[davidf18]

What do they call it now? Fake news?

But here is a real story. I'm American and "member of the tribe" who has been to Israel many times as shown by the passport stamps, speaks Hebrew and I didn't arrive at Ben-Gurion airport in Tel Aviv to a Turkish Air flight to Istanbul 3 hours in advance of the flight. My take-on was packed away and I was strip searched down to my underwear.

I was amused and happy for the security, but some people might be bothered by that.

[Daishiman]

Unlike the US, Israel and Turkey have been actively targeted by real, no-BS terrorist activity and their security measures are not the security theater that is the TSA, nor are their policies inspired by underlying racism but actual evidence-based security policy.

I'm 100% sure it's unpleasant, but their motives are far more trustworthy than the TSA's.

[davidf18]

I would have been subject of a terrorist attack in Jerusalem in 2008 except that I bought a chocolate bar in a tiny store at the last minute. I picked up the chocolate bar and before I could give the cashier the money, .....

> I'm 100% sure it's unpleasant,...

Well, for me, I am only too happy when there are these kinds of security measures....

Also, the screeners are all former military (even women in Israel are drafted) and have been trained to screen according to emotional response. (emotional prosody).

[InitialLastName]

Amused and happy seems like a misnomer when applied to overwhelmingly invasive, unnecessary procedures. Have they actually convinced you that this is improving security?

[davidf18]

Well, I don't believe the procedures to be unnecessary. Also, I am not a citizen of Israel but rather a guest, so anything to protect the citizens and other guests from terrorism.

In my opinion, if US airport security was run according to Israeli standards, 9/11 would have been less likely.

[logfromblammo]

If US airport security was run according to Israeli standards, all international flights would have to go through one of two airports, on the east and west coasts, each of which would have to be larger than ORD, JFK, LAX, DFW, and ATL combined. The special school required to train the screeners would effectively be the largest college in the world.

International tourism both in and out would shrink dramatically, as there are precious few religions that consider anywhere in the US to be special holy sites, and plenty of places to see in the US that don't require intensive security screening. No one I know would ever be amused by a strip search.

The Israeli air travel strategy just doesn't scale up quite that well.

[davidf18]

Well, I respectfully disagree with your assessment. First, I don't understand the two airport thing. Second, the Israelis do a security check on people before they board the (El-Al) planes -- like a day in advance or more.

Also, we have plenty of veterans who fought in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. who have real combat experience that we could pay more money for at TSA and train and staff appropriately. We could have air martials on every flight.

> "No one I know would ever be amused by a strip search."

Well, it was my own fault and a new experience and the agent/military guy was well trained and respectful. I was only too happy that they security was so through.

Israeli security is very professional and I don't feel nearly the same way with TSA in the US.

[logfromblammo]

What percentage of international passenger flights to or from Israel do not go through Ben Gurion? Part of the Israeli security strategy is to route most potential threats through the same focused security apparatus. On a land border, that means building a wall (or "security fence") and moving the travelers through fewer gates. On a sea border, that means watching the whole thing closely and only allowing traffic through a few authorized harbor ports. For the air border, it means routing most travelers through one airport (viz. Ben Gurion).

The US couldn't route everyone through one airport. It's too big. So put one on each coast. That was just a pinch of hyperbole. The US could not practically do that. But neither could it install Ben Gurion levels of security in all of its international airports, because even with all the combat vets, there are too few Americans would would have the capability, competence, composure, and willingness to take the job. And for those who would, the cost of training would be enormous. Just one airport, like O'Hare, which served 78 million passengers last year, had more than 4 times the volume of Ben Gurion's 18 million. And you would have to increase security for every single international airport, or it wouldn't work.

Americans have a different mindset than Israelis. The nation was born from resistance to arbitrary and capricious colonial restrictions, and has never been surrounded by enemies on all sides. Our history has led many of us to deeply distrust our own corrupt governments and police. Here, "security guard" is a low-prestige job for losers, as embodied in the "mall cop" archetype. You might be able to install increased security in Boston or NYC, where recent history instills a greater sense of insecurity, but it is only a short drive away from the state whose motto is "live free or die", home to libertarian festivals where an amalgamation of activist goals is to one day openly carry firearms, while openly vaporizing marijuana, jaywalking topless to request public records, while recording police in the act of not hassling anyone.

The last time I traveled for work (to New Hampshire, actually) I got to witness the American airport security procedure for checking a firearm. My co-worker apparently never went anywhere without it. And that's a typical American thing. An incredibly large number of us are almost constantly armed. Legally. You can't stop someone 3 miles out from the airport at a checkpoint and say the car can't proceed with a weapon in it. The NRA would take that all the way to the Supreme Court and win.

Even the ineffectual security theater they put on in airports now induces hordes of Americans to prefer ground transport, rather than put up with it. And not only are Americans obsessed with their own freedom, but we are also a nation of bargain hunters. This is the country that gave Wal-Mart to the world, and exported many of its own manufacturing jobs to other countries. If we had to pay more for air travel just to get expensive real security instead of cheap placebo, the airlines would simply go bankrupt [more often than they already do].

So if you try to say "arrive 3 hours before departure or strip search" in most US airports, you will have a lot of empty terminals. For one, adding 3 hours to a flight between, for instance, Los Angeles and San Francisco is making that 3 hours in an airport plus an hour in the air plus another 30 minutes for luggage and ground transport versus just getting onto I-5 and driving for 6 hours. From Chicago to Louisville, to name a flight recently in the news, that would be a 5 hour drive compared to 4.5 hours between airports. Hell, last time I flew on my own dime, I drove two hours, to reach another airport with cheaper fares. The local airport actually runs ads on television, begging people not to do that.

[davidf18]

Thank you for your detailed and reasoned response. But again, I respectfully disagree with your assessment.

First, you are speaking in terms of numerators but not denominators. Sure, we have 78 million people going through O'Hare of Chicago vs. 18 million for Ben Gurion. But the US has far more people and far more wealth than Israel as well as very large number of seasoned combat veterans.

Many Israelis carry firearms including those that live outside the green line. Those armed Israelis have stopped terrorists. In the case of a Yeshiva in Jerusalem a few years ago a terrorist killed 8 students but was stopped by another student who had a firearm (of course, former military). I know of another person who shot a terrorist who was shooting a machine gun at a bus. He was a hero but Israel doesn't publicize it because it makes him a target.

It may not be as perfect to have US International airports have the same level of security as Israel, but it could be much better than it is today. I'm not certain why Israel has the 3 hour rule.

As it is, for flights, airlines ask that you come to the airport two hours in advance, and in particular that is true for international flights.

Airports should receive more funding for security to 1) speed up the process and 2) use formal military combat vets properly trained. I suspect a small increase in the flight ticket tax to use for airport security would make the difference.

> "the airlines would simply go bankrupt [more often than they already do]."

They often go bankrupt partially because air travel for most is a commodity and it is hard to make profits with a commodity with many substitutions. Of course, consolidation such as United buying out Continental a few years ago makes airlines a bit less of a commodity because of fewer alternatives for flight.

[InitialLastName]

If they had locked and reinforced the cockpit doors, 9/11 wouldn't have happened.

That's all it takes.

[squarefoot]

Before 9/11 there was no perception of that necessity though.

[davidf18]

Well, Israel had done it for quite some time thanks to terrorists hijacking their planes. Plane hijackings have been going on for other countries for some time.

Also, IIRC, El-Al has an air martial (again former military in every case) on each flight.