreign embassies, hotels and commercial airlines in Kenya have been targeted by terrorists in the past and remain potential targets. The terrorists have already struck in these countries. Many of the Gulf state airlines are also targeted by various terrorist groups since these groups want to overthrow the governments. Qatar, Emirates and others fly in to Thailand. If there has not been an attack to date, it is because those airlines have acted effectively to thwart the attacks. The world is filled with sick people who have no problem making things go boom.

Exactly,

People should stop blaming their governments. Blame the terrorists !!!

Oh and racial profiling is happening already albeit on a small scale.

Imagine the outrage of civil rights groups if it become common practice.

I have no problem whatsoever with any (and I do mean any) security measure at airports, because I value my life.

Yermanee

Edited November 27, 2010 by yermanee

[kuffki]

If you want real security, try to fly with El Al, Israeli airline.You go through the scanners, then hand held scanners then body touch and only then you can board the plane. While some may find it harsh,but i sure felt safe that i would not be blown up or taken as a hostage somewhere in the dessert.

Actually El Al doesn't use these scanners nor do they randomly select people for testicle and vaginal pat downs. In fact they've said the TSA approach doesn't work. One of the primary methods of El Al security is a personal interview of every passenger by a trained agent, TSA agents couldn't even ask if you wanted fries with that. Furthermore the planes themselves are secure, undercover armed agents, reinforced double doors that require the Captain to enter the cockpit, etc. The TSA's approach is nothing but security THEATRE performed by Burger King rejects that adds nothing to safety.

Thats when you fly from Israel, on the way to Israel you go through 3 sets. I can not comment what scanners are used.

[jayjay0]

Mildly interesting that the only country that is facing this 'problem' is the USA. (Yeah Yeah, Russia too....) So is also mildly interesting that any other country in the world would consider using them.

Makes one wonder how many countries have been targets of TERRORISTS, and how many 'attacks' have been averted by the use of these full body scanners. Two?

Or how many will be in the future.

Or who is going to profit by the use of this 'service to the air traveler'.

Nah. not interesting.

In the over all scheme of things if they did not do any security checking there would most certanly be a lot more deaths. Even with the equipment they have in use now they have managed to stop several attempts.

My point here is why? They have absolutely no problem with letting hundreds of thousands get slaughtered on there roads every year. Air terrorism is just a joke compared to the excepted norm on the Worlds high ways.

Amazing what some people have no problem subjecting them self's to at a airport but take a different attitude on the highway's. In fact if subjected to the same degree of examination for driving on a high way they would fail it and Yell at the top of there voice invasion of privacy.

Just food for thought.

[Rimmer]

One inflammatory post removed from view

[richard_smith237]

IMO: El Al get it right.

They were years ahead of every other airline in having an armed 'sky marshal' on each of their flights.

They were and still are years ahead in their assertion that 'interviews' work...

I have flown El Al and its not a pleasant experience. Ben Gurion Airport is not a pleasant place to be. Also having Landed at a private airport in Tel Aviv the security grilling I received was extreme to say the least. Luckily I didn't have to participate in the back door boogie.

Digression aside, I very much doubt whether any of the measures taken by any airlines matches the level of 'reliable, skilled and trained' personnel on the ground.

IMO: minimum wage, unskilled, lightly trained employees are the weak link in the system.

[SergeiY]

There are ceramic guns which do not buzz so anyone can just strap one to their ankle and off they go boarding the plane

Not really, ceramic guns are a myth.

[AleG]

Travelling by plane isn't really a human right, is it?

People do have a choice.

How about all the chicken littles, scared silly from flying give the choice to people with a better grip on reality keep their dignity when traveling?

If people are so afraid of being killed by terrorist on a plane they have the choice to not travel on a plane. Same as the people too scared of drowining have the choice of not swimming instead of demanding to force everyone to wear a life vest in the water.

[AleG]

You are cup of coffee have very valid points, but i think its better to do something then just do nothing.

May be even if those scanner did not work but were there, it may deter one nutcase and even that makes the difference.

What i find amazing is the training security guards have received. Every time i been patted down in Thailand, they never checked underarms, inner thighs or ankle and i mean never.

There are ceramic guns which do not buzz so anyone can just strap one to their ankle and off they go boarding the plane

Ceramic guns are a myth, there's no such thing.

[bobbin]

A more effective approach would be to require passengers to board the plane naked and with no hand luggage. They could be handcuffed to their seats for the duration of the flight. Toilet stops could be managed with chamber pots.

I''ll bet more than a few of those rendition flights followed the same protocol, including the bags over the head mentioned in your later post.

BTW, I'm not suggesting you would have approved of such treatment, only pointing out that it has probably already been done.