Flight redirected because of "no-fly list" mix up

[MattW]

http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-01-29/story/passenger_cleared_name_does_not_match_no_fly_list

Continental Flight 881 was diverted mid-flight to Jacksonville International Airport because officials thought one of the passengers might be someone on the government's no-fly list. The FBI and U.S. Transportation Security Administration didn't release the passenger's name.

A law enforcement official says the passenger on a flight that was diverted to Jacksonville Friday evening wasn't a match to a person listed on the government's list of suspected terrorists who are banned from flying.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/01/29/us.colombia.diverted.flight/index.html

A Homeland Security (http://topics.cnn.com/topics/U_S_Department_of_Homeland_Security) official said it was a case of "mistaken identity" and that the FBI had to verify the identity of the passenger.

Okay. How many more of these do we need before we realize that the tissue thin security is not effective at its intended job?

Grannies get frisked and detained, planes get rerouted, shoes inspected, 3.5 oz bottles trashed, and still underwear bombers get on flights and just about manage to down an aircraft.

[icerose]

I vote for the brutal approach. Anyone found threatening the lives of others carrying bombs or what not is taken out onto the tarmac and shot. It is the then broadcast around the world. Same for inmates who rape or kill another inmate. Take them out into the yard and shoot them in the head and broadcast it to all prison inmates.

*granted this isn't possible wherever there is corruption or it would be abused, and I am not aware of any sector that isn't corrupted or prone to corruption*

[MattW]

I vote for the brutal approach. Anyone found threatening the lives of others carrying bombs or what not is taken out onto the tarmac and shot.
A little reactive, but surely effective. Except as a deterrent to folks who are suicide bombers.

I'd prefer something that's a little more predictive of intent to do harm, as opposed to trying to inspect every article of every passenger based on the tactics of past attacks.

[Williebee]

Wonder if Jacksonville citizens feel like the FBI and TSA think they are expendable?

"Hey, he might have a bomb. Let's put them in Jacksonville!"

[Kaiser-Kun]

The Wikipedia page for "False Positives" in the list shows some pretty crazy examples... my favorite:

A 60 Minutes report brought together 12 men named Robert Johnson, all of whom had experienced problems in airports with being pulled aside and interrogated. The report suggested that the individual whose name was intended to be on the list was most likely the Robert Johnson who had been convicted of plotting to bomb a movie theater and a Hindu temple in Toronto.

I'd recommend, before booking a flight, Google your name and check if there's anyone else with the same name.

[MattW]

The Wikipedia page for "False Positives" in the list shows some pretty crazy examples... my favorite:



I'd recommend, before booking a flight, Google your name and check if there's anyone else with the same name.
I have an uncommon name, but I've tested positive for explosive residue at an airport. I should be on a list, but somehow, somewhere, I didn't get flagged. Is it because they keep records and ruled me out because the false positive was later corrected on a retest? Shouldn't the same standards apply to common names?

Isn't relying on name search too flawed a process? Americans have trouble spelling Arabic names, even if they use their real passports, and we'd still need to know they were up to something to get on the list - innocent suicide bombers recruited for just such a purpose would never set off an alarm.

[clintl]

So what do you suggest instead?

[MattW]

So what do you suggest instead?
Not a personal attack against you clint, but why is that a such a popular knee-jerk response nowadays? Does lack of an alternative negate valid criticism of a broken process?

I've honestly got nothing. But if you follow the pattern of TSA threat assessment and prevention, the next safety protocol will be to prevent passengers from wearing underwear or using the bathrooms. That's can't be effective at preventing anything but one failed attack, not any future ones.

[Kaiser-Kun]

If I were a terrorist, I could use a fake ID to pass the test... Seems to me like an easy-to-circumvent, hard-to-success method. I mean, I'm not gonna post my bombing plans in Facebook and then use my credit card to fly to Washington...

[clintl]

Why is that a such a popular knee-jerk response nowadays? Does lack of an alternative negate valid criticism of a broken process?



Well, maybe this is the best system that can be created with the information we have to work with. Obviously, there have been mistakes. There have been lapses in judgement. But I think, in reality, when someone condemns a whole system but doesn't have an alternative to deal with what is a real problem, it's entirely valid and rational to discount their complaints to a certain extent. A flawed system that prevents some terrorists from boarding is better than no system at all. At least you can work on fixing the flaws if you have something that sort of works, and I think the no-fly list probably at least sort of works, even if we do have these kinds of incidents occasionally.

[Fran]

I think the problem with the list is how many people AREN'T on it who should be? The Christmas Day bomber should have been because his family reported he was unstable and an extremist. Are well-organised and orchestrated terrorist groups going to send a suicide bomber whose name's on the list? I hope they're as thick as that but they can't all be.

[clintl]

Well, I think both situations are flaws that need to be worked on. But a perfect system is probably unattainable.

[astonwest]

I'm thinking we should pump anasthesia into the cabin prior to takeoff and let people wake up after they land...that should give the authorities plenty of time to get all their ducks in a row.
:rolleyes:

[benbradley]

... (http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-01-29/story/passenger_cleared_name_does_not_match_no_fly_list)
Okay. How many more of these do we need before we realize that the tissue thin security is not effective at its intended job?
How many idiotic situations where a high school administration treats a student found posesssing an aspirin the same as a student found posessing heroin under "zero tolerance" policies before they realize zero tolerance not only doesn't do what it claims to do, but is grossly unfair?

Zero Tolerance policies are unlikely to change without a strong impetus from outside the public education system.
Well, maybe this is the best system that can be created with the information we have to work with.
It's the best system the US Government and US Airlines are willing to create and pay for. Here's a different system:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Al#El_Al_security
Here's the first sentence describing El Al security measures:
Passengers are asked to report three hours before departure.
That's unreasonable! We can't have US air travelers do that!

[MattW]

That's unreasonable! We can't have US air travelers do that!
Especially when we can't fathom taking other forms of transportation for regional trips.

"Wait three hours for a two hour flight? I wish there was some ground based transport that could get me there in a reasonable amount of time for less money and aggravation...perhaps a machine that travels on rails at a higher speed than a horse drawn carriage."

[Zoombie]

I kind of support getting knocked out for my flight. It's save on my laptops battery life...

[sassandgroove]

We're planning on driving 15 hours to NY state from Al in the fall b/c - well besides the expense- we don't want the hassle of security.

Clint- it is possible to have valid criticisms and yet not know a better way.