The Joys Of Air Travel

  past, present, future 
  Originally uploaded by Okaypro.

Michael Parekh wrote a post that resonated with me yesterday.

Because like Michael, I had the pleasure of flying yesterday. It wasn't the flying that was the issue, it was the security at the airport.

Michael lists these sights he witnessed yesterday:

• A couple scrambling to pack expensive bottles of wine and champagne into their checked luggage, while wrapping them with any convenient materials at hand, including strips of cardboard.
• A woman trying to give away her favorite bottle of perfume to any takers rather than throw them into the trash.
• A TSA screener taking away a bottle of water from a bewildered blind old lady in a wheelchair going through airport security.
• A guy applying Visine on his eyes before throwing the bottle away in front of a TSA screener at the gate.
• The steward on my flight reacting with an uncomprehending look when I informed him that there were going to be a lot of thirsty people boarding the flight in a minute.  Luckily, the catering representative in the galley was quicker on his feet, and immediately offered to stock the plane with additional bottles of water.
• After all the primary and secondary checks at the gate, including tagging of all the carry-ons coming on board, the airline personnel realizing that they'd let a woman with her three kids board the flight WITHOUT checking and scanning their boarding passes.

To that list I'll add the light brown skinned family in front of me, father, mother, older sister, baby, who had to give up their baby formula to get through security at JFK yesterday morning at 5:45am. At that point, I had no idea why they were getting such as hassle. But it upset me to witness it.

Later in the day, I realized what had happened.

As Michael said, "another day where millions of travelers everywhere, including yours truly, gave up another inch of our freedom to travel with our stuff, in exchange for hopefully safer travel for all."

Comments

[Steve]

Michael's supposition that there is a "freedom to travel with our stuff, in exchange for hopefully safer travel for all" is not only silly, it is dangerous. There is no such freedom and never was. One could never get on a plane, for example, with a container of nitroglycerin, even though it was disclosed and essential to one's, say, perfectly legal fertilizer business, and despite that one can transport that in one's car or through truck freight. Smoking is now prohibited on planes - does Michael bemoan that? How about the fact that boom boxes cant be cranked during flight?

Speedy safe convenient travel is a miracle and luxury of the modern Western world, not a freedom and not a right. Which is why terrorists and our enemies love to target it -- the perceived decadence and unholiness of our western modern world is the root cause of their anger and its elimination their goal.

I dont like the security inconveniences any better than Michael or anyone and I sympathize with the frustration and dismay, but turning the need for tightened travel security into another seeming red/blue political argument (on the imagined erosion of our freedoms) is painful

[Tom Labus]

Mutiple checks of "carry on" items is the norm in other parts of the world. I travel to India and those major airports are pretty tight in terms of wanting to see and know whats in your carry on bag.

I had an apple in a pair of running shoes that caused a long discussion with a check point. There can be up to three full carry on checks between ticket check in and final boarding plus some of those guys have weapons.

[Tom Labus]

Mutiple checks of "carry on" items is the norm in other parts of the world. I travel to India and those major airports are pretty tight in terms of wanting to see and know whats in your carry on bag.

I had an apple in a pair of running shoes that caused a long discussion with a check point. There can be up to three full carry on checks between ticket check in and final boarding plus some of those guys have weapons.

[andy m]

Notice any similarity in the suspects that were arrested yesterday in the UK?

I do.

We are in a war. I find it appalling that we are so politically correct...that we have lost our ability to describe and call out evil.

"Muslims generally need to come under heightened observation. I regret writing this as much as you dislike reading it, but it needs to be said and operated upon"

The suspects from August 10th, 2006

Umir Hussain, 24, London E14
Muhammed Usman Saddique, 24, London E17
Waheed Zaman, 22, London E17
Assan Abdullah Khan, 22, London E17
Waseem Kayani, 28, High Wycombe
Waheed Arafat Khan, 24, London E17
Cossor Ali, 24, London E17
Tayib Rauf, 21, Birmingham
Ibrahim Savant, 26, London E17
Osman Adam Khatib, 20, London E17
Shamin Mohammed Uddin, 36, Stoke Newington
Amin Asmin Tariq, 23, London E17
Shazad Khuram Ali, 27, High Wycombe
Tanvir Hussain, 24, London E10
Umar Islam, 28, (born Brian Young) High Wycombe
Assad Sarwar, 25, High Wycombe
Abdullah Ali, 26, London E17
Abdul Muneem Patel, 17, London E5
Nabeel Hussain, 21, Waltham Forest

[Raj Bala]

If it is so unsafe to have a bottle of water on a flight today, why have we been allowed to bring such items onboard for all these years?

[howard lindzon]

It just feels like Bush loves this fear campaign as if he assumes we want it.

If 21 jews had blown up the world trade center, there would be massive profiling and I would expect it.

meanwhile, with now over 40 arabs/muslims involved in World trade and London, we are scared of profiling.

We should be profiling until they can prove to attract no arabs to do their dirty work?

[jackson]

I say we all travel naked. A sort of 'get to know your neighbor' program.

As long as food and beverage is provided, and reasonable, on the plane, then I see no reason for grumbling.

Far too many people exceed a reasonable amount of carry-on anyway.

I'd love to see no carry-on luggage.

You are allowed a book.

[Tony Alva]

Steve said it all, so I have nothing to add other than to say the minute I heard of the "no carry on" thing happening in the UK I knew Jackson would be calling for it here in the U.S.

[anonymous]

"As Michael said, "another day where millions of travelers everywhere, including yours truly, gave up another inch of our freedom to travel with our stuff, in exchange for hopefully safer travel for all.""

well, as hobbes said, we all surrender certain freedoms to maintain our safety for the good of the commonwealth.

[Erik Schwartz]

The joke of it is the new measures (like the creation of TSA, the shoe searches and the banning of nail clippers earlier) make us no more secure.

Talk to someone really involved in security (I have a childhood buddy who's an FBI agent)... TSA is a joke.

OK, I can no longer bring a can of coke on the plane. Unless they strip search me I can still bring a bladder of liquid strapped to my body on the plane.

People who are willing to die to take others with them will always have that power and no amount "security measures" will ever change that.

[Gordon]

Erik's right -- security cannot make us 100% safe. Imagine all the other forms of public transportation, starting with subway systems, where it would be wildly impractical to institute aiport-type security. Not just on the MTA, but in dozens of other big cities.

Imagine a coordinated attack on them. It just seems like it would be easy for terrorists to do, just as they have in Madrid, London, Mumbai and, back in the 70s, Bologna.

[Leonard P. K.]

The events which unfolded in London yesterday along with the un-going drama in the Middle East, make me shake my head in disbelief and despair ... it doesn't seem like it's going to get better any time soon folks ... if things keep on as they have been (terrorism, paranoia, wars, rising oil prices, potential pandemic, etc.), then I fear that the days of commercial air travel as an industry are indeed numbered ...

[Shri]

Wow, I am completely blown away by some of the comments here. I grew up in India and India has had more deaths due to terrorism than the US - Islamic terrorism. There's been ethnic cleansing in Kashmir of the Hindu Pundits - in short, lots of shit going on, for a lot longer than 5 years.

But I would never go so far as to say we should racially profile Muslims. My God -- what a message to send educated, loyal, good citizens of the world who also happen to be Muslims!! It will certainly push the moderate Muslims to say "What the heck? If they are going to treat us like this, to hell with them"

And let's get real -- Timothy McVeigh was white. Didn't lead to ANY racial profiling now, did it? Huh? I don't for a minute believe that if a white terrorist, of *any* religious persuasion, committed a crime any white man/woman/child would be profiled (and just so we are clear, there are millions of white Muslims -- they are not only brown).

Yes, there is lots of security in India, but not racially profiled security - just plain, painful security. Why is it okay to advocate racially profiling anywhere in the world -- shouldn't it be based on something other than race/skin color?? As a brown (Hindu, if it matters) woman, in 2004, I was put through advanced security screening SEVEN consecutive times while flying to California for work. WTF?? I fly every other week, roundtrips, for months and I get profiled. Why? Because I am brown?? It only stopped after I requested a meeting with the supervisor of the airline and vociferously aired my complaint. Ridiculous.

I do want to be safer. And so, I will support the increased security and will subject myself to it. But I also agree with Erik. And the solution is never going to be in increased security alone. It is going to be in fixing the fundamental underlying problems that are bloody hard and may not be fixable.

Do I believe Islam as a religion is at a crossroads? Yes. I do. I think moderate Muslims *MUST* speak up. MUST condemn such terrible acts and MUST show the world that they want to follow a civil path to resolution of issues. It is the only way that the religion can reclaim itself and let its peaceful, kind, cultured side show itself to the world. But let's not forget Christianity had its bloody, conquest ridden past that it got over. Islam needs to do the same. Muslims need to stop feeling constantly wronged, accept certain realities in the world (like - Israel is never "moving" from the Middle East) and work towards economically improving their economies so that poverty doesn't drive their youth to terrorism.

Yes, simplistic and things are never so easy, but one has to believe there is hope. And one has to support the moderate Muslims and show them that we won't tar everyone with the same brush.

So, all this nonsense about racial profiling is just depressing. It is fine when cops pull over African Americans. It is fine when a brown baby lacks baby food.

Hmm -- what's common? Not terrorism. Racism.

[Erik Schwartz]

By the way...

"They" win when they make us change the way we live our lives.

The real AQ victory of 9/11 wasn't 3,000 deaths, it was when our democracy voluntarily passed the Enabling La.... err I mean the Patriot Act.

They cannot take our freedom away, they can only encourage us to give it away.

[andy m]

Shri,

You have made excellent points.....

We have a problem with, ONE religion in the world today.

One religion.

And although your post is a GREAT essay on why we should not profile, frankly -- it is not compelling enough, TO PUT MY CHILDRENS LIVES AT ADDITIONAL RISK, because of a lack of fundamental understanding of a religion - and their deadly aims of world domination....

Just as, I would not allow my children to live in a leper colony - there are certain aspects of LIFE, and risks that and we need to be clear on and NOT waver in the face of sensitivity.

A Radical Form of Islam has declared war on Western civilization.

No where do you address precisely HOW TO CONFRONT that issue.

You most profound statement was
"It is going to be in fixing the fundamental underlying problems that are bloody hard and may not be fixable."

Damn right they are not fixable.

The only way to FIX it is to defeat it, and KILL the idealogy.

It has been done in the past.

The solution is tough. But, sadly diplomacy with radical ISLAM, DOES NOT WORK.

Andy

PS. Your Timothy McVeigh analogy is correct, and legitimate, however it is statistically insignificant if you want to look at hard data about terrorism and hijackings dating back to 1967.
Do you care to entertain a data discussion, around exactly WHO, and WHAT religion they are, that commits terrorism against civilians - wherther on airlines, or public buildings, or pizzerias?

None of this is easy. It is uncomfortable, but in order to understand that WAR, has been declared up "dhimmis" (non-muslims) we must understand our enemy.

PS. Shri, where precisely are the moderate muslim organizations you speak of?

[Erik Schwartz]

andy writes:

We have a problem with, ONE religion in the world today.

3rd temple Jews and "waiting for the rapture" christians are also a problem.

There's far more real risk to our children from the David Koresh's of the world than the Usama Bin Ladens's

[Dave]

To riff off Erik Schwartz' point: the only thing I ask of the religious is that they consider the depths to which religion has sunk man.

[Shri]

Andy,

I'll go backwards on your post.

Moderate Muslims -- I never said organizations, but people (mainly b/c I haven't done my research - I am sure there are moderate Muslim organizations if there are moderate Muslim people). I have many friends who are educated citizens of the world who are moderate. Who live progressive lives, lives of tolerance and have friends in many cultures (date men of different religions, for that matter). What scares me is that profiling and an unabashed tarring of everyone could push these moderates to seeing the point of view of the terrorists. These moderates are the *only* people you can count on to help solve the problem. Please let's not antagonize them. Not out of fear, but because it is the right thing to do.

Let's look at the most recent conflict. When it first started, many Muslim countries were against the Hizbollah. They stated publicly and privately that it was stupid of them to kidnap the soldiers. But when the Israel defense became so strong that civilian casualties mounted to the hundreds, they reversed their stand -- an example of losing Muslims who showed sense. Krugman had an excellent article in the NYT on this -- http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=F60F15F8385B0C728FDDAE0894DE404482 (subscription needed). Just to be clear -- my stand is that Israel has every right to defend itself. Within reason. Why is it okay for Israel to invade Lebanon when it is not okay for India to invade Pakistan after >200 civilians were brutally murdered (that's just the most recent attack)? The reason India should NOT do what Israel is doing is that it will solve nothing.

The Statistics -- I agree with you here. Statistically speaking, yes, it is true. So let's ask the next question.

Key question -- is trying to wipe out radical Islam with force the way to do it? Does radical Islam need to disappear? Yes. Will using force do it? Absolutely not. As has been proved in the last 6 years alone, using force will only make things worse. There is so much poverty and so little hope in the Islamic world at large that thousands will fill the void if you kill the first line. It will keep getting replenished. Force cannot solve it.

So, while I offer no tangible solution, neither do you. Not one that will work in my opinion anyway. I do know that showing moderation, even in the face of great aggravation, getting people to see the balance and sense with which we approach things and showing them a better way is the only thing that will work. Will it take time? Yes. Will more people die while it takes time? Yes. But the toll will be far lower than if you used force since that will lead to an endless war that stretches into eternity.

One note -- yes, we currently have a problem with *one* religion. But if you place this same statement in a two hundred year period from 1095-1270, we had something called the Crusades. Where intolerant hordes massacred people in the name of religion. The name of that religion was Christianity. And in reality, this period of time is a narrow definition -- the Crusades actually spanned something like 400 to 500 years. So, decades/centuries of brutality is not the purview of just one religion.

[3D]

Nevermind all that........ The airlines are going to have to provide more food/drinks and this is gonna jack up airfares. So we'll pay more for the privelege of having to come earlier to subject ourselves to intense searching of our belongings. We'll get stuck in airports waiting on flights with nothing to keep us occupied because we have no carry on luggage. And you'll have to wait around at baggage claim even if you only took one small bag.

[Greg]

From:
http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue7_10/chakrabarti/

"El Al is Israel's airline, and while it receives daily threats, they have not experienced a terrorist incident in over thirty years. Its success is mainly due to its tight on-site security. Each passenger each time he or she flies is psychologically evaluated. Carryon bags are checked multiple times. In essence, El Al's security system works from the assumption that every passenger is a threat, and treats him or her accordingly."

This is not "profiling" in a classic sense, but rather a pragmatic approach to evaluating individuals on a case by case basis. (is this scalable to a system the size of the United States, I don't know? but it is certainly worth considering) While as a technologist, I would love to see technology driven solutions, I do not think that will get us all the way there.

El Al's former security head seems to agree (from a 2003 Computerworld article):
http://www.computerworld.com/securitytopics/security/story/0,10801,81428,00.html

"We can do it. We don't have magicians in Israel. We have people like you and me. Instead of spending hundreds of billions of dollars on technology and finding Osama bin Laden, give me a small percentage of that and I will show you what kind of security we can have in this country. At Continental Airlines at Newark Airport, to see their adoption of El Al's security program for all flights to Tel Aviv and Amsterdam, it cost them money. But they recognized that money is important but life is more important."

[Erik Schwartz]

El Al has great security.

Now how many flights a day do they have to handle? 50? 100? How many airports? 5? 10?

[Greg]

Erik - point very well taken and I questioned the scalability in my own comment. The cost to replicate identical security measures across the United States would certainly be enormous.

That being said, to use a business analogy, aren't large market incumbents always trying to learn from the best practices of more nimble, innovative startups? There are clearly important learnings from small, experimental situations that can be logically scaled. I have got to be believe that adopting some form of psychological screening is more effective than indiscriminately confiscating ipods and contact drops.

[nicole]

hey a few comments:

-i travel regularly to the middle east and have to agree with other similar posts about other countries security checks. Jordan has efficient, thorough, polite security checks. Perhaps Queen Alia Airport doesn't carry the traffic of Heathrow, but at least as much as La Guardia in nyc. A revolutionary concept: they just look at all your liquids and check to see if they are really safe to take on the plane. Your stuff is x-rayed 3-4 times and you are frisked a minimum of 2-3 times. And they are fast and quite civilized about it. Why can't we do this? Why can't american security just be well-trained and held accountable for doing their job well? No one with 10 seconds of training is going to confuse 70% hydrogen peroxide with shampoo, toothpaste or contact lens solution, let alone water.

-racial profiling is awful. period. and mr. name list should read a bit more, at least two of those guys were converts to islam, their birth names were plain old british white people names like Don Stewart-Whyte. Also if you have ever been anywhere else in the world, it is impossible to assume that all arabs or all muslims will be dark skinned with long beards and gowns. Muslims or Arabs just like Christians, Jews, Americans, Britons, Italians etc, do not always look like the stereotype. And the degree to which they look like the stereotype is not a reliable indicator of extremism, particularly if the goal is not to look extreme.

-there is no amount of security that can thwart a determined killer. caution is good, but it has to be sustainable and practical. It is not reasonable to ask people to go hours and hours without water, which is what happens if you are going on an international flight without bringing your own water. It is not reasonable to ask people to get on 13 hour flights without toothpaste or contact solution or baby formula. Especially when better screening would eliminate the need for such deprivations and actually ensure safer travel.

[Helmar]

"no one with 10 seconds of training is going to confuse 70% hydrogen peroxide with shampoo, toothpaste or contact lens solution, let alone water."

Sorry to burst your bubble, Nicole, but 70% Hydro Perox looks just like sparkling water. Only the effect on you when you drink it is slightly different. ;-)

On the other posts, just three comments:

1) "giving up an inch of freedom" - I dunno if I'm the only one here that thinks that there's someone with a big phallus somewhere waiting in the background, soon asking you to bend over to give up yet another inch of your freedom. At that time, your wife and kids will be gone already.

2) Given that the War on Terror created more terror than every before, maybe we should unilaterally declare a War on Security. America being so good at declaring war, I'm sure they'll pull off this one with ease.

3) As long as the 'western civilization' is on an economic crusade for raw materials in order to support its unsustainable and insatiable lust and greed for eternal growth, it will get worse rather than better. What is happening now in terms of terrorism is the effect, not the cause. We are the cause, but we're either too stupid or too ignorant to realise that. We're living a plush life at the expense of the majority of people on this planet - something you don't realise unless they are coming after you either in form of terrorist attacks or crime and violence as seen so nicely here in South Africa.

Helmar

PS: re 9/11, I'm sure you've all seen Loose Change 2nd Edition on Google Video. If not, do yourself the favour. It'll make you really angry, good angry, though, and hopefully leading you to become part of the solution. Right now most of you, either by attitude or by profession (or both) are part of the problem. That misguided little suicide bomber is just your alter ego. He will only go away if you go away in some way. Until then we're nothing but playballs of those in power, those who have never cared for human life, be in in NYC, Rwanda, Iraq, Nicaragua, Bosnia, Afghanistan, ... those that you in the US keep supporting.

[Helmar]

quick comment for andy m: I dunno in which country you've grown up, but it's 'innocent until proven guilty'. These people are a) suspects, nothing else, and b) that list according to UK police should have never been released. The names didn't come from them - they came from a bank.

One day maybe someone calls the local police, tipping you off as a child molester, rapist or uhmmm... terrorist, and before you can say 'big brother is good for us', your name appears in the papers. Lovely, eh? No matter how hard you'll then try to clear your name, you're toast - and you KNOW it!

I find it staggering and alarming at the same time how quickly reason goes out of the window when emotions run high.

And just in case you didn't know, what 'they' want is to make you afraid, very afraid. So they stage attacks on the WTC, etc, feed your propaganda, and yeah, kill plenty of people in the process to drive home the point. Why? Because if you're afraid, you'll give up more than an inch of freedom. Fear is the base for mass manipulation. Fear keeps you from asking questions. A free main isn't afraid. A free man asks questions. A free man doesn't buy into all the BS that's been espoused on the news. A free man cannot be manipulated. A free man is the nightmare of those in power. So 'inch by inch' they take away your freedom, making you more and more afraid, so that you'll eventually beg to be enslaved in order to be safe. The bad news is that even then you won't be safe, but you'll live a life that's not worth living anymore. Your bottled water and laptop on the plane is not even the beginning anymore. It started way before that. Way before that. Anyway... happy giving up your freedom, everybody!