Tagged: CATSA
False positive – II
A few weeks ago, a swab test of Contrarian’s laptop at Stanfield International Airport registered traces of nitroglycerin, leading to an additional interview and a 95% thorough physical pat-down. Details here.
The Canadian Air Traffic Safety Agency (CATSA) has apologized in writing to a Winnipeg-based human-rights activist for a similar incident. A swab test of Ali Saeed’s hands – not his laptop – turned up traces of trinitrotoluene, or TNT. After questioning, Saeed was permitted to board his flight for Denver. His return flight was uneventful.
Regular readers will know that Contrarian detests many aspects of airport security. Recent air travel through South America — where officials do not obsess over the amount of mouthwash among your toiletries, passengers carry pop bottles aboard unchallenged, and metal detectors do not have such hair-triggers that the rivets on your Levis set them off — reinforced my view that Canada has been unnecessarily craven in adopting idiotic US screening standards.
But random checks for explosives strike me as one of the few CATSA protocols that actually carries some protective value. In my case, the secondary screening was carried out professionally and politely, and the CATSA supervisor summoned to deal with the situation explained the nature of the alarm and what might have triggered it. I have no complaint about the incident.
So why did CATSA apologize to Ali Saeed? Because officials broke protocol by telling him about their findings.
CATSA’s procedures stipulate that screening officers must not discuss an … alarm with passengers… We are sorry that this is not what occurred. We extend our sincere apologies for the screening officers’ actions and the stress it caused you.
In my case, being told what the swab test turned up and what common household chemicals (hand cream, heart medication, household cleaners) might have triggered the false positive, helped persuade me that the episode, while not fun, was reasonable and appropriate.
So it seems to me CATSA has apologized to Saeed for something it did right, and by implication, promises not to do right again.
False positive
An apparently random swab test of Contrarian‘s new MacBook Pro at the Stanfield International Airport screening area this morning detected traces of nitroglycerin.
The CATSA agent who conducted the test summoned a supervisor who explained, pleasantly, that the machine had triggered an alarm. She proceeded to check my identification and ask a series of questions about medication, chemicals, and hand creams. My negative answers turned up no obvious source of nitro, resulting in a further swab test of my iPhone, a complete physical check of every item in my carry-on bag, and a rigorous, 90% pat-down.*
In all, my case drew upon the efforts of four CATSA agents, whose demeanor ranged from polite to cheerful. After half an hour, CATSA deemed Contrarian fit to fly.
Regular readers will know that I am no fan of airport security theatre. While I found this rigorous screening unpleasant, my initial reaction is that secondary, intensive screening following a positive indication for nitroglycerin probably falls into the small subset of CATSA protocols that actually make planes safer.
I am baffled as to what triggered the false positive result. The screen cleaning wipes I bought recently? A certain person’s hand cream? The pleasant supervisor said traces of nitro can be persistent, so I now wonder if I should allow an extra half hour for the flight home.
*The pat-down was 90% in the sense that it would not have caught the Christmas Day bomber, if you catch my drift.
All we like sheep – feedback (updated)
A cautious Contrarian reader writes:
A friendly caution about taking pictures inside the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority pre-board screening area: If noticed, likely to attract unwanted security attention.
Noted — but isn’t this just further evidence that the real purpose of security theater is not to keep Canadians safe but to buttress the puffed-up functionaries charged with upholding these useless, colossally wasteful procedures?
Left: Stanfield International Airport 7 a.m., October 15. The security queue extends past the Clearwater Seafoods kiosk to the Air Canada check-in counter. Right: Half and hour later, inside the CATSA security zone.
The overwhelming evidence is that airport searches do not make us safer, but they make us more sheep-like. For more discussion of the witless “security” precautions we have accepted since 9/11, see:
Jeffrey Goldberg’s Atlantic Magazine account of the ease with which smart terrorists could thwart airport screening.
John Mueller’s Foreign Affairs article contending that there reason there have been no attacks since 9/11 is that “that there are no terrorists within the United States, and few have the means or the inclination to strike from abroad.”
A Foreign Affairs panel discussion of Mueller’s thesis: “Are we safe yet?”
James Fallows’s many sensible contributions to the national “security” debate: “Declaring Victory,” “A Nation of Ninnies,” ” The End of 9/11,” and “Civilize Homeland Security.”
Ben Friedman on The War on Hype: “Conventional wisdom says that none of us is safe from terrorism. The truth is that almost all of us are.”
The blog, Crypto-Gram newsletter, and articles of security guru Bruce Schneier, who coined the term, “security theater.”
Nova Scotia could contribute to the reversal of this craziness by easing up on the intrusive “security” fooferah that has infested provincial public buildings.
Update: Contrarian reader Jeffrey Pinhey writes:
In Rome, earlier this year, I was screened very carefully getting into a security area. Once in, I was able to buy a large, heavy glass bottle of olive oil with a nice long handle… I mean neck. I then was allowed to just carry this on to the plane with me as carry on. This was a significant weapon, at least the equal of a box cutter, even without breaking it and having the sharp glass. Yet they took away a tiny hat pin from a little old lady.
