More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Peter Clothier

Peter Clothier

Posted: November 26, 2010 01:20 PM

Color me paranoiac, if you will, but I'm convinced the current media panic-fest over airport security is politically-driven. Americans are being whipped up into yet another absurd frenzy over an issue that, in view of the problems we face, strikes me as entirely trivial and peripheral. Given the history of shoe- and underwear-bombers and the highly publicized intentions of Al Qaeda to personalize their attack strategy, it seems to me reasonable to respond in kind. Unhappily, the situation in which we live requires constant vigilance. If that means a full body scan in the interests of preventing potential bombers from boarding commercial aircraft and, in some cases, pat-downs, so be it. I am less concerned with the sanctity of my private parts than I am with getting to my destination with safety.

The fact that this has been a major 24-hour news story for several days plays on our inability, as a nation, to make discriminating choices. It seems, on the one hand, that we are unable to tolerate the least insecurity in any aspect of our lives; we demand protection from the slightest threat. And that, on the other, we scream bloody murder if we are asked to make the smallest sacrifice to ensure the security we crave. Despite indisputable and centuries-old evidence that we are, and will remain vulnerable creatures, no matter what we do to protect ourselves, we act in the expectation that in our case it will be different.

I wonder, too, about the dread fear of being touched. It's obviously not something that I crave, from strangers, but the security pat-down -- and I myself have been subjected to this treatment, and survive to tell the tale -- is sexual only in the imagination of those who fear it so. To have the fleeting, professional, impersonal, and hopefully skillful touch of searching hands is surely no worse than a visit to the doctor's -- and could prove as life-saving to oneself and one's fellow travelers. I understand that there are those who have more reason than I to object viscerally to this kind of invasion--I think of rape victims, for example, or of people of color who associate it with the too-familiar humiliation of encounters with authority. I sympathize with them. Still, we are dealing with something broader and more potentially life-threatening than personal dignity or phobias.

So who, I ask myself, stands to gain from inflating this issue into something far greater than it ought to be? Politicians, that's who. They are grateful for any distraction from their own costly and disastrous failures. Those on the right -- this is my unhappy belief -- will exploit the slightest opportunity to foment discontent and rage against officialdom. It is to the advantage of some politicians, then, and of those who use them to further their financial interests; those, I mean, who can afford to buy politicians to do their bidding. And, sorry, yes, the media, too, who have a vested interest in controversial or sensational fodder for their news cycles, and who also have their bottom line of corporate profit to ensure. Those who stand to gain the least from the furor -- or lose -- are the airline patrons, who will find themselves standing in longer lines behind noisier and more quarrelsome fellow-travelers, whose objections to routine security will be validated by the current frenzy.

So yes, pat me down. Please. Scan me, by all means. And move me on with the assurance of safety toward the gate.

 
Color me paranoiac, if you will, but I'm convinced the current media panic-fest over airport security is politically-driven. Americans are being whipped up into yet another absurd frenzy over an issu...
Color me paranoiac, if you will, but I'm convinced the current media panic-fest over airport security is politically-driven. Americans are being whipped up into yet another absurd frenzy over an issu...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 54
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
photo
Aikaterina
A Greek-American living in California
09:50 AM on 11/29/2010
These scanners & pat-downs are another knee-jerk reaction to the shoe & underwear bomber failed attempts. Both Richard Reid and Abdumutallub are foreign nationals, (despite warnings and their being on "watch lists") got visas and plane tickets to the US.

Prior attempts to profile were ridiculous, since anyone with a foreign-sounding name, who resembled being Middle Eastern was selected for "random" screening. About 1/5 of the world's population is Muslim, and less than 1/4 of all Muslims are Arabs, rendering that "tool" useless.

While air travelers must subject themselves to ridiculous scrutiny, cargo on planes, ships or trucks entering the US is not scanned, inspected. Our borders (Canada & Mexico) and seaports are porous and unguarded. Our nuclear facilities, power plants, water-food supplies are vulnerable and virtually unattended (in terms of security).

Look at who's guarding our airports and public places. Private contractors use minimum-wage, uneducated, unskilled and often untrained workers. So too, these scanners and other measures designed to give the illusion of safety, rather than actual security, are a boom for surveillance-defense-military contractors, when a well-trained bomb or drug sniffing dog can do just the same for far less cost, invasion of privacy and violation of civil-legal and Constitutional rights.
photo
Ibackobama
I take donations! gotta pay for college y'know :o)
09:39 AM on 11/29/2010
I agree with you Clothier, I really dont care if someone wants to pat me down or have me scanned. As a frequent traveller, I am always the one picked out of the line for an extra check. I've been patted down, purse contents removed and checked, suitcase opened and riffled through, had a full body scan. One thing I do realise is that the TSA guys working at the airport are simply doing their job. And me standing there arguing, is just going to make everyone else stand in the line longer, and stress me out more than necessary, when I already have to deal with airline issues. Folks are checked when going into Disney, some at work, why is it a big deal when we are going to be thousands of feet in the air, with strangers and with no recourse if something were to happen? That one off chance that they may get that one shoe-bomber is a better alternative than having 100's of people dealing with the death of loved ones. That is just my 2 cents.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jeannette Harris
02:08 AM on 11/29/2010
The probability that any given potential airline passenger is *not* an effectively-armedt errorist approaches 100%. To whose/what benefit are we basing intrusive, extra-legal public policy on probabilities that approach zero percent?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
blackraisin
Life, Liberty, Property.
01:49 AM on 11/29/2010
I wonder if the author had the same opinion when Bush was in power.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
CarolinaYankee
05:37 PM on 11/28/2010
Hey Fine, anyone who does not want to go through security. We will not check anything on the plane first and you will be first to get onboard, and be sure to let us know if it blo ws up. Grow up this is the World we live in since Shrub invaded a country by mistake, get used to it.
11:38 PM on 11/29/2010
Brilliant argument. Not wanting to get zapped by x-rays, having someone look at my wife's naked body or lay their hands on my kids genitals=not wanting go through security. How simple minded.
How about something a little more thoughtful like http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/28/jeffrey-rosen-tsa-pat-down-unconstitutional_n_788880.html
or http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rob-kall/tsa-as-metaphor_b_788715.html
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Tulka2
Solidarity. Courage. Humor.
04:35 PM on 11/28/2010
Peter, it is all smoke and mirrors.  They don't examine the cargo that sits right under your feet.  If hocus pocus makes you feel better, that's nice i suppose, but the performance theater at the "security " line doesn't make anyone actually safer.  As a matter of fact Israelis know the security line, with people all jammed up right before they are checked, is the most dangerous place to be. 
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mbazid
Just smile and nod
03:48 PM on 11/28/2010
I wonder if the author wold feel it trivial if he were to witness his wife or daughter get frisked. Would he think it's trivial while watching them put their hands on his wife or daughters vagina to see if something is there?
I doubt that he would find it trivial.
03:36 PM on 11/28/2010
It isn't like 9/11 was first time terrorism has struck. What was different was the tactics used. And they used commonly available items. Why do we have to give our basic freedoms of the right to travel where and when we want because a certain percentage of infrequent travelers overdose on the 24/7 "if it bleeds, it leads" headlines of the day which makes it seem as if terrorism only started on 9/11/01?

http://www.salon.com/technology/ask_the_pilot/2010/11/23/tsa_airport_security/index.html


The scanners if they were 100% effective MIGHT be worthwhile but that has yet to be shown by TSA to be true. So we the taxpayers are forking out millions to few companies for 1st generation technology whose effectiveness at catching the ONE type of terrorist tactic is suspect at best while be a potential suspect until scanned everytime we buy an airline ticket.

I say the one type of terrorist because this technology can only stop on type of tactic which is taking down planes when many other tactics are available to cause financial, economic and personal terror such as driving a car loaded with explosives into a crowd during a Christmas tree lighting ceremony.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/27/mohamed-osman-mohamud-portland-car-bomb_n_788695.html
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
GayGrandpa
02:06 PM on 11/28/2010
Can't be any worse than a gay bar on a Saturday night.
photo
SeenItBefore
Ya want to super size that?
01:10 PM on 11/28/2010
I recently returned from London's Heathrow airport on a Continental flight.

After disgorging my knapsack with laptop, cameras and prescription meds, I was pulled aside for further investigation.

Why were there so many drugs- "I am a cancer survivor with hypertension, this isn't helping".

Open the computer and start it up - "O.K."

Why does it have an aluminum case? "It's an Apple."

Your toiletries are in the wrong sized plastic bag. "O.K."

What is this syringe for? "Cleaning my ears".

Put your arms out and spread your legs. "O.K".

Twenty minutes later as they have announced boarding will start, I'm pulled aside again and asked about the contents of my carry-on, in particular, my sailing foul weather gear. "I have been in Portugal to sail back to England. This gear is mine and it fits".

Put your arms out and spread your legs. "O.K".

As I presented my boarding pass 15 minutes later, a symbol was drawn on the pass and as I walked down the jetway and showed the pass, I was told I had been selected for an exam and was pulled aside for a third time.

Spread your arms and your legs. "O.K".

Being 64 and suffering from junk NO ONE wants to touch anymore, the least they could do is provide a bunch of hotties to feel me up! But, three times in less than an hour was a bit much.
photo
jcinco
Banned from commenting
12:55 PM on 11/28/2010
I recently traveled to Central America with my husband and two kids and was subjected to a full body scan. The thing that disturbed me is that it was done in such a way that I was not informed it was happening nor given any choice. The first inkling I had was when a female agent told me to place my feet in position and lift my arms. The scan then revolved around me before I had a chance to realize what was happening. The said female then had me exit the the scanner and stand and wait for perhaps 3-5 minutes while a male scrutinized the scan with fellow passengers walking behind him. I felt invaded and humiliated and given the choice would have agreed to a pat down by a femaile agent. I'm in my 50's, caucasian and am a US citizen. In my opinion I was chosen to prove that the TSA doesn't profile. I personally feel janet napolitano should agree to be subjected to the exact procedure I was.
01:01 PM on 11/28/2010
I don't care if Napolitano struts around naked in Reagan National. I refuse to be treated like criminal for simply trying to board a plane. I'm sorry it happened to you.
09:15 AM on 11/28/2010
Yeah, uhm, you're kinda missing the point. These security measures are ineffective. If you're talking about grabbing the crotch of a suspicious passenger boarding a flight to the United States from some African or European country with weak security measures, sure, this might be a tactic that works. But putting your hands on the chest of a 75 year old grandma flying from Dubuque to Cheyenne is certainly a waist of time, and definitely not pleasant for the granny.

And if YOU feel so unsafe on an airplane that you wish THE REST OF US to submit to a frisk every time we board a plane, I suggest that YOU take a train/car/walk, because the rest of us aren't so scared and only want someone grabbing our goods for pay after that's been negotiated up front. *wink*wink*
08:47 AM on 11/28/2010
Today they take away your freedom and pat you down like a criminal at the airport, tomorrow they will pat you down to get into a football or baseball game, enter a mall, etc.
You don't speak for me and the rest of the sane people in this country.
If the body scanners were considered unsafe for the Pilot Association, then they are unsafe for me too.
You are sheep, following orders of your masters. say "bahhhhhhhhhhhhh"
05:19 PM on 11/27/2010
Feel free to get you kicks this way if you like. You are certainly not speaking for me.
05:18 PM on 11/27/2010
So, no doubt, you were 100% in favor of warrantless wiretaps under Bush, because those made you feel "safer" too? Don't forget your blankie and duct tape, those might help when you hear monsters under your bed. Me, I prefer the place that used to be called the land of the free and the home of the brave.