By Jay Stanley, Public Education Director, ACLU Technology & Liberty Program
Okay, so no one is explicitly calling for body cavity searches for all airline travelers — yet. But the logic of those pushing for body scanners for all airline passengers, and criticizing the ACLU for opposing that, leads to the inescapable conclusion that these critics would support such a policy.
Consider:
- When Richard Reid brought explosives onto an airliner hidden in his shoes, the authorities made everyone remove their shoes. When security experts and other critics pointed out that this was "silly security," defenders argued that we must put up with it in order to block that particular kind of plot.
- Now that a disturbed person has brought explosives onto an airliner in his underwear, panicked voices want the TSA to essentially view naked pictures of every passenger who boards an airline — that’s up to 2.5 million people per day on domestic flights alone. When the ACLU and members of Congress object, critics cry that we must abandon our personal dignity and privacy in order to block that particular kind of plot.
- It is far from clear that body scanners will, as so many people seem to be assuming, detect explosives concealed the way that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab concealed them. Some experts have said plastic explosives can be concealed against the human body. It’s not clear how good scanner operators would have been at detecting the "anatomically congruent" explosives Abdulmutallab hid in his underwear (let alone how consistently effective bored operators would be if these $200,000 machines were placed at every screening station in every airport for 2.5 million people a day).
- However, if terrorists even perceive that scanners will work, they take the next logical step and conceal explosives in their body cavities. Al Qaeda has already used this technique; in September a suicide bomber stowed a full pound of high explosives and a detonator inside his rectum, and attempted to assassinate a Saudi prince by blowing himself up. (The prince survived.)
So it seems that when the next terrorist tries to blow up an airliner using this technique, all the usual jittery voices surely will once again say that we must abandon our personal dignity and privacy in order to block that particular kind of plot. So we’d just like to get ahead of the game and state right now that the ACLU will be opposed to that.
Of course, even if body cavity searches for all were made policy, terrorists would probably shift their efforts to just hiding explosives in their carryon baggage, and the TSA’s level of success in catching contraband has always been, shall we say, mixed. And reliably catching every possible means of hiding 50 grams of explosives is probably impossible given the millions of people who fly each day.
Yes, the government must zealously work to make us as safe as possible and to take every reasonable step to make sure security breaches like the ones that led to the Christmas Day attempted attack are not repeated. But we need to act wisely. That means not trading away our privacy for ineffective policies. We should be investing in developing technologies such as trace portal detectors (a.k.a. "puffer machines") that provide a layer of security without invading privacy, and in developing competent law enforcement and intelligence agencies that will stop terrorists before they show up at the airport.
Ultimately, it is up to the American people to figure out just how much privacy they want to abandon to block a few particular means of carrying out terrorist attacks. The ACLU represents those who value privacy in this debate. But when Americans make that decision, they should do so with their eyes wide open, without any illusions that this will prevent all attacks on airliners, much less attacks on shopping malls or all the infinite number of other plots and targets that terrorists could come up with if they are not stopped by competent law enforcement and intelligence agencies.



9 Comments




I still can’t figure out why security for airplanes appears to be so stringent, when it is largely smoke and mirrors? For the amount of human capital and actual dollars spent on this awful system, we could have something as secure as Israel. Can we just hire them to run our system? Maybe a little outsourcing would do the TSA some good.
As for the balance between privacy and security, we can do much better. As someone who has flown about 30 times this past year, I can tell you that I’d err on the side of security — if, and only if, the hassles and intrusions actually provide real security. No more smoke and mirrors.
Rec’d, thanks.
I can’t believe they are so opposed to something that has not even been proposed.
The ACLU should try fighting the true fights instead of making up one to fight.
When I was a kid in the late 1950s and early 1960s, I taught myself how to make rockets and in the process learned how to make various explosives. (It was easy to get chemicals then.)
One powerful explosive a friend and I figured out how to make (from an encyclopedia article), was a harmless purple liquid. When poured on paper and left to dry, it became a contact explosive. Killed lots of flies that way.
Al Qaeda knows all that I knew and more.
If they really want to blow up an airliner, no problem.
The problem is, Richard Reid and the crotch bomber are nincompoops. Al Qaeda isn’t trying very hard.
I believe Al Qaeda knows that.
I also believe there was no intention to blow up the aircraft, unless by accident. Until I see it demonstrated on a real aircraft, in flight, I don’t believe the amount of PETN used normally would have been sufficient to bring down an aircraft.
However, watching the “most powerful country in the world” jump itself through self-made hoops in response: priceless.
Yes, agreed. Priceless indeed!
IntelVet: Do you know what MOS 8666 was?
That’s what I was in the army.
For the most part terrorists have one thing in common, they’ve purchased airline tickets to carry out their attacks against the U.S.. If we want to limit terrorists attacks wouldn’t it make more sense to just stop selling airline tickets to terrorists?
I see this as an insidious plot by Amtrack. Eventually, we’ll understand that good rails beat lousy planes and investment will flow to new tracks.