Wednesday is the busiest air travel day of the year, and a horde of paranoid zealots—techno-libertarians, Tea Partiers, rabble-rousers, Internet activists, andcongressional demagogues—has decided to make it even worse.
His whole column is a great example of how mainstream journalism has assumed the role of government enforcer since 9/11.
First, there’s absolute acceptance of government justifications for the policy in question. He uses the innocuous term “electronic scanner” to describe the scanning machines. He points out that pat-downs are more time-consuming and invasive than the machines, without acknowledging that the TSA might have in interest in making pat-downs unpleasant to limit opt-outs. And he accepts without question that the underwear bomber’s unsuccessful bombing attempt is sufficient justification for spending billions on a scanning system of questionable efficacy.
Second, everyone who opposes this reasonable government action is motivated by irrational fear or ignorance. He constructs a straw man of the weakest arguments of one opt-out group. He doesn’t acknowledge the real issue, which is that people are fed up with years of pointless, time-wasting security theater, and that the scanners are just the last straw. There’s no effort made to understand those protesting — their “idiocy” is manifest since they oppose a sensible government edict.
I’ll grant that Saletan is an easy mark, but he’s also a typical representative of the post-9/11 journalist. He swallowed the justifications for the Iraq war hook, line and sinker. Even though he issued an obligatory mea culpa five years later, it made no discernible impact on his reporting. Every day is 9/12, and until the ill-defined yet omnipresent enemy is defeated, Saletan’s job is to make sure that nobody gets in the way of whatever the government says will keep us safe.
MAJeff
Apparently, Saletan doesn’t recognize that the point of peaceful non-violent resistance is to make the system’s operation too onerous to continue. Civil Rights protestors filled the jails in order to overwhelm the Southern system. The point is exactly to make worse…in order to make its continued operation untenable.
Annelid Gustator
Cost-imposition strategy FTW!
MattF
Thank you. I saw the headline on Saletan’s post, and I’m grateful you read it so I don’t have to.
Linda Featheringill
Who flies?
Dennis SGMM
Saletan could have saved himself several paragraphs of name calling and bullshit by simply swearing that the full-body scanners make Sheik Khalid Mohammad cry. When the TSA starts doing random cavity searches (And they will, sooner or later) Saletan will write a column titled “Stop Whining and Bend Over for America!”
Annelid Gustator
@Linda Featheringill: Time flies, like an arrow.
PurpleGirl
Juan Cole put up a column about the whole-body imagers being necessary to find PETN. The second commenter wrote that PETN is dogable; that is, can be found by a dog sniffing exam. Myself, I think I’d prefer a dog sniffing me than either the whole body imagers or a human pat-down.
ET
Republicans spent years post 9-11 scaring people into accepting all of the security procedures, intelligence intrusions, etc. People including those that write for major papers swallowed it hook, line, and sinker and told those who bothered to dissagree that that were un-American or that things had “changed” with 9-11 and to suck it up.
Some of these people are Saletan and some of them are the ones protesting the scanners and pat down. The only reason this is coming up now is because scanners were not in every airport. Now that they are those who had previously not encountered one are going to and – oh what a surprise – they don’t like it. Saletan would have written a better article if he had focused on that.
cleek
alQ is laughing.
terrorism is not a strategy built upon military victories. it’s a strategy based upon making your target’s life a living hell.
FTW
homerhk
I have to say from the other side of the pond, this whole anti-TSA thing seems absolutely ridiculous. As a non-white frequent overseas traveller I have been subjected to many a search, pat down, additional inspections etc. They are annoying – partly because of the obvious profiling at pretty much every airport I’ve been to – but I would much rather they do these things (even if they may seem stupid) than do nothing. This really isn’t a civil liberties thing since no-one is forcing you to fly (you might also say that having to show your passport and id when you enter a country is an infringement of civil liberties). I can’t quite understand the whole to-do about it, save that it inures to supposed small-government conservatives who want the idea of helpless, idiotic government to percolate within the US society – along with the help of so-called progressives, of course.]
Shorter me: stop whining already!
Dennis SGMM
@homerhk:
You’ll only be really, really safe if you have yourself welded inside a titanium sphere. Today would be good.
gnomedad
@Annelid Gustator:
But fruit flies like a banana.
geg6
@cleek:
This.
@homerhk:
You know what? Go fuck yourself. I’ve protested this shit for years. Perhaps you are fine with security theater, but some of us are actually consistent on the idea of personal privacy and how to prevent terrorism (hint: it isn’t with this stupid shit). Not to mention the actual probabilities involved in being a victim of a terrorist. I’m sick of assholes like you and the people in the related thread last night who think that people like me (who, once again, has protested this for years) are some sort of dupes for the rightwing Wurlizer. I have put my money where my mouth is by inconveniencing myself through a boycott of flying for quite some time, long before assholes like Drudge started on this. IMHO, it’s people like you who are buying into rightwing bullshit by defending stupid shit like this. Fuck you with a rusty pitchfork.
Dennis SGMM
@gnomedad:
And horse flies like Saletan.
WyldPirate
@ET:
And your point is what?
The Obama administration not only continues the “security theater” but steps it up a notch. It excuses and immunizes both government officials and giant telecom industries against rampant 4th amendment violations. It excuses war crimes committed by past government officials. It seems to have no problemn with the CIA destroying evidence of torture.
How the fuck have things changed? I’ll make it simple for you–they haven’t.
homerhk
geg6 – obviously you feel strongly about it, fine and good for you for the boycott. I don’t feel strongly about it and since I don’t really have the option of boycotting flights, I choose not to worry about fucking airplane scanners as opposed to the hundred million more important things to worry about. That was the point of my post – it’s not to say that these security things are necessary for safety reasons (although I think that some inspection is absolutely justified), it’s that it just didn’t seem like such an important issue to get all worked up about it. You feel differently, so fine. And my point about helping along right wing meme about incapable government is perfectly legitimate. If you don’t think so, bully for you, but there is absolutely no call for the language in your post – it’s as if you can’t take a simple disagreement.
By the way, I would consider fucking me with a rusty pitchfork to be a serious infringement of my civil liberties.
chopper
@PurpleGirl:
dogs are waaaay more effective than scanners.
geg6
@homerhk:
No, I can’t take bullshit argumentation from assholes. You are telling me that I shouldn’t get pissed off about you calling me a dupe for the rightwingers. When it is quite clear that it’s people like you who are falling for their garbage.
And, seriously, have you ever read Balloon Juice or even anything on the Internet? And you want to slap my hand for language? Seriously?
A Typical Republican
@homerhk:
Oh yeah? OH YEAH?? Show me where in the Constitution it says that you have a right NOT to be fucked with a rusty pitchfork! Maybe you should read Thomas Jefferson like we do in Texas, instead of listening to your activist judges, hmm?
homerhk
Geg6, frankly i wasn’t calling you anything since I don’t know who the fuck you are and couldn’t really care less.
I read BJ and comment here quite regularly and what I do know is that usually people are able to have calmish debates about things without automatically being called an asshole. Having said that, I don’t think I need to read more than your two posts to me which don’t really address anything I said save for my throwaway line about government incompetence to come to the conclusion that you are a major dick and not really worth engaging with.
Mark
Does airport security work? Airport security measures in the US have not identified even a single terrorist. They have found a few nutjobs that a halfway competent cop would have stopped if he saw him on a street corner, but not one single terrorist.
Of course some would argue that the mere existence of the security measures have discouraged terrorists from trying to board planes in the US. If you believe that and you live in a metropolitan area of the US, I have a simple device for sale for only $99.99 that I guarantee will keep lions away from your house. I use one in my back yard and I have never seen even one lion there.
An Uncivil (but decent) Duck
Jesus Fucking Christ on a Dildo, what is with the sudden blooming of the civility police? One of the main attractions of Balloon Juice is the frequent and unnecessary use of colorful and intemperate language.
Can I get a round of fainting couches and clutching pearls over here, please?
Scott de B.
The 9/11 attacks were devastatingly effective, but they also featured the most rapid obsolescence of a tactic in human history. The whole “hijack a plane and fly it into a building” plan stopped working within hours, as the fate of Flight 93 demonstrated.
Some additional security was only reasonable in the wake of the attacks, but it’s clear that the threat from one or more passengers trying to bring the aircraft down is relatively modest. I’m fine with metal detectors and x-raying luggage, and would have no problem with dogs, but taking off shoes, etc. does little.
Sorry, government is quite often incapable. Conservatives might have a knee-jerk reaction against everything the government does, but that doesn’t mean liberals have, or should have, the opposite reaction.
WyldPirate
@geg6:
geg6, i don’t really have a dog in this fight, but it seems to me you sort of flew off the handle at homerhk. He didn’t directly address you initially and didn’t hurl any uncivil names at YOU, yet you pile on him with “go fuck yourself” and “asshole”?
You always seem like a really reasonable poster. Maybe you just started the day off badly, but it seems like homerhk got a full load of vitriol out of the gate.
Ya’ll resume fire now. I’ll just sit over here on the side line with my popcorn and watch the festivities.
WyldPirate
@An Uncivil (but decent) Duck:
Hey Duck—FUCK YOU!
I like my fainting couch and pearls. The couch is comfy and the pearls look good on me.
The Grand Panjandrum
JMM posted an email from a reader who has been through the “enhanced pat down” and it sounds like she didn’t enjoy it as much, but this makes you wonder why the government even bothers with this stupid new more aggressive and intrusive search policy:
She was flying out of Reagan National in DC. Not only is it security theater, it is security theater done at the high school drama club level.
The Grand Panjandrum
@WyldPirate:
I’m quite envious. I can never find the right outfit to go with my pearls.
Violet
@PurpleGirl:
Dogs don’t make Michael Chertoff rich. That’s why they’re not using dogs.
geg6
@WyldPirate:
I think I addressed the reason that I’m sick and tired of asshole framing of this issue but I’ll say it again: just because you oppose this non-security-providing garbage does not make you a dupe for wingnuts and, in fact, it actually is those accusing me of being a dupe who are being the dupes for falling for the idea that this is something reasonable or that provides an ounce of security. It has made me intemperate and, honestly? If you actually knew me, you’d know that the intemperance for assholery is more my IRL mode than my more polite Internet mode of communication.
WyldPirate
@The Grand Panjandrum:
Naked goes best with pearls. Given my lily white skin and hairy body, I have to shave and vary the color of the pearls based upon my tan.
WyldPirate
@geg6:
Hey man, it’s all good. I understand your intemperance perfectly. I have the same sort of affliction, just different triggers.
These are crazy times and seem to be getting crazier and more outlandish every day. It’s hard to reconcile reality, facts and reason with the idiocy that spews forth from the media, our fellow citizens and political leaders.
Violet
@homerhk:
If privacy concerns aren’t your thing, perhaps health concerns are. The government says they’re safe, just like they used to say smoking was safe and x-ray machines in shoe stores were safe for kids.
The fact is, they have not been tested for safety if used on people many times, such as with frequent fliers. Their safety in use with more vulnerable populations, such as children, pregnant women, cancer survivors, those with genetic dispositions to certain forms of cancer, etc. It is unknown how safe they are for those populations. But don’t worry. The government says they’re safe.
There is also no discussion from the government on inspection schedules, calibration checks, etc. It’s well known from people who work with radiation equipment that they fall out of calibration easily. There is no maintenance schedule and the TSA employees are NOT ALLOWED to wear dosimeters. The government doesn’t want them to know what they’re exposed to. But don’t worry. The government says they’re safe.
Dennis SGMM
@Violet:
That comes close to criminal stupidity. Radiation effects are cumulative.
RalfW
Well, since there was precious little opposition to the Patriot Act, we all better just shut up and be groped, shouldn’t we?
Much of the media bought the Patriot Act nonsense hook, line and sinker. They have to go along with the TSA charade or they look totally weak – piling on TSA when they couldn’t muster even a mild defense of Constitutional liberty when it actually mattered.
Violet
@Dennis SGMM:
Yep. But the government won’t allow the TSA employees to wear dosimeters. They don’t want to open that kettle of fish. If no one knows how bad the radiation is, no one can sue. Etc.
Nor can you wear one through the Nude-o-scopes. Well, I guess you could, but it would be seen and you’d be automatically sent to the sexual assault pat down. Might be worth it.
homerhk
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2010/11/my-tsa-anti-rant
I appreciate the health concerns of the scanner but you can go for the pat down instead, right?
shortstop
@homerhk:
Yes, by all means, we’ve got to do something!
I notice that your sentence is unencumbered by adjectives along the lines of “effective” and “useful.” I’m not sure why this has no relevance for you, but it does seem like an issue to most of us.
@The Grand Panjandrum:
Pearls are shown to best advantage when the wearer is naked. I plan to wear mine to O’Hare on Friday. In my hoo-hoo.
WereBear
Precisely. There’s a bunch of good noses sitting in shelters right now, and programs to get prisoners to train them!
shortstop
@Violet: They tried to find a way to get Arabian horses in as sniffers, but determined it would be too obvious for even the American public.
Phoenix Woman
Let’s set aside the fact that this technology is expensive, unproven (the GAO says so), has created a grand total of one (1) US job, and is largely a scam for Nosferatu Chertoff’s buds to rake in the bucks (which is why Chertoff bought up Steve Brill’s failed express-checkin-ID service “Clear” at the bankruptcy fire sale: He or his buds will make money off of you no matter what!).
Let’s look at the health issues involving the radiation emitted by these machines. From Alternet:
— “They say the risk is minimal, but statistically someone is going to get skin cancer from these X-rays,” Dr Michael Love, who runs an X-ray lab at the department of biophysics and biophysical chemistry at Johns Hopkins University school of medicine, told AFP.
“No exposure to X-ray is considered beneficial. We know X-rays are hazardous but we have a situation at the airports where people are so eager to fly that they will risk their lives in this manner,” he said. —
The Airline Pilots Association has told its members to avoid the RapiScans for this very reason. And I can’t help but wonder how this will affect TSA employees, particularly those currently battling cancer or who have done so in the past.
Corner Stone
@homerhk:
This is a rapidly spreading BJ meme, and one I find curious.
Just like I don’t make decisions on new legislation based on the category of people who “hate” it, I don’t make decisions on civil liberty issues based on who’s making other arguments.
The idea that somehow conservative causes are railing against the govt for their own benefit should preclude me from protesting what I consider awful policies by my govt is ridiculous.
Nick
I can’t believe you don’t see it. Isn’t it obvious. This whole thing is nothing more than the media creating a narrative. They want someone (probably Sarah Palin) to come out and say “we can all avoid these procedures if we just profile Muslims” which will lead to a “serious discussion” about profiling Muslims where the media will censor anyone who makes even the slightest sense (“How do you profile a religion that cuts across all demographics?”). They will spin it as “a way to be secure, hassle-free” and will poll the country on “do you support these security procedures if done only on suspects who could be considered terrorists?” 70% will agree.
Then the goal is to get the President to respond; either A.) endorsing profiling (why did he flip flop?), B.) not endorsing profiling (He doesn’t side with America!) or C.) say nothing (Why is he avoiding such a serious discussion?)
If you don’t think this is all pre-planned, you haven’t been to a News Directors convention.
Bullsmith
Remember when “freedom” and “liberty” meant something other than quietly bending over for your masters?
Corner Stone
And just like it was fine with some people to torture “suspects”, the fact that this civil liberty infraction is ok with some people is irrelevant.
paradox
Oh, go fuck yourself twice, you obnoxious England queen, I guess when they’re jamming a flashlight up your ass you’ll tell us how you really wanted to come out all along, this is great.
Oh did I hurt your feelings? Oh, you were finished! Well allow me to retort.
We have an asshole vice president who called us whiners too. If he were up for re-election two weeks ago his ass would on the street, good riddance. So would yours if you were stupid enough to talk to me like that in person.
Your persuasion skills are in the anal range of accomplishment, shithead. You insult people and then wonder what the big deal is. You’re brilliant too, great.
Okay, Einstein, I’ll state it real clear: I’m supposed to live free here, not have my balls groped by some idiot for no reason when I want to take a flight.
Furthermore, it really pisses me off when my government deliberately instills fear through stupid physical intimidation. The dogs of war will soon be upon us with that insanity.
[sigh] Go fuck yourself three times, you authoritarian toad cocksucker, go sneer at humans on your stupid perch on your own god damn side of the ocean.
Violet
@homerhk:
Yes, you can go for the pat down. And if you are unable to assume “the position” (hands up, legs spread, like a criminal), then you are forced to go for a pat down.
And once you’ve opted for the pat down, they’ll humiliate you by asking you to remove your prosthetic devices, or dislodge your urostomy bag causing you to spill urine all over yourself, or pat you down while you are undressed even if you’re a child. That doesn’t include the sexual molestation and pain caused by TSA gropers. Post-op surgery patients, the elderly, people with injuries..no one is exempt from the pat down. And they can be very rough. Rough enough to dislodge someone’s urostomy bag.
But of course “it’s keeping us safer.” The government says so.
shortstop
That would be a torch, I think.
Violet
Fuck it. I’m in moderation. I’ll try again. I forgot the ‘too many links’ rule.
@homerhk:
Yes, you can go for the pat down. And if you are unable to assume “the position” (hands up, legs spread, like a criminal), then you are forced to go for a pat down.
And once you’ve opted for the pat down, they’ll humiliate you by asking you to remove your prosthetic devices, or dislodge your urostomy bag causing you to spill urine all over yourself, or pat you down while you are undressed even if you’re a child. That doesn’t include the sexual molestation and pain caused by TSA gropers. Post-op surgery patients, the elderly, people with injuries..no one is exempt from the pat down. And they can be very rough. Rough enough to dislodge someone’s urostomy bag.
But of course “it’s keeping us safer.” The government says so.
TomG
I just saw a posting on Reddit which says that according to one source, TSA workers are not allowed to wear dosimetry badges (radiation measurement).
Can somebody verify this? If the scanners are really safe, why are these workers who are near them day after day NOT allowed to keep track of accumulated dosage ?
arguingwithsignposts
@Nick:
So that’s what they talk about at the RTNDA conventions. Maybe I should submit a session proposal on “developing a security theatre meme.”
Martha
@geg6: You may not think you’re a dupe , but that’s how they’re framing it right now. They are masterful at this stuff you know. Spoken as a person who flies once a month or so for business or family reasons. All the pie in the sky “won’t fly” sound nice and if that works for y’all, count yourselves lucky. But lots of us don’t have the luxury of “I just don’t feel like it today…”. We just get on the plane and go because we have to. Until we buy winning lottery tickets and our loved ones die.
Lysana
I’m sick of arguments that boil down to “if we don’t do it this way, we may as well do nothing for all your whining.” Homerhk, that kind of bullshit is proof you aren’t worthy of as much respect as you think you’re due around here. Decloaking to spout fucked-up logic does get you a hammer to the skull. Especially on a topic like this. Put on your big-boy panties and deal.
And I’m used to being a progressive who finds overlap with right-wingers in certain areas of political opinion. It happens when dealing with individual liberties sometimes. I take the alignment as proof the other side is human, too.
Chris
@The Grand Panjandrum:
You really should not insult our high schools like that. :-)
Violet
@homerhk:
BTW, I’ve been subjected to an incredibly invasive ‘pat down’ (really a sexual molestation) on your side of the pond. I was required strip down to my under shirt, take off my shoes and socks, unroll the cuffs on my jeans, and stand in the freezing cold jetway being molested while all the other boarding passengers stared at me.
The security agent put her hands everywhere on me, including in my hair, checking behind my ears, between my toes, up the bottom of my jeans as far as she could reach, down the waistband of my jeans at least a full hands length, and, from the outside, she cupped my breasts, mashed them (and that wasn’t comfortable), grabbed and moved around my butt cheeks, reaching in the crack as far as she could, and also thoroughly felt my genital region including my labia, so that my underwear was shoved completely aside during her digging around.
It was sexual molestation, no question about it. It was humiliating and absolutely no explanation of what she was going to do was given. In fact, she didn’t speak to me at all. Just positioned my arms and legs and continued to grope me.
It was so awful I was almost in tears by the end of it and for the entire hours-long flight over the Atlantic just wanted to take a shower to wash off the feeling of her hands all over me. I can only imagine how traumatized an abuse survivor would have been. I can’t really describe the awfulness.
In addition, they searched every bit of my bag, even taking my wallet out and pulling out all the money and cards, etc. My carry on bag was a mess, I was undressed, and all the other passengers got to watch. No explanation was given for why and no warning was given over what they were doing.
But hey! Humiliating people is great because it keeps us safe! Right?
Judas Escargot
@Violet:
There is no maintenance schedule and the TSA employees are NOT ALLOWED to wear dosimeters.
How. The fuck. Is that legal?
If I’m a TSA employee, and I wear a dosimeter I bought myself with my very own money, on what grounds are they going to fire me?
I wish I were a bored lawyer with a friend working for the TSA: Smells like a nice high-profile lawsuit opportunity.
Violet
@TomG:
Yes it’s true:
Your government at work! Safety first!
shortstop
@Lysana:
Paul W.
BJ – Unreadable when it comes to TSA hysterics… Seriously though, I just traveled internationally with zero problems, almost no delays, and with good to good+ service from the TSA in one of the most asshole prone airports in the US (Newark).
I agree that a good portion of our current system is theatre (taking off sneakers and sandals for instance), but things like bag scanners and metal detectors (which ARE the predominant means of security, whatever people say here) are useful and the extra time they take is alright with me as they are a deterrent to hysterics taking place in up in the air.
Why don’t we focus our ire on something which affects more people, and in a much more dangerous fashion? Frakking going on throughout the US and vomiting toxins into the air and into our drinking water and which is not subject to the EPA or Clean Water Act anyone??
I am a little dumbstruck by how virulent people are on this issue, has everyone here personally had their genitals cupped or something?
Ash Can
Before this thread dissolves completely into Anger Management Issues Theater:
@Nick: IIRC, Bobby Jindal (!) has already brought up profiling “terrorists.” We’ll see how far that goes. So far, it doesn’t seem like it has much traction. Maybe some other spokespeople are in the offing, however. If more RW plants start piping up about it, you may very well be onto something.
Violet
@Ash Can:
I can’t wait for Bobby Jindal’s wife and children to be profiled.
shortstop
@Paul W.:
Please point us to a single instance of someone here complaining about metal detectors and bag scanners. Thanking you in advance.
A Typical Republican
@Nick:
Paul W.
Oh, and since I know I will get jumped on for writing that… isn’t there a line to draw between uncontrollable rage at the existence of the TSA and different sorts of scanning equipment and the invasive-ness of it? The solution is not to throw out the baby with the bathwater (we have been quite successful in preventing in-air incidents), but to purge bad or useless practices.
I suppose this issue is too personal to discuss without generating the strong emotions I see here, but I wish that we could. Or maybe I’m just still living in 2008….
Chris
And the above comment was me. FTR.
Paul W.
@shortstop: You missed my point… which was that the first and foremost line which all passengers cross is those two things. How often do we go through those extra measures? I wanted to say that we should temper our reactions to problems to the size of the problems.
I’m not saying that the things brought up here (invasive pat downs and equipment that is either useless or even harmful) shouldn’t be demonized or objected too, I’m questioning the level emotion attached to these issues.
A Humble Lurker
@WyldPirate:
Actually, this is not entirely true. There was a guy on Rachel Maddow last night, Adam Serwer, who said according to the government accountability office the scanners were in operational testing way back in the heady days of 2007. The Obama administration apparently pushed their distribution after the Christmas bombing, but they were not their authors. There’s an argument to be made about whether that was a good idea, (I think not) but not one where this was a new idea that just popped up this year.
Also, how can we push for bomb-sniffing dogs? Should we call senators? Bitch to the TSA? Spread leaflets? Because that seems like it would be a much less invasive and much safer option that no one’s considering because there’s no money in it. We could ride the public outrage on this; the real question is how?
An Uncivil (but decent) Duck
Have we gone so far down the ‘framing’ rabbit hole that we must form our opinions and morality according to the ‘optics’ of the situation? If the answer is yes, then I fear that calling geg6 (and even when we disagree, I love the passion) a dupe is somewhat misplaced.
Chris
@shortstop:
Bingo.
And that, more than any other reason (and I could find dozens upon dozens of them), is the reason I’m a liberal.
Stefan
This really isn’t a civil liberties thing since no-one is forcing you to fly (you might also say that having to show your passport and id when you enter a country is an infringement of civil liberties).
It’s a big country, and for all practical purposes if you want to get around in it you have to fly (try driving to Hawaii, for example). Americans have a constitutional freedom of movement, and yet if I want to travel from NY to visit, say, family in California I have to subject myself to the government either taking naked pictures of me or groping me?
No one is “forcing” me to fly, sure (other than the force of having to get places without unlimited time in which to do it), but then again no one is forcing me to walk down the street — does that mean that I have to submit to constant instrusive searches just to walk to my grocery store and back?
And the passport thing is a straw man — there’s a clear distinction between moving around in your own native country and being allowed to enter someone else’s country.
Corner Stone
@Paul W
Nicely done. Two posts, two things no one is arguing against.
Joseph Nobles
The Bojinka plot, as envisioned by Ramzi Yousef and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, involved getting a few ounces of an liquid explosive on board an aircraft and situating it over the fuel tank. The small bomb acts as the detonator. Yousef and Mohammed had wanted to get these simple devices on board several planes flying across the Pacific and detonating them mid-flight. The result would have been planes simply disappearing with catastrophic loss of life, with no need to obtain access to the cockpit.
Yes, Ramzi had already conducted tests of security by smuggling the required materials onto a plane in his shoes.
As long as we insist on flying through the air on top of an immense amount of explosive material, we will be vulnerable to these types of attacks. These TSA objections, the same kinds of objections being raised since right after September 11, are now being used by rightwing activists to attack unions and Obama. They do not care that they are making the skies less safe, because any tragedy will be blamed on Obama – and that’s fine by them, no one will be screaming for his head louder. Al Qaeda could only pray for such a disruptive tactic on one of the nation’s busiest travel weekend, and Americans are doing it for free because some schmuck raised a Gadsen flag.
If someone here thinks they have a better way of accomplishing the impossible 100% security goal task that Americans require of air travel safety while maintaining other American values, produce it. Otherwise, you’re all just contributing to the latest American witch hunt, even while the memory of one of our last is concluding in the Levy murder trial.
J.W. Hamner
I’m all for people protesting in this way… especially since I’m not flying this holiday… but I doubt it’s going to be effective. The percentage of people who fly more than once a year is pretty small, and it seems from all the surveys floating around that the masses are fine with the “naked” scanners.
I’d prefer we scaled back the TSA, but I just find it completely implausible that such a thing will happen… and thus our choice is between high tech scanner technology and invasive “enhanced” pat downs… so I’ll take a little radiation thank you.
shortstop
@Paul W.: Are you honestly suggesting that metal detectors and bag scanners are comparable to nude photos and heavy-duty gropes? I’m not sure how to interpret your question, “How often do we go through those extra measures?” Is it possible that you aren’t aware that the latter two measures are now something that everyone at most airports (and soon all U.S. airports) goes through?
Stefan
I would much rather they do these things (even if they may seem stupid) than do nothing.
What? Why? That’s idiotic. If it’s stupid and ineffective, than doing it is effectively doing nothing in terms of useful results achieved, only costing lots of extra time, effort, money, trauma and intrusion.
Corner Stone
@Joseph Nobles: I’d like to be clear. Two to three ounces of explosives could blow through existing sheet metal to rupture a fuel cell and cause it to explode?
And this is just fucking ridiculous:
There is nothing about asking for our govt to perform actual security instead of security theater that is analogous to a witch hunt.
Paul W.
@shortstop:
“Is it possible that you aren’t aware that the latter two measures are now something that everyone at most airports (and soon all U.S. airports) goes through?”
That’s exactly right, my own personal and anecdotal flying experience and that of those who are close to me has not come ANYWHERE NEAR the stories I see here. For whatever reason, I do not see or hear about invasive searches or body scanners being the norm right now anywhere other than here at BJ or in the new crop of stories coming out of the MSM (which I distrust greatly, as they seem way too late on this bandwagon and more responding to the hysterics this is generating).
Aren’t there only something like 200 operational body scanners in the US? What number of people are searched every day out of the total going through security? Is a pat down in Dallas the same one as in Newark?
I just don’t see this being approached rationally, so I’m questioning why we the community here is soooo up in arms about this. Anyways, this thread has gone about as far is it is going to go and this topic is one that I am unable to relate to from the perspective that seems to dominate these TSA threads.
kay
@Ash Can:
In my humble opinion, Ash, profiling is bigger than airports and terrorism.
This is a 20 year battle with conservatives (Arizona, anyone?)
They want profiling to be the norm in law enforcement, and that has real implications for civil liberties in every area.
If you read the opinions on auto-drug-search stops, it’s all about acceptable profiling. Routes, luggage (lack of, usually), nervous behavior.
My point is conservatives usually have an end-game when they start one of these OUTRAGES, they have some long term policy objective they’re pushing, bit by bit.
I think wariness is called for.
rickstersherpa
From Josh Marshall is an current example of what we, citizens of a once free country, are being subjected to by the state:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/11/steamy.php#more?ref=fpblg
One of the problems is that at least until the present blow-up, all the incentives on Goverment officials was to double down on security. No one, least of all in a Democratic administration, wants to be responsible for loose security that let bomb on the plane. Hence, lets tighten the screws and buy more equipment.
rickstersherpa
By the way, profiling basically will mean “Flying while Black/Flying while Brown.”
Joseph Nobles
@Corner Stone: The liquid limits are in place to prevent the amount needed from simply walking onto the plane in a toiletry bag.
“There is nothing about asking for our govt to perform actual security instead of security theater that is analogous to a witch hunt.” Actually, witch hunts are best diagnosed from the outside. The people on the inside always have great sounding reasons to exclude themselves from an internal sweep, like your statement I just quoted. When we ask our government to do the impossible, theater is what we get. Government must be seen to do something. Americans can give up on 100% air travel security or they need to stop pulling back the curtain and step into the backscatter machine. You can’t have both.
catclub
@Paul W.: “BJ – Unreadable when it comes to TSA hysterics”
This – although really for the whole nation.
I think Homerhk had a link to kevin Drum’s anti-rant at Mother Jones.
I agreed with much of that: it is bad now and also a huge waste of time energy and money ( except for the people making money off of it), but if something gets through and does damage – it will all get much worse because of the top line – the nation has lost its shit since 9/11.
I would suggest a terrorism insurance fund – if you are harmed by terrorism we will make you whole as possible, but we will cut down on completely out of proportion responses which make Al Qaeda happy and us miserable.
Discussing the above approach requires a nation that has not lost its shit – and does not happen.
There has STILL not really been a public discussion of
a) what are now the more likely terrorist attacks.
and more important b) what are the likely changes that would occur if such an attack did succeed.
All because as a nation we are a bunch of WATB’s
(replaced W with you multi-colored, multi-cultural abbreviation of choice.)
shortstop
@Paul W.: Just checked–I was mistaken about how widespread the full-body scanners are presently. There are about 300 now, with a goal of 200 more by the end of the year, and eventually, in all U.S. airports.
When we get to that point, will you be ready to begin thinking about possibly considering perhaps having a discussion about whether this level of invasiveness is warranted given that we have zero data on either the efficacy or safety of these machines? Or will you keep pretending that someone–anyone–is suggesting that we “throw out the baby with the bathwater” by eliminating all forms of airport security and presenting other strawmen?
Chris
@Paul W.:
Well, I can’t speak for everyone, and I, myself, haven’t been through the process yet – ask me again after Thanksgiving.
But the process Violet described as happening to her is, from what I understand, exactly the one my mother had to go through a week ago at Dulles airport as a consequences of having an artificial hip. So yes, the intrusiveness of the new process is quite real.
Violet
@Paul W.:
The stories are there, and have been there, but they haven’t reached a critical mass until now. Why has it changed? One reason is that the TSA implemented the new more invasive pat downs starting November 1. The nude-o-scopes started being rolled out earlier this year (I think April), but their installation and use has accelerated since November 1.
Just because you don’t hear a lot about something doesn’t mean it’s not happening. The stories have been there for years.
The number is increasing every day as they get installed. Frequent fliers report seeing them being installed in airports across the country. I don’t know what the final number will be, but they are intended to be operational in all airports and used as primary screening while the metal detectors are phased out.
I don’t know the answer to this one. I imagine it varies based on day and time of year (holidays, etc.).
It’s suposed to be. It’s not. Frequent fliers know which airports have “good” security agents and which one have agents that more resemble prison guards. The TSA agents are not trained well, and the screening process for hiring is not very stringent. There have been multiple examples of corruption and lawbreaking within the TSA, things like planting “white powder” in attractive women’s bags so they have to be pulled aside and chatted up to theft rings.
Recently, TSA agents have told passengers if they “opt out” that they “won’t make their flight” and have used harsh, painful groping techniques on passengers, which seems to be a form of retaliation for not going through the nude-o-scopes. TSA agents have acted in a threatening manner, including threatening to have passengers arrested, just for asking a question. So, no the pat down experience is NOT the same from airport to airport, despite what the TSA says.
For me it’s a civil rights issue. My body is mine and unless I give you permission or am under suspicion of a crime, no one should be touching me like that. It’s also an issue of using scare resources in a smart way. These scanners are enriching Michael Chertoff and his pals and aren’t actually improving security. They also present a significant radiation risk, so there’s the health issue.
Unlike with other things like that abstract war in Afghanistan or wire tapping where if someone is looking at my emails I will never know it, this is something I see, hear and feel. It’s intrusive and unnecessary. I think because we can see our civil rights and health being violated and threatened, it’s a bigger deal. But I’ve been protesting airline security theater for a long time, so maybe I’m not the best person to ask. I’m glad to see others take up the cause.
shortstop
Typical. Drum seems to leave the house about once a week to drive a mile to his mom’s house (it’s too far for him to walk or bike), to the grocery store and so forth. He flies possibly once every year or two.
Could everyone who never has to/doesn’t want to get on a plane kindly refrain from telling everybody else what they should be just fine with?
Corner Stone
@Joseph Nobles: I’m sorry but I don’t understand your response at all.
How much of the liquid did Ramzi smuggle onboard and what type explosive was it? I ask you because you said this:
And I’d like to research this further.
Regarding your response to my suggestion that the govt do things that actually increase security, I have to tell you that your response is a complete non sequitur.
Nick
@A Humble Lurker:
and I know I had a rather intimate pat-down at JFK in 2007.
Chris
@rickstersherpa:
Not only that, but it’s utterly ineffective. I direct you to the shoe-bomber, a man named Richard Reid, with a British passport, born to white British and black Jamaican parents; there is no way your standard profiling would have identified him as Muslim, let alone a terrorist.
Bad guys can’t be recognized on sight. It really is that simple, even if conservatives at every level cling to the fantasy that you can.
catclub
Matt Yglesias also has a post on this that is not completely irrational.
My take: How much should we spend to push the target away from airplanes to something else?
And can we have a rational discussion of that choice? (No)
He also mentioned something that I have resisted ever mentioning – because it seems too simple but has not been considered ( apparently) by the motivated crazy people out there.
The real lesson I get is that Al Qaeda really really does not understand US society and does not know how easy it would be to shut the country down.
Consider: Washington DC snipers times 10 =
massive profiling campaign,
no outdoor activities for the children nationwide,
incredibly strict gun restrictions on muslims.
et cetera, et cetera
And Al Qaeda has not figured this out.
shortstop
@Joseph Nobles:
False dilemma in that the backscatter machine obviously cannot provide 100 percent security. And you’ll have to look long and hard to find anyone at this blog who doesn’t think that Americans need to get over the idea that the government can keep them perfectly safe. The criticisms of the full-body scanners are perfectly in line with that.
Joseph Nobles
@Corner Stone: The Internet is that away. Google “Bojinka” and you can find out all the details. Not knowing the reasons behind the “security theater” doesn’t speak well to your opinion being informed.
The security procedures in place are now the price of flying. If you don’t like them, you don’t get to mess things up for everybody else.
J.W. Hamner
@shortstop:
But that’s part of the point. This is something that effects a pretty small percentage of the population. Nate Silver estimated the number of people who fly more than once a year not more than 1 in 3.
I’m just not sure how such a small number of frequent fliers is going to push this very far.
Joseph Nobles
@shortstop: My point is based on backscatter machines not providing 100% security. Asking the government to provide something it cannot is asking for theater. Complaining that theater is now theater when that’s what was asked for is silly.
These complaints have been around since December 2001. But when the Gadsen flag is raised and the right wing decides it’s a great way to attack unions and Obama, everybody piles on.
I confess to find myself amazed that I’m in agreement with General Stuck on this, and that most of Balloon Juice (including the proprietor) is lockstep with Jane Hamsher and the Firedoglake folks. So it goes.
arguingwithsignposts
@J.W. Hamner:
Frequent fliers tend to have more money. satsq.
shortstop
@J.W. Hamner: Thirty-three percent of the population is a sizable number, JW–considerably larger than other demographics that have successfully pushed back against the compromise of liberties. And unlike some of those groups, this one is likely to expand as more people become aware of what’s involved and experience it for themselves.
@Joseph Nobles: Totally bizarre thing to say. What exactly is it that you think questioners of the new procedures are “messing up for everyone else”? Is open discussion of whether these machines/gropes are effective and safe somehow compromising your liberty to do whatever the official-looking person tells you to do without questioning its efficacy?
Chris
@catclub:
It’s possible they simply don’t have the resources. Right now, al-Qaeda’s name is shit, all over the Muslim world; they have little or no state support or popular support, with meager exceptions. It’s possible they want to disrupt American society and just aren’t able to.
Or maybe they just don’t understand American society at all, like you said, which is kind of comforting I guess – better to have ignorant and stupid enemies.
By the way, that rejection of AQ by the Muslim world should be the story of the decade – completely eclipsed, unfortunately, by hysterics about dangerous Sufis in Manhattan and secret Muslims from Hawaii/Kenya/Chicago.
J.W. Hamner
@arguingwithsignposts:
2/3rds still support the body scanners, so rich white people haven’t proven to be completely omnipotent yet.
Joseph Nobles
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the real story.
http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1110/111610nj1.htm
And it’s just a coincidence that all of these stories demonizing TSA screeners hit the airwaves just as Congress is considering giving them collective bargaining rights.
shortstop
@Joseph Nobles: It doesn’t make sense to attribute the entire current pile-on to some loud teabaggers and other opportunistic conservatives when the new heavyhanded patdowns just started Nov. 1 and the backscatter machines have just now started being installed rapidly and in large number.
I’m with you in attributing no good to the motives of most of the right on this, but you’re not being honest about there being legitimate criticisms from the left. Nor is it particularly admirable to ask people to go along without a peep with the abrogation of their own liberties lest we embolden the right.
shortstop
@J.W. Hamner: By your own admission, most of that two-thirds hasn’t experienced them yet. And the one-third that flies more often includes large numbers of business travelers who have a lot more weight in this discussion, as they tend to do in any discussion involving the airlines or air travel.
arguingwithsignposts
@J.W. Hamner:
From your link:
Also, why do you think it’s just “rich white people” who fly frequently?
I am decidedly middle class (although I am white), and I fly several times a year for business, although I’ve decreased that number as much as possible because of the PITA that flying has become.
ETA: also from your link, this bit of conservative concern-trolling: “One possibility that could generate public support is the use of profiling at airports, where the TSA would single out specific passengers for extra screening based on available information. Overall, 70 percent of Americans back the idea, which has been floated as an alternative.”
Floated as an alternative by whom, I wonder?
Corner Stone
@Joseph Nobles: Bojinka was revealed in 1995. What does it have to do with the recent x-ray scanners or invasive pat downs of Nov 1, 2010?
ThresherK
There is an ever-narrowing list of topics on which Lord Saletan is worth reading. This makes one fewer. At what point is it not worth clicking on him at all?
Joseph Nobles
@shortstop: Open discussion here is fine. Open discussion in the line is not. It’s disruptive to the point of actually endangering the traveling public by overwhelming actual security measures along with the theater during one of the nation’s busiest travel weekends, a natural target for terrorism.
The airport security line isn’t a 1960’s lunch counter. This entire controversy is about demonizing workers who are wanting to unionize by taking decade-old complaints and stirring them up into a child molestation frenzy worthy of the Salem witch trials. And that’s safety in the fire along with the workers, because the rightwingers know that they can turn on a dime and scream at Obama for not keeping us safe, the NEGRO SHERIFF DIDN’T KEEP US SAFE, HE JUST MOLESTED OUR KIDS AND BUILT HIS UNION GOON ARMY WHILE THE TERRORISTS BLEW US UP!
RE: Union goon army – Beck made the claim just today.
Joseph Nobles
@Corner Stone: Oh, I’m sorry, I missed the change in the law of physics that makes a similar plot unworkable now.
Corner Stone
@Joseph Nobles: No, that’s not my point. The point was if we knew this plot in 1995, and they managed to kill at least one airline passenger it seems, then why weren’t some of these methods in place 15 years ago?
Your snarky answer isn’t really an answer. You seem to be doing that a lot in this thread amid your cries for us to just submit. Or else!
ETA the ban on liquids is very recent for example
J.W. Hamner
@arguingwithsignposts:
@shortstop:
The experience of getting body scanned is not bothersome however… though it is strangely slow and an added inconvenience (I have been through it once in September). Obviously it can bother people that someone can see their unclothed body, but what about the experience in the airport is going to make people freak out about that? It’s not like they post it on a giant monitor for people to gape at.
“Enhanced” pat downs are another beast entirely, and I can definitely see those a being incredibly unpopular after the holidays… but isn’t that what will body scans a much more attractive alternative?
The idea that outrage over the next few days/weeks is going to fuel a rollback of the TSA just seems unlikely. Maybe some kind of compromise on the pat downs… but it’ll be one that is even more unpalatable to liberals since it will probably involve profiling and be sadly popular.
Annelid Gustator
So what do they do with a lone mother carrying a child in arms? Both thru the scanner? Somebody in line hold this baby? TSA guy, you hold this baby? Just put the baby on the floor or in one of those bins?
Corner Stone
I for one want the TSA to unionize and do not want to shut down the organization. IMO they should have been unionized at inception but that was difficult all things considered.
My problem isn’t with the TSA. My problem is with policy makers who don’t seem to understand what they are doing.
Make an effective policy, and then communicate that. Don’t just tell me the pat downs are “necessary”.
Stefan
Open discussion here is fine. Open discussion in the line is not. It’s disruptive to the point of actually endangering the traveling public by overwhelming actual security measures along with the theater during one of the nation’s busiest travel weekends, a natural target for terrorism.
Bullshit. What actually endangers the travelling public is the security line itself — if I were a terrorist, I’d just load up a luggage cart with several suitcases packed full with high explosives, get on the security line, and then right before I hit the scanners, at that point where everyone is packed tightly together, I’d set it off, killing dozens and effectively shutting down the entire airport.
Now how exactly would you prevent that? A security line to get on the security line?
shortstop
@Joseph Nobles: Oh, my jesus, no! We’re emboldening the right wing AND the terrorists! And we’re making Glenn Beck start to say uncomplimentary things about Barack Obama!
@J.W. Hamner: I don’t find the full-body scanning experience unbothersome, but I’m aware of what it does and what the people operating it can (and do) do. That’s why I said “become aware of what’s involved and experience it for themselves.” There will be more and more stories and reports about what the backscatter machines do and the fact that some of the photos don’t disappear. People will become more aware. And they will not like it.
You may be right that this policy won’t be rolled back. I don’t see that a possible lack of success is any reason not to keep loudly pointing out that we have crossed yet another previously unthinkable line in our foolish, trembling quest to trade liberties for security–in our collective fucking freak-out after 9/11.
shortstop
@Stefan: Merely by asking this question you are making said terrorism possible. Obama will take the political hit for your lack of self-restraint.
OT, why do people in the east say “on line” and people in the midwest say “in line”?
Corner Stone
I’m getting a kick out of people here telling us “just do what the govt tells you to”. “Don’t question them or you’re emboldening [insert pronoun here].”
Sounds vaguely familiar somehow.
Flugelhorn
@ET: There is a world of difference between removing my shoes and laptop vs. being groped after a free peep show as the star.
Get real guy.
Stefan
Merely by asking this question you are making said terrorism possible.
Shortstop, merely by noting that I am making said terrorism possible you have emboldened the terrorists who now know, because you pointed it out, that I have made said terrorism possible so now that they know it’s possible they’re emboldened to do what was previously umpossible…..
Flugelhorn
I am gobsmacked. I actually agree with you. Common ground. Whodathunkit?
Stefan
OT, why do people in the east say “on line” and people in the midwest say “in line”?
Because people in the east aren’t a bunch of hay-chewing yokels.
Corner Stone
@Stefan: And they tell two friends, and they tell two friends, and they tell…
Stefan
Bullshit. What actually endangers the travelling public is the security line itself—if I were a terrorist, I’d just load up a luggage cart with several suitcases packed full with high explosives, get on the security line, and then right before I hit the scanners, at that point where everyone is packed tightly together, I’d set it off, killing dozens and effectively shutting down the entire airport. Now how exactly would you prevent that? A security line to get on the security line?
You know, the more I think about it, the more I’d like to pose this as a challenge: how exactly would you prevent the scenario I’ve outlined above? The current security measures do nothing to prevent it — if anything, they make it easier to achieve by offering such a nice fat juicy target of densely packed humanity.
Flugelhorn
@homerhk: Perfect example of a the Euro who has already headed much further down that slippery slope.
That is the problem with these types of rules. There are protests in the beginning. Minor tweaks might be made as a result, but the majority of the new policy stays in place. People are still disgruntled, but they eventually become used to the inconvenience and begin to tell themselves, “Well, I guess it is keeping me safe” such that it is soon broadly accepted since you “can’t beat em, you join em”. After a few years it becomes “The way its always been” and any attempt to change it later by any young, enterprising new minds hits even more opposition because, well, “That is the way its always been. We have been dealing with this for years now, so stop your whining.” I think I have it fairly well paraphrased.
Then… Buddha forbid, a terrorist attack happens on a plane again. “What?! But we have all these great security measures in place! We must be doing it wrong. We need to tighten it down even further!” Fairly soon you have Military personnel in every airport, all the citizens are equipped with ID chips for easy scanning and tracking, and all they are serving at the nutrient disbursement line is soylent green… again.
I would much rather be at my elevation on the slippery slope than at Europe’s.
rageahol
If the TSA gets collective bargaining, then they might wind up getting rid of at least the backscatter machines anyway. They would at least have the ability to demand dosimetry tags and regular calibration and measurements of the output and leakage of the machines.
catclub
@Flugelhorn:
“I would much rather be at my elevation on the slippery slope than at Europe’s.”
What? Europe has much less intrusive boarding screening
(except for flights to the US and THAT screening is demanded by the US).
Am I missing something?
shortstop
@Stefan: Yeah, you swallow your hay whole like some kind of savage animals.
A Ghost To Most
All this back-and-forth has me wondering; after the first terrorist is found (in pieces or otherwise) to have a bomb sewed up inside him/her, are we going to start cutting open 3% of passengers to look for bombs? Sounds like the airlines would be able to overbook even more than now, even if people start to avoid the cut-rate (sorry) prices.
p.s. the 3% is the number I heard quoted as the percentage of of folks who go through the “enhanced” screening.
Corner Stone
@Joseph Nobles:
This should have been the only clue you needed to catch.
Platonicspoof
As of 2007:
From the same USA Today article:
So I suspect the rankings are similar today.
Not worth any more googling to me.
h/t History Channel.