[IP] Mostly show
Title: http://frequentflyer.oag.com/stories/02042004/f120701-3.asp
Missing in Action
by <http://frequentflyer.oag.com/bios/biochandler.asp>Jerome Greer Chandler
3ff216d.jpg
?Smoke and mirrors.? That?s the stuff of which this nation?s aviation
security system is composed. So says a controversial new study by a
respected security-consulting firm.
?Today we do not have anything resembling real security to protect the
commercial aviation system and the traveling public,? asserts David Forbes,
president of Colorado-based BoydForbes Security. ?The sham pretense on
stage now, and the implied direction of the future, is Oscar winning
material of the ?smoke and mirrors? variety.?
In writing the white paper Missing In ActionAviation Security In America,
Forbes tapped the expertise of a slew of industry insidersairport
managers, airport employees, security specialists. Several of the people
the author talked to were at one time employed by the federal government?s
aviation security apparatus.
Among the major conclusions of the white paper:
? Security upgrades are aimed at show, not substance. BoydForbes maintains
that many of the actions the government has taken since September 11 have
been aimed at influencing public perception, rather than increasing safety.
The study says this philosophy began with the stationing of ?National
Guard-like mannequins? at screening points. Meanwhile, airport perimeters
and other vulnerable areas were left largely unattended.
In search of another example? How about those untrained, non-TSA personnel
who conduct ?glance & go? car searches at the entrance to parking garages
when threat levels are elevated to Orange?
? There?s been a failure to replace incompetent management. BoydForbes says
Congress and various Administrations were ?well aware of the material
weaknesses and failures? of the FAA?s aviation security program prior to
September 11. Several governmental studies detailed the shortcomings long
before that fateful Tuesday morning.
The real problem is, contends BoydForbes, many of the same peoplesome of
whom were shown to have failed in the responsibilities before September
11were re-appointed to high positions within the Transportation Security
Administration. New chairs, same players.
? An enormous bureaucracy hinders security flexibility. Because terrorists
can hit us from every angle, with devastating speed, the white paper calls
for shortening the chain of command and speeding up communications.
BoydForbes believes TSA is more focused on reactive bureaucratic structure
than on anticipatory, aggressive security.
? A lack of accountability continues to persist. Echoing the FAA aviation
security apparatus it replaced, there is no system to hold TSA management?s
feet to the fire, make them accountable for failure to perform. ?Without
this,? says the study, ?there is no assurance of excellence in aviation
security.?
? There?s a lack of cohesion. Fragmented, poorly focused and reactive.
Those are the terms BoydForbes uses when characterizing TSA?s overall
aviation security philosophy.
How to set things straight? Missing In Action calls for fundamental
cultural and operational changes within the government, specifically the
TSA. The study says that what?s really needed is nothing less than ?clear
standards and ruthless accountability.?
How do you do that? Among other things, institute truly independent
oversight. Regular audits of TSA?s performance should be done by ?an entity
outside the influence of politicians and the aviation industry.? That audit
should be made public within six months to make sure action is taken to fix
problems.
There?s also the imperative to see ahead, to deter attack, and mitigate its
effects should it happen. Again, the operant word is ?anticipate.?
BoydForbes believes there should be a ?bottom-up? vulnerability analysis
for every airport. That analysis would include contingency planning.
In the years and months leading up to September 11, aviation security
experts, governmental watchdog agencies and Frequent Flyer laid out the
case for long-overdue changes in this nation?s aviation security system. It
took an act of unbridled barbarism to make the government move.
Now, voices such as David Forbes are calling for further changes,
tightening up and streamlining a system thatwhile betteris still terribly
vulnerable. Whether the rising chorus is heeded this time is an open question.
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
