Air Marshals: Let Us Be Less Joe Friday and More Frank Serpico
My friend Oscar Merida sent me this story this morning, and it’s the sort of thing that you can’t help but shake your head while you read, it’s so dispiriting…
From the New York Times — Dress Code May Hinder Their Work, Air Marshals Say:
Documents and memorandums issued by the Department of Homeland Security and field offices of the Federal Air Marshal Service say air marshals must “present a professional image” and “blend unnoticed into their environment.” Some air marshals have argued that the two requirements are contradictory.
Federal air marshals must have neatly trimmed hair and men must be clean-shaven, the documents say. Some of the service’s 21 field offices have mandated that male officers wear suits, ties and dress shoes while on duty, even in summer heat. Women are required to wear blouses and skirts or dress slacks. Jeans, athletic shoes and noncollared shirts are prohibited.
In April, the officers’ group sent a letter to members of Congress saying that the “military-style grooming standards and a blanket ‘sports coat’ dress policy,” along with conspicuous boarding procedures, jeopardize the safety of air marshals.
In other words, the Air Marshal Service has decided that, when their dress code comes into conflict with their requirement to blend in with the other passengers, the dress code comes first. Never mind that this could result in Marshals sticking out like a sore thumb — which would make them pretty easy to identify and eliminate in the opening stage of any halfway-competent hijacking operation. That’s not important. What’s important, apparently, is that the dress code be preserved.
The Times quotes Air Marshal Service spokesman Dave Adams giving this justification for this bass-ackward policy:
Mr. Adams said a dress code was put in place in April 2002 after the airline industry complained that air marshals’ attire was too casual. He said some marshals had worn shorts, blue jeans, sandals and T-shirts while on duty.
“In order to gain respect in a situation, you must be attired to gain respect,” Mr. Adams said in an interview. He said if air marshals were allowed to be too casual in their dress, “they probably would not gain the respect of passengers if a situation were to occur.”
Say what? They wouldn’t be able to gain the respect of passengers?
I have a news flash for Mr. Adams — you don’t have to dress like Sergeant Joe Friday to “gain the respect of passengers” in a hijack situation. I’m pretty sure that carrying a gun, a badge, and shouting “FEDERAL AIR MARSHAL!” would do the trick, even if you’re wearing shorts. And if those shorts keep you from getting popped before you even know something’s going down, they’ve done their job better than a sport jacket ever could.
Air Marshals are undercover cops. Their first priority should be to blend in!
The whole situation makes me wonder if anyone at DHS ever saw the classic movie Serpico. Remember all those scenes where Serpico watched in amazement as his fellow “undercover” narcotics cops went out onto the street in painfully square clothes and hairstyles that told anyone who looked at them that they were a narc? I’d feel a lot safer in the air if I knew that DHS was telling its Air Marshals to model themselves on Frank Serpico instead of Joe Friday.
UPDATE (Aug. 28, 2006): Two years after I posted this, the Air Marshals Service has finally relaxed its ridiculous dress code.
A web feed for this site is available,
Comments
NateLog
July 20, 2004
2:29 am
Air Marshals – Undercover or Right out there in the Open?
Reading through this blog posting: http://www.jasonlefkowitz.net/blog1archive/001235.html
I see that as usual, the folks who are supposedly “in charge” of things… (i.e. manager, bosses, whatever) have had zero time ever doing the job of the …
sali
July 20, 2004
7:36 pm
i’m with you on this one… how obtuse can beurochracy be?
sali
July 20, 2004
7:37 pm
sorry spelling… bureaucracy
Joe
July 20, 2004
11:50 pm
Just to throw this out there as a Devil’s Public Defender: Couldn’t an easily recognized air marshall serve as a deterent? If a highjacker/suicide terrorist is trying to take over a plane, and sees a person matching the standard air marshall description, they may abort the attempt instead of trying to take out the marshall, revealing their intentions, and risking being attacked by the crew and passengers. This has the added bonus of your highjacker aborting every time they see a person in a suit jacket and a high and tight haircut, which does include a lot of people besides air marshalls.
OF course, the best answer to this issue is not air marshalls, but pilots packing heat.
Jason Lefkowitz
July 21, 2004
9:38 am
“Couldn’t an easily recognized air marshall serve as a deterent?”
I hear where you’re coming from, but I personally think a bigger deterrent would be if *anyone* they see on the plane could potentially be an air marshal. Besides, if you’re talking about suicide hijackers, what are the odds that they’re going to abort? It’s more likely that they would try to bull their way through, and just see the marshal as one more obstacle between them and their 72 virgins, I would think.
Marc Pritz
July 22, 2004
6:34 pm
When I first read this article I was very alarmed, but then I began to think. I have a friend who went to West Point and who is in the Army. (He just returned from Baghdad in fact) He was telling me about the differences between Rangers, Spec. Ops, and special forces i.e. Delta. He said that although some special forces are very conspicuous, Delta guys are not. They look like regular joes even while walking among other special forces guys. In fact the only reason that you would know that they were Delta is because they were hanging with other Special Forces, otherwise they look like civilians.
What I mean by all of this is that I think that the FAM program is highly aware of being conspicuous and therefore utilizes air marshals that are, although not totally obvious, do look like air marshals in order to draw attention from far less conspicuous looking passengers who are in fact air marshals as well. When it comes to protecting the lives of so many people and the welfare of the American public, I have a hard time believing that there is much more out there than meets the eye.
marc pritz
July 22, 2004
6:38 pm
I made a mistake in my earlier post. What I meant in my last line is that I DO IN FACT bthat there is much more out there than meets the eye. I put meant to put the word “isn’t” instead of “is” in the last line.
marc pritz
July 22, 2004
6:38 pm
I made a mistake in my earlier post. What I meant in my last line is that I DO IN FACT believe that there is much more out there than meets the eye. I put meant to put the word “isn’t” instead of “is” in the last line.
Jason Lefkowitz
July 22, 2004
8:13 pm
Marc,
if that’s true — if there are other law-enforcement or military personnel on board the flights who are not as conspicuous as the Air Marshals apparently are — shouldn’t they at least let the Air Marshals know they’re going to be there? Just to prevent the Marshals from mistaking them for terrorists if the balloon goes up on a particular flight?
I would think that if the Marshals knew they had such clandestine “backup” on board, they wouldn’t be complaining like this. The fact that they are doing so implies that, if there is a reason like the one you describe for having the Air Marshals stick out in the crowd, nobody has shared it with them.
Marc Pritz
July 23, 2004
10:58 am
Jason, I can see what you are saying. However, I am fairly certain that the more conspicuous air marshals are indeed aware of their clandestine counterparts while on a flight. I would imagine that when the marshals are assigned to flights they would be made aware of any other marshal who was aboard and where he/she might be sitting, or look like. In several articles, it was mentioned that they travel in two’s or three’s. Also, the recent news about air marshals complaining about their dress code could easily be a cover to mislead the public or potential terrorists. This all comes down to secrecy. In talking with my friend who is in the army, he told me that guys who are in Delta etc. simply don’t talk to anybody about their specific duties and or tactics, not even other soldiers. The fact that several air marshals have come out and broken silence by revealing how they dress and act is a very severe breach of security, and even under the condition of anonymity, I think that they would realize the magnitude of this. Because of this, I think that the government has indeed utilized the media to “leak” information about the way that air marshals work so that we as passengers feel safer if we are able to identify their presence. This allows the more inconspicuous air marshals to do their jobs better by maintaining the element of surprise while everybody is looking at the clean shaven guy with the nice suit.
Marc Pritz
July 23, 2004
11:27 am
Also, I read a government press release yesterday where a congressman was questioning Tom Ridge about the funding cuts in the Federal Air Marshal Program. While Ridge did comment that this was in fact true, he mentioned that there are indeed many other government/military personnel who are now traveling on commercial flights. I would imagine that if the CIA, FBI, or DIA had a legitimate concern regarding terrorist activity aboard commercial flights that they would post agents on board for intelligence as well as protection purposes. The Israeli government has been doing this for years by placing mossad agents aboard El Al Airlines flights. Lastly, even if the regular Federal Air Marshals are not made aware of special agents on board their flights, this could be for a good reason. Some things are kept extremely secret for a reason and in cases of national security I believe that the government might keep this information from everybody, including federal air marshals.