Friday, December 21, 2007
Wow. So Harvard, carrying on their great tradition of intellect, has just found out something incredible: Most of the newest security measures at airports.... doesn't make flying any more secure.
Wow again. I wonder how long it took them to figure that out. And how much money. But hey- it was likely worth every dime to find out that forcing an 80 year old man to remove his shoes and belt probably won't prevent him from hijacking a plane and flying it into a building.
Sometime after September 11, I recall reading that a senior Israeli intelligence official testified before Congress. He asserted that airport security in the US was excellent for what it was intended to do- make people feel more secure. As for the reality of security, versus the perception?
Not so much.
Oh, and here's another brilliant piece of information that the Harvard group ferreted out:
"We noticed that new airport screening protocols were implemented immediately after news reports of terror threats,"
Wow cubed. I never would have seen that one coming either.
If the TSA is willing to fork over a large sum of money- say $10 million or more- I promise to study the incidences of airport hijackings over the past 10 years or so, and find a darned effective way of finding out whether somebody is a higher risk than others for being a hijacker. It'll take some serious research, and might step on a few toes (though they'll all still have shoes on), and might come to a completely un-PC conclusion, but I have a theory in my mind regarding potential hijackers. And a way to possibly even identify them.
And I could have the results back before say, the end of the year. Or I could drag it out- er, study it more in depth- for another 6 months.
Or, for $20 million, I could study it in a conclusive manner, and take an entire year. And I guarantee my results: I'll manage to root out at least one thing that terrorists have in common. Probably even more.
Toss in a few more millions, and I'll come up with viable methods to protect passengers.
Here let me point out an important fact. Not once has a flight been hijacked and flown into a building with me on board.
Oh, and a final note: Just to show that my services are the best available, I'll give TSA a piece of free advice. Exceptional cases make bad law. Or to put it another way, passing regulations to prevent an incident that already occurred, simply to ensure that you're seen doing something, is a really bad idea.
One more thing. Just to show how clever I am, and to demonstrate my final point above, here's another quote from the article:
"The U.S. told research teams requesting information their need for quick new security measures trumped the usefulness of evaluating them, Eleni Linos, Elizabeth Linos, and Graham Colditz reported in the ."
Image courtesy of someone I don't recall. Probably either Ace of Spades or Gates of Vienna.