REVIEW RSS FEED
DON'T LOOK THE WRONG WAY AT THE AIRPORT THIS WEEK OR YOU MAY BE INTERROGATED
Alternet - For the past few years, airports across the country have been using what many call "behavioral surveillance" to weed out potential hijackers among us, by covertly examining travelers' facial expressions and body language as they go through security. Unlike those airport employees who herd us along as we remove our shoes and relinquish all liquids over three ounces (with dubious results), this new program, named "Screening Passengers by Observational Techniques," or "SPOT," is carried out by TSA employees who have been trained to monitor travelers' faces and movements. As Americans head out of town this holiday season, more than 3,000 "Behavior Detection Officers" will be at 161 airports nationwide, watching our every move.
Tthe TSA boasts that the SPOT program is "derivative of other successful behavioral analysis programs that have been employed by law enforcement and security personnel both in the U.S. and around the world." Yet, the success of the SPOT program remains highly questionable. This month the Washington Post reported that, in 2008 alone, Behavior Detection Officers across the country pulled 98,805 passengers aside for additional screenings, out of which 9,854 were questioned by local police. 813 were eventually arrested.
The cost of the program, according to TSA spokesperson Ann Davis, was $3.1 million.
In an e-mail correspondence with AlterNet, Davis could not say how many of the 813 arrests led to convictions -- or for that matter, whether any terrorists were caught. "Many of the SPOT cases that resulted in arrests remain under active investigation by law enforcement," she said. "TSA doesn't always hear back from the investigative agencies on the outcome of the cases so we cannot track convictions."
But as Stephen Soldz, Director of the Center for Research, Evaluation, and Program Development at the Boston Graduate School of Psychoanalysis points out, "Even if the arrests are justified, they are less than 1 percent of the total singled out. What happens to more than 9,000 who are subjected to questioning and released?"
This question cuts to the heart of protests by civil liberties advocates and others who argue that, not only is the SPOT program a violation of people's privacy, but it is actually counterproductive, a wasteful exercise in false positives.
Tthe TSA boasts that the SPOT program is "derivative of other successful behavioral analysis programs that have been employed by law enforcement and security personnel both in the U.S. and around the world." Yet, the success of the SPOT program remains highly questionable. This month the Washington Post reported that, in 2008 alone, Behavior Detection Officers across the country pulled 98,805 passengers aside for additional screenings, out of which 9,854 were questioned by local police. 813 were eventually arrested.
The cost of the program, according to TSA spokesperson Ann Davis, was $3.1 million.
In an e-mail correspondence with AlterNet, Davis could not say how many of the 813 arrests led to convictions -- or for that matter, whether any terrorists were caught. "Many of the SPOT cases that resulted in arrests remain under active investigation by law enforcement," she said. "TSA doesn't always hear back from the investigative agencies on the outcome of the cases so we cannot track convictions."
But as Stephen Soldz, Director of the Center for Research, Evaluation, and Program Development at the Boston Graduate School of Psychoanalysis points out, "Even if the arrests are justified, they are less than 1 percent of the total singled out. What happens to more than 9,000 who are subjected to questioning and released?"
This question cuts to the heart of protests by civil liberties advocates and others who argue that, not only is the SPOT program a violation of people's privacy, but it is actually counterproductive, a wasteful exercise in false positives.
4 Comments:
Just the fact that the nation of Jefferson and Lincoln now has "Behavior Detection Officers" is amazing.
In 1775, Patrick Henry's speech of 'give me liberty or give me death' led to the British royal governor sending out the royal marines.
In 2009, an American citizen shouting 'Give me liberty or give me death' in an American airport would most certainly be detained by these 'Behavior Detection Officers'.
King George III would be proud. And he's also probably satisfied that some 230 years later, its clear that he won the war.
"A republic if you can keep it"
"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty"
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
Awesome dude.I'll definitely vote for whoever said all of that stuff! Now back to the Gamecube/ballgame/mall.
........ Orwell and Huxley were both right!!!!!!!!!
I wouldn't exactly call a program that started in 2003 "new." This is like saying you shouldn't have an alarm system in your house because you've never been burglarized. A program like this is a strong deterrent and from what I've read about the program it has nothing to do with "looking the wrong way." Do your research.
Anon 3:01, Simple assertions of wasteful crap being "a strong deterrent" or some inane comparison of the rape of the Constitution to a burglar alarm aren't much of an indication of research or expertise, more like a pathetic insulation from reality caused by ignorance and preconception.
If you had ever had any contact with law enforcement from the proletariat's perspective, you might feel differently. I think Thomas Paine said it rather well,“An avidity to punish is always dangerous to liberty. It leads men to stretch, to misinterpret, and to misapply even the best of laws. He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.”
Post a Comment
<< Home