Racial Profiling Rife at Airport, U.S. Officers Say

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,304
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#1
Racial Profiling Rife at Airport, U.S. Officers Say

By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT and ERIC LICHTBLAU Published: August 11, 2012 367 Comments

BOSTON — More than 30 federal officers in an airport program intended to spot telltale mannerisms of potential terrorists say the operation has become a magnet for racial profiling, targeting not only Middle Easterners but also blacks, Hispanics and other minorities.

In interviews and internal complaints, officers from the Transportation Security Administration’s “behavior detection” program at Logan International Airport in Boston asserted that passengers who fit certain profiles — Hispanics traveling to Miami, for instance, or blacks wearing baseball caps backward —are much more likely to be stopped, searched and questioned for “suspicious” behavior.

“They just pull aside anyone who they don’t like the way they look — if they are black and have expensive clothes or jewelry, or if they are Hispanic,” said one white officer, who along with four others spoke with The New York Times on the condition of anonymity.

The T.S.A. said on Friday that it had opened an investigation into the claims.

While the Obama administration has attacked the use of racial and ethnic profiling in Arizona and elsewhere, the claims by the Boston officers now put the agency and the administration in the awkward position of defending themselves against charges of profiling in a program billed as a model for airports nationwide.

At a meeting last month with T.S.A. officials, officers at Logan provided written complaints about profiling from 32 officers, some of whom wrote anonymously. Officers said managers’ demands for high numbers of stops, searches and criminal referrals had led co-workers to target minorities in the belief that those stops were more likely to yield drugs, outstanding arrest warrants or immigration problems.

The practice has become so prevalent, some officers said, that Massachusetts State Police officials have asked why minority members appear to make up an overwhelming number of the cases that the airport refers to them.

“The behavior detection program is no longer a behavior-based program, but it is a racial profiling program,” one officer wrote in an anonymous complaint obtained by The Times.

A T.S.A. spokesman said agency inspectors recently learned of the racial profiling claims in Boston. “If any of these claims prove accurate, we will take immediate and decisive action to ensure there are consequences to such activity,” the statement said.

The agency emphasized that the behavior detection program “in no way encourages or tolerates profiling” and bans singling out passengers based on nationality, race, ethnicity or religion.

It is unusual for transportation agency employees to come forward with this kind of claim against co-workers, and the large number of employees bringing complaints in Boston could prove particularly damaging for an agency already buffeted with criticism over pat-downs, X-ray scans and other security measures.

Reports of profiling emerged last year at the behavior programs at the Newark and Hawaii airports, but in much smaller numbers than those described in Boston.

The complaints from the Logan officers carry nationwide implications because Boston is the testing ground for an expanded use of behavioral detection methods at airports around the country.

While 161 airports already use behavioral officers to identify possible terrorist activity — a controversial tactic — the agency is considering expanding the use of what it says are more advanced tactics nationwide, with Boston’s program as a model.

The program in place in Boston uses specially trained behavioral “assessors” not only to scan the lines of passengers for unusual activity, but also to speak individually with each passenger and gauge their reactions while asking about their trip or for other information.

The assessors look for inconsistencies in the answers and other signs of unusual behavior, like avoiding eye contact, sweating or fidgeting, officials said. A passenger considered to be acting suspiciously can be pulled from the line and subjected to more intensive questioning.

That is what happened last month at Logan airport to Kenneth Boatner, 68, a psychologist and educational consultant in Boston who was traveling to Atlanta for a business trip.

In a formal complaint he filed with the agency afterward, he said he was pulled out of line and detained for 29 minutes as agents thumbed through his checkbook and examined his clients’ clinical notes, his cellphone and other belongings.

The officers gave no explanation, but Dr. Boatner, who is black, said he suspected the reason he was stopped was his race and appearance. He was wearing sweat pants, a white T-shirt and high-top sneakers.

He said he felt humiliated. “I had never been subjected to anything like that,” he said in an interview.

Officers in Boston acknowledged that they had no firm data on how frequently minority members were stopped. But based on their own observations, several officers estimated that they accounted for as many as 80 percent of passengers searched during certain shifts.

The officers identified nearly two dozen co-workers who they said consistently focused on stopping minority members in response to pressure from managers to meet certain threshold numbers for referrals to the State Police, federal immigration officials or other agencies.

The stops were seen as a way of padding the program’s numbers and demonstrating to Washington policy makers that the behavior program was producing results, several officers said.

Instead, the officers said, profiling undermined the usefulness of the program. Focusing on minority members, said a second officer who was interviewed by The Times, “takes officers away from the real threat, and we could miss a terrorist we are looking for.”

Some Boston officers went to the American Civil Liberties Union with their complaints of profiling, and Sarah Wunsch, a lawyer in the group’s Boston office, interviewed eight officers.

“Selecting people based on race or ethnicity was a way of finding easy marks,” she said. “It was a notch in your belt.”

The transportation agency said it did not collect information on the race or ethnicity of travelers and could not provide such a breakdown of passengers stopped through the behavior program.

But the agency defended the program’s overall value. Behavior detection “is clearly an effective means of identifying people engaged in activity that may threaten the security of the passengers and the airports and has become a very effective intelligence tool, enabling law enforcement to bust larger operations and track any trends in nefarious activity,” the agency said in its statement.

“In addition, the deterrent value of the program can’t be overstated,” it said. Monitoring passengers’ behavior “adds another layer of security to the airport environment and presents the terrorists with yet one more challenge they need to overcome” in their efforts to defeat airport security measures, the agency said.

But government analysts and some researchers say the idea of spotting possible terrorists from their behavior in a security line relies on dubious science.

A critical assessment of the program in 2010 by the Government Accountability Office noted that aviation officials began the behavior program in 2003, in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, without first determining if it had a scientific basis.

Nine years later, this question remains largely unanswered, even as the agency moves to expand the program, the accountability office said in a follow-up report last year. It said that until the agency is able to better study and document the validity of the science, Congress might consider freezing tens of millions of dollars budgeted for the program’s growth.

Based on past research, the accountability office said the link between a person’s behavior and mental state is strongest in reading “simple emotions” like happiness and sadness.

But the link is weak in determining from behavior whether someone is lying, the report said, and “nonexistent” for determining “when individuals hold terrorist intent and beliefs.”

Representative Peter T. King, a New York Republican who has pushed for more aggressive counterterrorism measures, said he was troubled by the reports of profiling in Boston.

“If it is going on, it is wrong and can’t be defended,” Mr. King said.

Meanwhile, the Massachusetts Port Authority, which runs Logan airport, is eager to review the findings of the T.S.A. investigation, said David S. Mackey, executive director of the agency.

“There is no place for racial profiling in any security program,” Mr. Mackey said. “It is illegal, and it is not effective.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/12/u...ton-airport-officials-say.html?pagewanted=all
:smackhead:
 

THE FEZ MAN

as a matter of fact i dont have 5$
Aug 23, 2002
41,706
9,162
768
#2
El al has been doing it for years seems to work for them
 

JoeyDVDZ

That's MR. MOJO, Motherfucker!
Aug 20, 2004
28,853
5,599
693
#6
I don't think I'd stop a black guy (or girl) for expensive clothing or jewlery, but if they look like a gangbanger, here's an idea... dress appropriately for a plane flight. It's not hard.
 

Hudson

Supreme Champion!!!!!
Donator
Jan 14, 2002
32,840
4,566
898
Land of misfit toys
#7
I don't think I'd stop a black guy (or girl) for expensive clothing or jewlery, but if they look like a gangbanger, here's an idea... dress appropriately for a plane flight. It's not hard.
I think they are talking about people that are N-word-ing it up.
 

JoeyDVDZ

That's MR. MOJO, Motherfucker!
Aug 20, 2004
28,853
5,599
693
#8
Well, within reason I would probably allow some "gang banger" type clothing, but over the top "look at me, I'm so ghetto, I'm a gangsta" clothing would warrant an immediate "get the fuck over here" from me if I was a TSA guy. (Yeah Kirk, I believe sometimes profiling is warranted. So fucking what.)
 

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,304
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#9
(Yeah Kirk, I believe sometimes profiling is warranted. So fucking what.)
Actually, I think Kirk is a fan of profiling. He's always argued that we should be targeting Arabs instead of grannies and 6 year-olds. I've tried explaining to him we've been secretly doing this under the radar for awhile now, but now it looks like the jig is up on that one...
 

THE FEZ MAN

as a matter of fact i dont have 5$
Aug 23, 2002
41,706
9,162
768
#11
No not at all.
 

Hudson

Supreme Champion!!!!!
Donator
Jan 14, 2002
32,840
4,566
898
Land of misfit toys
#12
Actually, I think Kirk is a fan of profiling. He's always argued that we should be targeting Arabs instead of grannies and 6 year-olds. I've tried explaining to him we've been secretly doing this under the radar for awhile now, but now it looks like the jig is up on that one...
And Gone!!!


[video=youtube;C3viQHsBFc4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3viQHsBFc4&feature=related[/video]
 

Falldog

Wackbag's Best Conservative
Donator
May 16, 2007
19,166
6,825
568
Nothern VA
#13
People tend to dress to attract a response from someone else. You gotta look at the folks who are trying to be nondescript first.
 

MayrMeninoCrash

Liberal Psycopath
Dec 9, 2004
24,325
8,509
693
Silverdale, WA
#14
People tend to dress to attract a response from someone else. You gotta look at the folks who are trying to be nondescript first.
Like these fine gentlemen rushing through the airport to make their business meeting in DC that day

 

Hudson

Supreme Champion!!!!!
Donator
Jan 14, 2002
32,840
4,566
898
Land of misfit toys
#15
People tend to dress to attract a response from someone else. You gotta look at the folks who are trying to be nondescript first.
People who dress to be nondescript..are dressing to elicit a response. Getting up and dressing in jeans and a sweatshirt or clothes you feel comfortable in is a world away from dressing to be nondescript.
Case in Point: undercover Secret Service agents were at a funeral I was at locally, protecting Nancy Pelosi. My father and I spent 5 minutes picking them out.
 

LiddyRules

I'm Gonna Be The Bestest Pilot In The Whole Galaxy
Jun 1, 2005
141,468
49,794
644
#16
This is why I wear tuxedos.
 

Hate & Discontent

Yo, homie. Is that my briefcase?
Aug 22, 2005
15,777
1,343
628
#18
People who dress to be nondescript..are dressing to elicit a response. Getting up and dressing in jeans and a sweatshirt or clothes you feel comfortable in is a world away from dressing to be nondescript.
Case in Point: undercover Secret Service agents were at a funeral I was at locally, protecting Nancy Pelosi. My father and I spent 5 minutes picking them out.
I used to do the same thing around Fort Bragg. The squirrel types around there all tried to dress down and be nondescript... but they all did it in the same way. If you knew what to look for, it made them easy as shit to spot. Body language goes a long way with that, too.
 

Hudson

Supreme Champion!!!!!
Donator
Jan 14, 2002
32,840
4,566
898
Land of misfit toys
#20
I used to do the same thing around Fort Bragg. The squirrel types around there all tried to dress down and be nondescript... but they all did it in the same way. If you knew what to look for, it made them easy as shit to spot. Body language goes a long way with that, too.
Exactly.


Oh and my Dad was Special Forces and FBI.
But I think I learned about body language more in EMS and Lifeguarding than anything my Dad said to me.
 

Mags

LDAR king
Donator
Oct 22, 2004
34,878
11,977
693
Ill Repute
#23
Actually, I think Kirk is a fan of profiling. He's always argued that we should be targeting Arabs instead of grannies and 6 year-olds. I've tried explaining to him we've been secretly doing this under the radar for awhile now, but now it looks like the jig is up on that one...
Ahem.
 
#25
I've never worked in law enforcement, security or border patrol, so I don't know if racial profiling works or not. My thoughts are pretty black and white on it: if it works, use it, if it doesn't don't waste time and resources on it.

As a result, I have to objectively, based purely on evidence say that its probably not as effective as other methods because that's what the evidence shows:








"William Press, a professor of computer science and integrative biology at the University of Texas at Austin, now realizes we don’t have to weigh this dilemma at all. Racial profiling, he has concluded, simply doesn’t work. Never mind how you feel about it. The math doesn’t add up.

Plucking out of line most of the vaguely Middle Eastern-looking men at the airport for heightened screening is no more effective at catching terrorists than randomly sampling everyone. It may even be less effective.

Press stumbled across this counterintuitive concept — sometimes the best way to find something is not to weight it by probability — in the unrelated context of computational biology. The parallels to airport security struck him when a friend mentioned he was constantly being pulled out of line at the airport.

“He’s not on any do-not-fly list, and it occurred to me it was exactly this phenomenon,” Press said. “Either explicitly or implicitly, there was some kind of profiling going on, and the same innocent individual was being screened over and over again. That draws resources away from the screening that would find the bad guy. I realized those were basically the same problems.”

Racial profiling, in other words, doesn’t work because it devotes heightened resources to innocent people — and then devotes those resources to them repeatedly even after they’ve been cleared as innocent the first time. The actual terrorists, meanwhile, may sneak through while Transportation Security Administration agents are focusing their limited attention on the wrong passengers."









Racial Profiling Doesn’t Work Says Israeli Airport Security Chief

Rafi Ron, the former chief for security at Ben Gurion airport argues that racial profiling is not effective. Ben Gurion in Tel Aviv is Israel’s largest airport and has a generally excellent reputation for security.

Ron squarely addresses the effectiveness of racial profiling:
“One of the problems with racial profiling is that there is this tendency to believe that this is the silver bullet to solve the problem. In other terms if you are a Middle Easterner or if you are a Muslim you must be bad. If you are a European and Christian, you must be good.
But back in 1972, Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv was supposed to be attacked by a Palestinian. It was never attacked by one. It was attacked by a Japanese terrorist killing 24 people and it was attacked in the mid-80s by a German terrorist with blue eyes and blonde hair answering to the name Miller.”

Ron even goes on to blame the failure to spot shoe bomber Richard Reid as the terrorist was because of racial profiling. Ron cites testimony from a flight attendant at the foot of the airplane door that Richard Reid entered. According to the attendant’s testimony, Mr. Reid “name” and “perfect English accent” persuaded her to allow him on the plan despite her initial misgivings with his behavior.

Perhaps hearing a security expert who served at an airport with a track record of success will help persuade administration officials that profiling does not work and is not effective.