[IP] Must Read TSA overreaction to Delta incident

A different take (as posted on www.skatingonstilts.com):

Al Qaeda Failed. What About Us? Ten Questions.

Early reports about the failed Christmas bombing of NW 253 raise
questions that need answers. Because, frankly, if the reports are
true, al Qaeda never should have gotten this close to a successful
attack.

1. According to early reports, the suspect is 23-year-old Abdul
Farouk Abdulmutallab, and his name "appears to be included in the
government's records of terrorist suspects, according to a preliminary
review." The first question, then, is how he managed to get a visa to
come to the United States.

2. One report suggested that the visa was granted to attend a
religious meeting. Is there some political correctness problem that
makes State reluctant to deny visas for such travel?

3. A visa might have been granted for a good reason (a chance to
interrogate or arrest him) but only in circumstances where he was
watched closely. At a minimum, data about him should have gone to DHS
and FBI from State. Did it?

4. Even if it didn't, TSA and DHS should have identified him as a
possible risk from his travel reservations. Did they? If not, why
not?

5. If they did, was he screened specially at Schiphol? Did DHS put
an air marshal on his flight?

6. Sometimes travel reservation data is spotty and badly recorded,
but that shouldn't be true for the passenger manifests that NW should
have sent to DHS. Those should come straight off the passport. Did
it? Should airlines be held liable for deaths caused by bad manifest
information?

7. How good was the air travel screening in Nigeria?

8. If it wasn't that good, and I suspect it wasn't, in part because
the plane was not bound for the US, did Schiphol fall down on the job
by not properly rescreening Abdulmutallab?

9. Have we let European objections to US screening standards affect
the security of flights with connecting passengers?

10. One passenger is said to have helped thwart the attack by
climbing over several less active passengers to grapple with the
terrorist, apparently suffering burns to his hands in the process.
How long will it take Secretary Napolitano (at least) or President
Obama (my preference) to visit this guy in the hospital if these facts
turn out to be true? Passengers are the last and most effective line
of defense in cases like this. But the incentives to sit tight are
still great. We need to honor the heroes who react quickly to thwart
attacks in the air.

Update: Many thanks to Instapundit, BigGovernment, and Volokh
Conspiracy, among others, for the links. They've spurred some
interesting comments, and one by hiscross about AQQ is important
enough to generate an 11th question.
AQQ is a program in which passport downloads collected by the airline
are supposed to be sent to DHS *before* the plane takes off. Under
AQQ, the airline is also supposed to be able to receive a return
message from DHS requiring that suspect passengers be removed from the
plane.

(AQQ is also that most dreaded of government innovations, the
recursive acronym, in which one acronym nestles comfortably inside
another. Thus, AQQ stands for APIS Quick Query, which tells you
nothing unless you know that APIS stands for Advance Passenger
Information System. APIS was the earlier, slower, one-way version of
AQQ.)

DHS made the AQQ requirement final more than a year ago, after a long
testing period. But a number of US carriers have been stiffing DHS,
refusing to comply with the regulation because, they say, they can't
afford to upgrade their computer systems. They say they're waiting to
see what upgrades they'll have to make for the TSA Secure Flight
program, but I find it astonishing that a private regulated industry
would simply declare that it won't comply with US law. When you do
that, you have to expect consequences -- or be very lucky. As a
result of airline noncompliance, it is hard for DHS to keep bad guys
off planes, even if the bad guys have been identified from their
passports. If Delta/NW falls into the carrier-scofflaw category, and
that failure contributed to the incident, they are are, and should be,
in trouble. In addition, I'm guessing, DHS will immediately begin
fining the other carriers who have been rope-a-doping them.

So call it question 11: Was Delta/NW in compliance with US law when it
boarded the Amsterdam flight?

On 12/26/09, Dave Farber <dave@farber.net> wrote:

Begin forwarded message:

From: Lauren Weinstein <lauren@vortex.com>

Date: December 26, 2009 2:20:44 PM EST

To: Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>

Subject: Re: [IP] re TSA overreaction to Delta incident

Dave,

For what it's worth, I'm often quoted as the original author of the

"chain naked passengers to their seats" line. I see I used it right

here in IP over five years ago during another spasm of TSA security

escalation:

http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/200505/msg00278.html

As for Wendy's seemingly reasonable idea about making more fire

extinguishers available ... well, now, after all, fire extinguishers

can also be used as *weapons* ... right? Can't take that risk, eh?

Rumor is this guy may have been hiding his incendiary in his clothing.

Better pray it wasn't in his underwear, given how TSA reacted to the

"wannabe shoe bomber" case.

Of couse, what TSA really wants to do is eventually force everyone

into full body millimeter or "soft x-ray" scanners. Just a "little"

more radiation. Nothing to worry about.

--Lauren--

Lauren Weinstein

lauren@vortex.com

Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800

http://www.pfir.org/lauren

Co-Founder, PFIR

- People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org

Co-Founder, NNSquad

- Network Neutrality Squad - http://www.nnsquad.org

Founder, GCTIP - Global Coalition

for Transparent Internet Performance - http://www.gctip.org

Founder, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com

Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy

Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com

Twitter: https://twitter.com/laurenweinstein

- -

On 12/26 14:01, Dave Farber wrote:

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Wendy M. Grossman" <wendyg@pelicancrossing.net>

Date: December 26, 2009 1:49:46 PM EST

To: dave@farber.net

Subject: Re: [IP] TSA overreaction to Delta incident

(For IP if you like)

Given that the biggest hazard posed by yesterday's attacker seems to

have been the flames, wouldn't the most logical response be to make

fire extinguishers more readily accessible throughout the cabin?

wg

Dave Farber wrote:

Begin forwarded message:

*From:* Kris Gabor <kgabor@aol.com <mailto:kgabor@aol.com>>

*Date:* December 26, 2009 1:21:16 PM EST

*To:* <mailto:dave@farber.net>dave@farber.net

<mailto:dave@farber.net>

*Subject:* *TSA overreaction to Delta incident*

Hi, Dave,

For IP, if you think it's appropriate. If the following is true,

this is another good example of kneejerk overreaction after a

security incident. There used to be a rule that passengers bound

for DCA had to remain seated during the last 30 minutes of flight,

but even that was scrapped after a few years. Good luck telling

passengers they can't use their laptops or read a book for the

last hour of a flight. As someone had suggested in the wake of

9/11, maybe the best thing would be to strip all the passengers

naked and chain them into their seats for the entire flight.

It's interesting how Air Canada has already posted this, but there

is no official announcement of it yet from TSA. I wonder if after

the initial kneejerk, pragmatism may yet win out.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/27/us/27plane.html

"Although transportation officials had not announced new security

measures yet, Air Canada said the Transportation Security Agency

would make significant changes to the way passengers are able to

move about on aircraft. During the final hour of flight, customers

will have to remain seated, will not be allowed access to carry-on

baggage and cannot have personal belongings or other items on

their laps, according to a notice

<http://www.aircanada.com/en/news/trav_adv/091226.html> on Air

Canada’s Web site.

In effect, that means passengers on flights of about 90 minutes or

less will not be able to get out of their seats, since they are

not allowed to move about while an airplane is climbing to its

cruising altitude.

Air Canada also told its United States bound customers that they

would be limited to a single carry-on item and that they would be

subjected to personal and baggage searches at security check

points and in the gate area. It said this would result in

significant delays, canceled flights and missed connections. Air

Canada said it would waive the baggage fee for the first checked

bag as a result of the new policy."

Archives <
<
Listbox] <http://www.listbox.com>

-------------------------------------------
Archives:
RSS Feed:
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

-------------------------------------------
Archives:
RSS Feed: Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

--
Stewart Baker
o: 202-429-6402
c: 202-641-8670

interesting-people message