Badmovies.org Forum

I've heard this expression tossed around alot lately. Terrorists hate Israel yet their airport never gets bombed and their planes don't get hijacked. This is done by a type of profiling that is part racial and so forth and also part psychological.

From what I understand they interview EVERY person who gets on a plane. I don't know exactly what they ask them but I'm wondering if they did that here ..would it even be possible?

America has alot of airports and millions of people flying. Could they manage to interview every single person on every flight? forever?

That seems like ALOT of interviews.

I've heard this expression tossed around alot lately. Terrorists hate Israel yet their airport never gets bombed and their planes don't get hijacked. This is done by a type of profiling that is part racial and so forth and also part psychological.

From what I understand they interview EVERY person who gets on a plane. I don't know exactly what they ask them but I'm wondering if they did that here ..would it even be possible?

America has alot of airports and millions of people flying. Could they manage to interview every single person on every flight? forever?

That seems like ALOT of interviews.

Yeah, that's part of it.  I gather you also don't know the exact place you'll be boarding and the exact plane until moments before you get on. 

Oh I understand the logic behind it and you can't argue with the results they've gotten, I just wonder how that system could be applied here.

Also, on another level, we aren't Israel. The idea that we are importing their policies implies their problems are ours in a way that is at odds with many peoples understanding of what our country is, namely a republic not an empire.

Terrorists hate Israel yet their airport never gets bombed and their planes don't get hijacked.

Other countries that aren't on the muslims s**t list don't have to do any of this.

Eventually we are going to have to come to grips with the fact that we are not wanted in the middle east and they will be over here doing stuff like 9/11 as long as we are over there.

Theres no magic security pill that is going to allow us to continue with the status quo as far as our foreign policy is concerned.

Our airports aren't getting bombed and our planes aren't getting hijacked, either ...

They'll never be safe from attack, no matter what we do.  We already have plenty of security.  Would shoveling even more inconvenience on travelers - not knowing what gate or plane they're going to until the last minute, pre-flight interrogations - really help that much?

Two studies by a group of Cornell University researchers have found that strict airport security has the unintended consequence of increasing road fatalities, as would-be air travelers decide to drive and are exposed to the far greater risk of dying in a car accident.

In 2005, the researchers looked at the immediate aftermath of the attacks of September 11, 2001, and found that the change in passenger travel modes lead to 242 added driving deaths per month.  In all, they estimated that about 1,200 driving deaths could be attributed to the short-term effects of the attacks. The study attributes the change in traveler behavior to two factors: fear of terrorist attacks and the wish to avoid the inconvenience of strict security measures; no attempt is made to estimate separately the influence of each of these two factors.

In 2007, the researchers studied specifically the effects of a change to security practices instituted by the TSA in late 2002. They concluded that this change reduced the number of air travelers by 6%, and estimated that consequently, 129 more people died in car accidents in the fourth quarter of 2002.  Extrapolating this rate of fatalities, New York Times contributor Nate Silver remarked that this is equivalent to "four fully-loaded Boeing 737s crashing each year.".

The 2007 study also noted that strict airport security hurts the airline industry; it was estimated that the 6% reduction in the number of passengers in the fourth quarter of 2002 cost the industry $1.1 billion in lost business.

Also, there's the bit about unintended consequences.

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_Security_Administration#Unintended_consequences_of_strict_security[/url] ([url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_Security_Administration#Unintended_consequences_of_strict_security[/url])

israeli guy I talked to said the inteviews are like a minute long and thinks its very much feasible for US airports.

israeli guy I talked to said the inteviews are like a minute long and thinks its very much feasible for US airports.

I think it'd do a lot more good and cause far fewer problems than the "enhanced" pat downs and screeners.  I don't know how feasible it is or is not though.

While that's a question of feasability, also keep in mind that there are those who are trained to withstand questioning, and to not show any bodily or vocal indications that they are up to no good.

That and as usual the logistics of such a large deployment of such a procedure in a country as big as the U.S.

It'll be nice when we run out of fuel and air travel becomes the world of the super-rich...

other people were talking about allowing people to have guns on planes. I don't know if that is a cure for this. One, you would almost certainly have to stop serving alcohol on planes.