Editorial: Post-9/11 screening makes skies less unfriendly
Nineteen hijackers who boarded planes in small groups in Boston, Newark
and Washington on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, didn't so much evade
airline security as walk boldly through its many gaps. Terrorism watch
lists were of little bother. Box cutters were permitted on planes.
Checkpoints were manned by minimum-wage screeners working for the lowest
bidders who won airline contracts. And once on board, the hijackers
faced obstacles as flimsy as the security on the ground.
Today, experts who complain that security is
still porous and just "theater" must be suffering from amnesia. The
Transportation Security Administration (TSA),
created in the weeks after 9/11, has brought security a long way in the
past 10 years. And while the agency has had its share of missteps and
failures, there's no question that flying is far safer today than in
2001.
One of the most effective changes,
hardening cockpit doors to make them impassable, was accomplished in a
matter of months, proving how much the government and industry can
accomplish when both are committed. Many pilots are now armed and
trained to use guns in an emergency. Air marshals are deployed on more
flights.
All checked baggage is screened for
explosives, and TSA agents have taken over screening from private
companies at the vast majority of airports. Cargo in the bellies of
domestic passenger planes is screened, too. At 78 airports,
many travelers pass through full-body scanners designed to detect
explosives. And the TSA, albeit belatedly, is finally checking
passengers against combined government watch lists — to detect
dangerous people, not just dangerous objects. For years, the airlines carried out such work, a law enforcement function that never should have been jobbed out to the private sector.
Of
course, even all these steps cannot eliminate risk. What they can do is
make it harder for terrorists to succeed and less enticing for them to
try.
That terrorists remain fixated on
airplanes is certain, as evidenced by last October's plot to ship parcel
bombs on planes from Yemen to the USA, and the "underwear bomber" who tried to blow up a Detroit-bound jetliner on Christmas Day
of 2009. The parcel-bomb plot was foiled by good intelligence and
swift international cooperation, but it exposed holes in the screening
of cargo on international flights. The Christmas Day near-miss revealed
gaps in intelligence sharing as well as the role that alert, courageous
passengers can play in subduing terrorists.
Which brings us to another point about
passengers. They often show more sense than the lawmakers who make
policy and oversee security. In November, amid an uproar over body
scanners and pat-downs, 71% of fliers said both were "worth it"
to prevent acts of terrorism, according to a USA/Gallup Poll.
Tellingly, the TSA's vocal critics failed to propose any credible
alternative.
The TSA and its director, John Pistole,
are taking some cautious steps toward reducing the airport "hassle
factor." Next month, the agency will start testing a new way to identify
frequent fliers who are not risks and treat them accordingly. Another
overdue program would limit the screening of children. On Tuesday,
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano also mentioned allowing
passengers to keep their shoes on — at some vague point in the future.
We
hope this doesn't take another 10 years. Having the nerve to decide
when a procedure is no longer necessary is as important as deciding to
add yet another layer of security.
Posted by YufGrafix
on 5:52 AM. Filed under