Ned
09-14-2006, 08:28 AM
Joel Widzer latest column, "Are we safer now? You bet!" is intriguing. Joel states, "Are we safer five years later (referring to 9/11)? You bet! Yes, our intelligence and security systems still need work, but the facts are undisputable: Not one major U.S. airline has suffered a terrorist attack since 9/11."
Since I disagree, and think TSA has not made us safer since 9/11, I wanted to look at the actual data Joel used, rather than the statistics quoted with their conclusion, to see what I would conclude from them.
To start, I went to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (http://www.bts.gov/publications/transportation_statistics_annual_report/2001/html/chapter_05_figure_01_114.html) at the US Department of Transportation and looked at the underlying data concerning "Worldwide Civil Aviation Hijackings: 1970–2000" we're all aquainted with 2001 and beyond.
Joel looked at the incidences of airline security breaches since 1930 and ended at 1998. He coupled the years of 1987 through 1998. He specifically mentioned the "notorious bombing of Pam Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland" which occured in 1988, one year from the start of that time span. So you know, I don't dispute the numbers used by Joel at all. I do dispute how he's used them and the conclusion he's drawn from them.
Joel states, "Not one major U.S. airline has suffered a terrorist attack since 9/11. Not much of a benchmark, you say?" I don't think that the premise of no US airline suffering a terrorist attack since 9/11 is much of a benchmark. I don't think it's a benchmark because that fact doesn't tell us why there have been no attacks since 9/11. There could be a myriad of reasons for it well beyond TSA. There needs to be more information than this, to say we're safer due to TSA and the Department of Homeland Security, because we've not been attacked for the last 5 years. Do you think that's a weak argument about Joel's use of statistics? Well I do agree it's not strong enough. Keep reading please.
Let's look directly at the statistics Joel has used and the underlying numbers.
According to the US Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics from 1992 through 2000 (9 years) there were 225 hijackings, world wide, of all airlines. During those same 9 years there were no hijackings of US carrier planes, zero, zilch, nada, none. As Joel says, since 9/11 there were no hijakings either, however, there was Richard Reid's attempt with his shoe bomb since 9/11. I don't think we can count Mr. Reid's incident against TSA, as it was too soon after 9/11 to count against them, and fortunately it was twarted.
Here's the problem with Joel's use of the statistics, as I see it. Prior to 9/11 we went 9 years in the US without any hijackings, and since 9/11 we've gone 5 years without any hijackings. Let's look at Joels coupling of the years 1987 through 1998. In the first 5 years of that 12 year time span, there were 7 hijackings of US flagged carriers, but in the last 7 years of that time span there were none. There were also no US carrier hijackings from 1999 until the 9/11 hijackings. Why did Joel couple 5 years where there were some hijackings with 7 years with no hijackings, and then lop off 2 more hijacking free years which he could have put in, from his statistical quotes? In fact, why wasn't the time span from 1998 until September, 2001 used at all? I have no idea why.
I conclude that you can't call 2001 or 2002 (when TSA work really went into effect) as the "turn around year" for limiting hijackings as Joel infers, from when he says the statistics show TSA made us safer. Somehow, for 9 years prior to 9/11 we did very well on the hijacking front, without TSA. In fact, even from 1984 through 1991, while the world had 139 hijackings, we had only 18 on US flagged carriers. I think this suggests that for whatever reason we've been relatively safe for years, and that it's probably much harder to get to terrorize us in the US, than elsewhere. Perhaps having two oceans of great width on either side of the US has something to do with that. It's harder to slip into this country than European countries.
While it's true that we haven't had a hijacking since 9/11, I don't think one can take that statistic, and/or Joel's use of it, in light of all the numbers, not just an extract of the numbers, as proof that we're safer. We may be safer, we might not be safer, the numbers stated by Joel Widzer, in his column, just don't prove it to me, one way of the other.
Since I disagree, and think TSA has not made us safer since 9/11, I wanted to look at the actual data Joel used, rather than the statistics quoted with their conclusion, to see what I would conclude from them.
To start, I went to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (http://www.bts.gov/publications/transportation_statistics_annual_report/2001/html/chapter_05_figure_01_114.html) at the US Department of Transportation and looked at the underlying data concerning "Worldwide Civil Aviation Hijackings: 1970–2000" we're all aquainted with 2001 and beyond.
Joel looked at the incidences of airline security breaches since 1930 and ended at 1998. He coupled the years of 1987 through 1998. He specifically mentioned the "notorious bombing of Pam Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland" which occured in 1988, one year from the start of that time span. So you know, I don't dispute the numbers used by Joel at all. I do dispute how he's used them and the conclusion he's drawn from them.
Joel states, "Not one major U.S. airline has suffered a terrorist attack since 9/11. Not much of a benchmark, you say?" I don't think that the premise of no US airline suffering a terrorist attack since 9/11 is much of a benchmark. I don't think it's a benchmark because that fact doesn't tell us why there have been no attacks since 9/11. There could be a myriad of reasons for it well beyond TSA. There needs to be more information than this, to say we're safer due to TSA and the Department of Homeland Security, because we've not been attacked for the last 5 years. Do you think that's a weak argument about Joel's use of statistics? Well I do agree it's not strong enough. Keep reading please.
Let's look directly at the statistics Joel has used and the underlying numbers.
According to the US Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics from 1992 through 2000 (9 years) there were 225 hijackings, world wide, of all airlines. During those same 9 years there were no hijackings of US carrier planes, zero, zilch, nada, none. As Joel says, since 9/11 there were no hijakings either, however, there was Richard Reid's attempt with his shoe bomb since 9/11. I don't think we can count Mr. Reid's incident against TSA, as it was too soon after 9/11 to count against them, and fortunately it was twarted.
Here's the problem with Joel's use of the statistics, as I see it. Prior to 9/11 we went 9 years in the US without any hijackings, and since 9/11 we've gone 5 years without any hijackings. Let's look at Joels coupling of the years 1987 through 1998. In the first 5 years of that 12 year time span, there were 7 hijackings of US flagged carriers, but in the last 7 years of that time span there were none. There were also no US carrier hijackings from 1999 until the 9/11 hijackings. Why did Joel couple 5 years where there were some hijackings with 7 years with no hijackings, and then lop off 2 more hijacking free years which he could have put in, from his statistical quotes? In fact, why wasn't the time span from 1998 until September, 2001 used at all? I have no idea why.
I conclude that you can't call 2001 or 2002 (when TSA work really went into effect) as the "turn around year" for limiting hijackings as Joel infers, from when he says the statistics show TSA made us safer. Somehow, for 9 years prior to 9/11 we did very well on the hijacking front, without TSA. In fact, even from 1984 through 1991, while the world had 139 hijackings, we had only 18 on US flagged carriers. I think this suggests that for whatever reason we've been relatively safe for years, and that it's probably much harder to get to terrorize us in the US, than elsewhere. Perhaps having two oceans of great width on either side of the US has something to do with that. It's harder to slip into this country than European countries.
While it's true that we haven't had a hijacking since 9/11, I don't think one can take that statistic, and/or Joel's use of it, in light of all the numbers, not just an extract of the numbers, as proof that we're safer. We may be safer, we might not be safer, the numbers stated by Joel Widzer, in his column, just don't prove it to me, one way of the other.