Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither...
|
|
|
Airport Security Screening
- Thread starter Admiral Beez
- Start date
Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither...
nfitz
Superstar
Back then, the US screening at most airports was a completely different process. It was laughable. For domestic flights anyone and everyone could go right to the gate, with no identification or ticket. Entire families would go through screening and walk all the way to the gate. Meanwhile pre-2001 (1995 if I remember correctly) the private security at Pearson had caught me with a cooking knife in my carry-on (was a wrapped Christmas present ... never even crossed my mind). I doubt that would have happened at any of the US airports I used at that time.
I don't think resorting to the tactics of a police state is the solution. Sure it's effective ... so were the Stasi.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
I don't think having Federal employees manage out-going passenger, luggage and cargo is equal to the Stasi. The Canadian Air Transport Security Authority is already responsible for these tasks - I just don't like that they out-source it to an outside firm. Let's just make CATSA hire, train and be responsible for air travel security, minus the out-sourced underpaid staffers.
nfitz
Superstar
I didn't say they were. I was referring to the suggestion of having a MOSSAD like agency doing it.
I'm not sure why one assumes that a government agency is going to do a better job. Look at the RCMP, and how incompetent they are. I can't imagine an agency with a worse reputation. I'm sure a private agency could do a far more professional job, and kill less innocent people.
kEiThZ
Superstar
The context is different and could never be pulled off here. First off, Israel essentially has one large international airport to secure. Canada has several. Next, El Al, for reasons of Israel's history is essentially a state managed airline. It has armed air marshalls on-board. It's aircraft are equipped with Missile Approach Warning Systems (MAWS), electronic warfare kit, etc. El Al also conducts their own security for flights at foreign stations (like at Pearson). This of course, is largely because El Al is targeted far more than other airlines.
The threat isn't the same. The context isn't the same. And quite frankly we don't have the resources to put air marshalls on every flight.
We don't even have the resources to intercept airliners heading towards Toronto without prior warning. Baggottville with the alert Hornets is over 30 mins away on full burner (which means the birds arrive over TO with almost no gas to stay on station). And the tankers to support them are based in Trenton and would take hours to get going. This is why Downsview is such a necessary airfield. It gives the Hornets an emergency forward operating base when there are threats towards Toronto.
Anyway, all that is to say that we don't have the resources to secure every flight. We have too many flights and our country is too big to do that. There will have to be risk management.
While in general I agree, that phrase was also coined in an era where the responsibilities of citizenship included communal defence (often through military service). That context should be kept in mind. Today people either want security through infringing on everybody's freedoms or they want liberty at risk to the lives of others.
I agree with this. I have always had an issue with security outfits that outsource. And the CATSA employees while better paid than most security guards, are hardly a professional outfit. This is the government cheapening out though. They don't want to create another public service union-monopoly. And that's why they are avoiding insourcing CATSA's employees. Heaven forbid we have an incident. But if we do, I am certain this cheap labour mentality will be revealed for the threat that it is.
Higher training standards. Tighter screening. Better pay (ie. less likely for employees to be corruptible). CATSA is just security window dressing. In reality, they should be as trained and as professional as a police service if you want real security.
Nonsense. The RCMP has made mistakes to be sure. And they should rightly be criticized and investigated for them. But suggesting they are incompetent as a force is akin to suggesting the TTC is incompetent as a transit service because a few bus drivers were caught napping or taking extended breaks.
Anyway, this isn't a discussion about the RCMP. CATSA is a standalone agency with a mandate to secure air transport. The debate is whether they should be outsourcing the job or doing it themselves. And that should not be related to how any other federal agency or service performs.
You are right that private agencies could provide better security. But the private agencies that CATSA hires aren't better. That's reality. The rent-a-cops are scarcely better than mall security guards in my opinion. Mind you, they are still a lot better than the TSA in the US. Personal, I'm with Admiral on this. I'd like to see them brought in-house and turned into a proper professional service. I don't care if it costs more and they have to be paid more. Securing airliners filled with hundreds of people should not be left to poorly trained, low-skilled, underpaid workers.
Doesn't CFB Trenton also have scramble interception capabilities? Seems like that would be a logical place to put them, seeing as how it's relatively close (when flying borderline supersonic) to the 3 largest urban centres in eastern Canada.
kEiThZ
Superstar
What racist nonsense. You are labelling an entire country as a terrorist nation while they are in a conflict with their neighbours?
Do you consider the Palestinians to be perfectly innocent? Do you consider it acceptable for Hamas or Hezbollah to fire dozens of rockets and mortars at civilians daily?
What about the rest of the arab world? Were they not being racist when Jews were expelled from virtually every Arab state after the creation of Israel? Would you label Iran a "racist theocratic terrorist nation"? Their government is run by clergy who honestly believe its their duty to foment unrest in the region in the name of spreading their version of Islam. Or what about Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, etc. who have the denial religious freedoms to minorities as state policy? Or what about Pakistan which has seen its religious minority populations drop to single digits (in percentage) since independence through constant harassment and in one case (the Ahmaddiyat) outright disenfranchisement. Or is that label only reserved for Israel (because it's fashionable among some extreme leftists to label Israel so these days)?
I've lived in the Middle East and I'll tell you what a Palestinian friend told me once, "The Arabs have done far worse to the Palestinians than any Jew ever could." Want proof? Compare the living standards and personal freedoms of Israeli Arabs to Arabs anywhere else in the Middle East. And Arabs make up a third of Israel's population. Heck, compare the living standards of Palestinians living in Palestine to Palestinian refugees elsewhere. You'll be surprised.
This issue has largely been kept alive by the Arabs. While Israel took in Jews who were expelled from other countries and granted them citizenship and integrated them, Arab states have refused to absorb Palestinian refugees for decades. They refuse to grant them citizenship and they treat them like second class citizens in the hopes of "motivating" them to continue the struggle against Israel. They expect an independent Palestine to someday take on millions of Palestinian refugees, but utterly refuse to entertain the idea of their former Jewish populations returning.
Some of Israel's policies (particularly under the current government) are undoubtedly excessive at times. But to label them as a "racist theocratic terrorist nation" is nonsense when they clearly face existential threats from their neighbours, some of whom would gladly see a re-run of the Holocaust. Israel may not be innocent. But neither are their neighbours. Condemning them while giving a free pass to regimes who are far more oppressive and threatening is the height of hypocrisy.
Inflammatory jibberish. Mossad is like the Stasi? The Stasi were feared by the citizens of their own country. Israelis are hardly likely to harbour any sincere fear of Mossad. Most are probably grateful for all that Mossad has done to ensure the security of their state.
kEiThZ
Superstar
8 Wing has QRFs (Quick Reaction Facilities). However, they are only meant for prolonged temporary use....a few weeks at a time. Trenton isn't configured to function as a Fighter Wing. It's designed to operate as a transport base...and very soon as a quick deployment facility for the Army (hosting special forces). The latter move affords the SF/SOF more training space and better facilities and gives them access to aircraft that could deploy them anywhere in the world on a moment's notice. Hence the move from Ottawa. A close secondary motivation, was the ability to respond to terrorist threats in Toronto more rapidly....the Mumbai attacks still on many security experts minds.
The problem is one of budgets and geography. For the longest time, the CF had North Bay as a fighter wing to protect Toronto, Ottawa and Southern and Eastern Ontario. However, with cutbacks, bases were chosen based on geographic and political considerations. Cold Lake was too well built (with massive training spaces and air ranges) and too well positioned (for Arctic intercepts) to give up. Bagotville fulfilled a requirement to have a major airbase in Quebec that could also cover some of the North and the Atlantic approaches. We've only got enough money and enough airplanes for two bases. And with there being this much debate on the purchase of 65 F-35s (a lot of it political....any engineer can tell you why the F-35 is actually cheaper over the long run), it's very unlikely the CF will ever operate another fighter base near Toronto again. This means that we'll have to accept slower response times for Toronto and some assistance from American fighters (under NORAD) command to secure Southern Ontario (F-16s in upstate New York can actually reach Toronto faster in some cases).
kEiThZ
Superstar
Admiral Beez
Superstar
65 aircraft can equip perhaps three operational squadrons and a training unit. Assuming we lose 1-2 aircraft in accidents every 2-5 years (same rate as the CF-18) we'll have a very limited capability.
kEiThZ
Superstar
1) We may not have an OTU (operational training unit) or the OTU maybe substantially smaller. Pilots may be trained in the US. Like they are for the C-17. Most European countries with far larger combat air forces do this already for their F-16 fleets today. We're probably heading this way.
2) Current defence procurement policy does not allow for an attrition reserve. We didn't buy any extra for the Cormorant SAR fleet. We didn't buy any for the C-17. And we haven't bought any for the C-130 fleets. The idea is to buy off-the-shelf and then buy additional aircraft as required to compensate for attrition or additional requirements. The F-35 line could well be pumping out fighters for 15-20 years. We'll have enough time to buy extra airplanes if we need them. It's a policy that is contentious inside DND, but its one that has been supported by both the current Conservative and the previous Liberal government (who bought the Cormorants), so it's not likely to change any time soon.
Transportfan
Senior Member
Why the RCMP and not CBSA? It's stupid this country has a bloated, overly broad-ranged police agency that gives speeding tickets on backroads and handles special investigations, ect. The RCMP needs to be scaled down, not broadened further.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Fully concur. However, by historic tradition many provinces in this country would rather contract with the RCMP for local policing than provide for their own provincial forces. Personally, I'd love to see the RCMP restrict itself to providing specialized support and becoming a national investigative service (a la FBI).
In any event, it's not CBSA that needs to take over airport security. They have their hands full with customs and immigration duties (that cover a lot more than airports). CATSA already exists. They need to stop contracting for rent-a-cops and start training professional air transport security officers.
Transportfan
Senior Member
Actually, many provinces actually did have provincial forces historically. The mounties were meant to be temporary, and were supposed to be disbanded after the Prairies were settled, and partially were with the the establishment of the afformentioned provincial forces. Why they re-replaced those provincial forces is beyond me.
nfitz
Superstar
Racist?? How on earth do you get that from anything I said? Any Israeli I've known has been the same race I am. Many aren't.
??? I didn't metion Palestine, or any other nation such as Uganda or Samoa. I don't see the relevance to my comment.
Not sure your point here. Many Arab countries are horribly backwards and bigoted. But you can't use that to justify that other nations have the right to act like terrorists.
I don't know why one can't acknowledge that Israel is a backward bigoted criminal nation without pointing to it's neighbours and saying it's okay that they are like that, because their neighbours are worse. Do you rape your neighbour and then say it's okay, because my neighbour would have killed them instead?
Last edited: