XPost: alt.flame.airlines, alt.politics.immigration, rec.travel.air   
   XPost: alt.travel.uk.air   
   From: mazorj@erols.com   
      
   "JK in TX"  wrote in message   
   news:OqiKc.6566$Qu5.2761@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...   
   >   
   > "Fred Smith"  wrote in message   
   > news:4bbb5bb7.0407120807.308f8237@posting.google.com...   
      
   > > I don't mind reasonable, common sense things we can do, such as the   
   > > Israeli El Al method where they ask passenger questions for 5 minutes or   
   > > longer, if need be.  This way, they can tell if someone is a genuine   
   > > terrorist threat.   
   >   
   > El Al is a poor choice of comparison for airline security.  The 2004   
   > Aviation Week & Space Technology Aerospace Source Book showed El Al   
   operated   
   > 29 aircraft in 2002.  Delta Air Lines ALONE, by comparison, operated 545   
   > aircraft.  Considering the prorated amount of money spent per aircraft for   
   > security, the El Al model would clearly be impossible to apply to the US   
   > airline business.  It is VERY easy to protect 30 aircraft.   
      
   Reportedly, *every* El Al flight has at least two incognito armed agents in   
   the cabin.  One of which is seated near the cockpit with authorization to   
   shoot anyone who disobeys orders to move away from the cockpit door, even   
   though it is protected by the "man trap" double door system.   
      
   > Additionally, considering the sheer volume of passengers flying each day   
   on   
   > US-flagged carriers, a five minute interview with each and every one of   
   > them, and the additional security procedures for those deemd to be a   
   > possible threat - such a process would bring the US airline industry to a   
   > screeching halt.   
      
   Can you imagine doing that here?  People get antsy when they have to spend   
   five minutes in line to get through screening.   
      
   > And on a final note.... recent events this week would seem to indicate the   
   > CAPPS-2 system is going down the drain, for privacy fears.  It's another   
   > peculiar event, considering it seems many members of the general flying   
   > public seem upset with intrusive security procedures, but CAPPS-2 would   
   have   
   > resulted in FEWER passengers being subjected to additional screening   
   > measures.  That's my opinion.  You asked for it.  :-)   Cheers!   
      
   Unfortunately, TSA let that Christmas tree get loaded down with too many   
   ornaments, such as screening for wanted criminals.  If they had kept it   
   stripped to the essentials, dumped the data after an uneventful arrival, and   
   dealt with legitimate issues such as false positives, it could have squeaked   
   by on the civil rights issues.   
      
   Some of the privacy objections seem overblown.  I still don't understand   
   what's wrong with the government dipping into commercial databases that your   
   creditors, boss, and ex-spouse can pay to get, to verify an individual's   
   identity, so long as the data is dumped after arrival.   
      
   -- John Mazor   
   "The search for wisdom is asymptotic."   
      
   "Except for Internet newsgroups, where it is divergent..."   
   -- R J Carpenter   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)