Recently, a U.S. government report cited flaws in the ability of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to validate the effectiveness of its behavioral screening program. After the suspect of the attempted bombing in New York's Times Square was caught minutes before fleeing the country, the TSA, facing criticism for not catching the name from various watch lists, is now requiring that airlines check their no-fly lists more frequently. IAPA asks: are current airline security measures working or are we swatting at flies?

There are people who watch lists and scanners that watch people. We give our birthdates, gender and other information so we can be approved for airline travel. We submit to poking, prodding and embarrassing bag searches. We take off our shoes, belts, and empty our portable lives onto a plastic tray just for the privilege of getting to the other side. Welcome to the new reality of air travel.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) is an arm of the U.S. Congress that investigates the performance of the federal government. In May it issued a report suggesting that the TSA could not determine if its behavioral screening techniques were working. According to CNN, the GAO report said between May 2004 and August 2008 detection techniques led to the arrests of more than 1,100 people but not because of suspected terrorism. Instead the people were found to have committed drug or other offenses. The report claimed that at least 16 alleged terrorists were able to travel through U.S. airports undetected.

The TSA says that Behavior Detection Officers (BDO) screen travelers for involuntary physical and physiological reactions that people exhibit in response to a fear of being discovered. The TSA website claims that BDOs add an element of unpredictability to the security screening process that is easy for passengers to navigate but difficult for terrorists to manipulate.

According to the TSA, passengers traveling to the United States from international destinations may be subject to enhanced security and random screening measures throughout the passenger check-in and boarding process, including the use of explosives trace detection, advanced imaging technology, canine teams, or pat downs, among other security measures. The TSA has purchased 450 full-body imaging machines and is in the process of deploying the first 150 at airports nationwide.

The TSA is also trying to ease privacy and health concerns over the full-body scanners. The agency claims that the technology used has been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration's Center for Devices and Radiological Health, the National Institute for Science and Technology, and the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory. The TSA states that the two forms of technology – backscatter and millimeter wave – produce energy thousands times less than a cell phone transmission or x-ray exposures equivalent to 2 minutes of flying on an airplane.

With respect to privacy, the TSA insists that the officer reviewing the images cannot see the passenger and that the images taken cannot be saved. Officers are prohibited from taking cameras, cell phones or other photo-enabled devices into the resolution room, according to the TSA. The full body scan is also voluntary. Currently, some airports in Europe are studying plans to make the body scanners the only screening option. In essence: be scanned or don't fly at all.

What about those "watch lists"? Recently, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced that 100 percent of passengers traveling within the United States and its territories are now being checked against terrorist watch lists through the TSA's Secure Flight program which prescreens a passenger's name, date of birth and gender against government watch lists for domestic and international flights. The government is slowly taking over the role of checking passengers against such lists from the airlines, but until that is fully in place, airlines are required to check the lists with more frequency – a direct reaction to the alleged Times Square terrorist that almost got away.

So where does that leave passengers? Do you feel more secure when you fly? We're hearing more and more stories of incidents where aircraft have been diverted due to unruly passengers or threatening notes. Given the rarity of terrorist acts on commercial aircraft, are we better at detecting threats, a little paranoid, or just plain lucky? The answer may be a combination of all three. The TSA states that its multi-layered approach (some 20 different tactics) to security helps thwart terrorism. To some passengers, it may seem like a cover for disparate techniques, complete with their own flaws, but in the end it may take a combination of technology, common sense and good old fashioned detective work to thwart security threats to commercial aviation. It is often said that a terrorist only needs to be right once while those in charge of security need to be right all of the time. The question is: do we continue to work toward perfecting the imperfect, or do we insist on a known level of consistency that is universally applied. Will we be able to stay ahead of the nefarious mind working to overcome a known, seemingly-impenetrable obstacle or is unpredictability our best defense?

Did you know: Airlines can sell priority lines at Transportation Security Administration checkpoints because the government responsibility is for the actual screening lanes, not the lines leading up to TSA officers? TSA makes a distinction between "lanes" and "lines." TSA leases space for the screening lanes; lines leading up to them are controlled by airports and airline tenants. (source: Wall Street Journal, The Middle Seat)