Federalizing the air cargo screening process is a drastic and short sighted solution that would further erode our proven risk-based inspection strategy. We need to find flexible, common-sense solutions to meeting the new mandates that don’t totally disregard the important role that risk-based security plays in our national security model.
Given backscatter technology’s proven track record in detecting potential threats, why has TSA chosen not to deploy it at U.S. airports, along side millimeter wave – thereby introducing competition to the procurement process and the “random factor” that TSA talks so much about. Simply put – because it didn’t focus group well enough for TSA.
Hearing topics include the congressional mandates to screen 100 percent of air cargo; Human trafficking; FEMA preparedness and response; and DHS intelligence infrastructure.
Checked Baggage, Security Checkpoint Screening Equipment to be Funded by Stimulus Money The department plans to use the funds to accelerate the implementation of optimal checked baggage solutions and the enhanced detection of liquid threats in carry-on baggage. To support this strategy DHS is proposing a plan to allocate $700 million to checked baggage explosive […]
New airport security rules to require more personal information — chicagotribune.com You may have been patted down at airports or suffered the indignity of having your dirty laundry from a vacation searched at screening checkpoints. Now prepare yourself for security to get a little more personal. Passengers making airline reservations soon will be required to […]
Passenger imaging technology is breakthrough technology that can better detect concealed items. It is another step in the right direction to raise the bar on security. Good for Secretary Napolitano. She recognizes security is the mission, while still keeping privacy and public education concerns in the forefront.
Whether talking about 100% or 50% or 10% screening, the larger the percentage the larger the cost in equipment and staff. However, I would ask 2 questions: What are we screening for and, and is the cost a sound investment in the most effective strategy?
I spent last weekend reading Bioviolence: Preventing Biological Terror and Crime, Barry Kellman, Cambridge, 2007 (reviewed last year by Foreign Affairs). I am impressed with the deep analysis and research that Professor Kellman has put into this issue. I understand his definition of Bioviolence as, “human interaction causing a disease or pathogen to attack mankind in some way that would not have naturally occurred.” Being an attorney and law professor, he categorizes the crime as Species Treason- a crime committed by man against mankind
Today’s New York Times business section carries an unusual story “Playmobil Finds Fun in the Police State” about a security check point toy that is causing some dismay among parents as being unsettling and too lifelike. Perhaps this opinion comes as no surprise on a blog dedicated to security, but such controversy over a rather trivial toy is a troubling barometer that our society is still far from prepared for the next terrorist attack.
Technology is worthy and more of it can only help, but technology alone cannot stop a terrorist. We know the terrorists are still interested in US aviation. The human factor is an essential part of the layered security recipe in the aviation environment. That is why the TSA is in the process of a transformational culture change to empower officers to rely on their experience.
Sponsored by:
