A Perfect Metaphor for Bush's America

Today Sir Charles and extended family went to see the Statue of Liberty on an absolutely perfect day in NYC.  Security to get on one of the tour boats out to Lady Liberty is now akin to that in airports -- metal detectors, officious people in uniform and so forth.  Well today the security brain trust decided that our safety required them to frisk an elderly woman in a wheel chair.  Seriously.

So now not only do we live in a society ruled by cowards, torturers, and authoritarians -- we also appear to be moving towards living in one in which common sense and discretion will become things of the past.

Come to think of it, the day I was leaving Netroots, an elderly woman in a wheel chair traveling only with her young grandchildren was pulled out of line for additional screening and made to stand -- with great difficulty -- while subject to multiple sweeps of the wand.  The process appeared to be painful and confusing to her.  I was desperate to say something, but figured it wouldn't help her and end up with me going through worse.  But I regret not speaking up.

Worse yet, Michelle Malkin was allowed on my flight without extensive and enhanced interrogation.      

Comments

[Joe Klein's conscience]

One of the best things Obama can do is abolish the TSA and the DHS. Homeland Security sounds so 1950's Soviet Union anyway.

[Don K]

Happens every time my partner and I travel by plane. He's in a wheelchair from MS, and has to put up with the groping from the TSA - ummm - gentlemen (yeah, that's what I'll call them). They don't try to force him to stand up, but the experience is de-humanizing. Looking at it on the bright side, at least we don't have to stand in the snake line - at Detroit Metro we can go through the First Class entrance and never stand in line.

I'm appalled at what we've let happen in this country in the last seven years, but unfortunately I have no confidence Obama will be willing to reverse any of it. Even if he had the inclination, I'm sure all of his advisors will be telling him backing off will be seen as soft on terrorism.

[weboy]

I'm never quite sure what the point is here - and I had a similar conversation with a girlfriend this afternoon about a cousin of hers who has been searched twice on trips to Israel on El Al (she's Orthodox, and Israeli, so what the issue is remains a mystery). But as I said to my friend, I get weary of complaints that security is inconvenient or unfair; we apparently seem to all want to believe that we come with "it's not me" signs, and the perps are easy to spot. If that were the case, I think, we'd probably be able to do away with security all together.

Look, I agree our security issues are rampant and poorly addressed, and the current systems heighten inconveniences and seem highly arbitrary... but "improving" security will probably be more intrusive, not less, and doing away with it is simply unrealistic. We will have a TSA, and while dismantling Homeland Security makes sense on some levels (if only to rescue FEMA from total destruction, on another, the initial idea to bring security functions together was a sound one, one we all tended to agree with... after 9/11.

As someone who remains profoundly affected by that day, I still find myself impatient with the complainers and frankly willing to do what it takes to see that we're secure. I have no sympathies for whines of confiscated lighters from luggage, or that 3 ounces of shampoo is too hard (though I think the liquids rule is somewhat absurd, it is the rule). I have some sympathies for "they searched Grandma" or get too handsy with wheelchair searches... but arguments that "they just want to be PC" don't really sway me. And the most fascinating thing to me is how this annoyance iwth security searches cuts across party lines and politics: for all the bluster about the need to be secure, conservatives who travel are just as likely to complain about TSA searches and procedures. And with unanimity like that, I think the pressures to relax security, rather than improve it, are bigger than many people realize.

[joel hanes]

Weboy, it's been seven years. When will you begin to let it go? I mean, I'm sorry you're still frightened, but I'm unwilling to live in a security-theatre police state to mollify you.

You're in far more danger driving to the airport than you are on the plane.

I mean, they've been inspecting all of us for seven years. Let's talk return on that investment: Please tell me about the ongoing recurrent terror attempts that are foiled -- they've found nothing, they've got nothing, because if they had averted an actual security threat, you can be sure we would have heard all about it. And the way you can tell that is that they have felt compelled to heavily publicize the few ridiculous "plots" they've turned up -- amateurs who never posed a threat, who were unlikely ever to act on their "plans", like the ones whose supposed liquid-explosive device was complete wack. Your laptop is

So there aren't any realistic airline terror attempts being made; which is a good thing for us, because the TSA regime provides very little actual security, despite the enormous inconvenience and expense it imposes on air travelers.

There are measures that we could take to increase our actual security; see Bruce Schnier. We, acting through our government, don't seem very interested in carrying out those measures; somehow the show of security measures has come to be more important than the substance.

TSA exists to make airline passengers more anxious about terrorism, to make them fearful and docile, and it does a pretty good job of that.

[Stephen]

but "improving" security will probably be more intrusive

I find that highly unlikely. No airport in the world is under greater threat than old Kimpo in Seoul, within artillery range of North Korea. When I lived there they even still manned the machine gun emplacements, as well as used Korean soldiers armed with fully automatic weapons as security, rather than just airport police officers. Getting through security there was simple and efficient.

The real problem with the TSA is that each airport is one person's fiefdom, with each supervisor and even TSA agent serving as simultaneous vassals and lords over their own little fiefs. They have enormous leeway over how they conduct searches; the TSA manager at the Phoenix airport got in quite a bit of trouble several years ago for ordering her agents to deliberately inconvenience travelers however they could so she could justify her requests for more funding.

The security they provide is a joke; I've read several reports of tests where people without proper ID and/or with banned items get through security to the gate areas or even the tarmac. There was even some kid not long ago who talked his way onto several different planes at different times to fly completely free. It's a show, something definite for people to see and experience so they can simultaneously believe the government is "doing something" while being reminded of the ever-present terrorist bogeymen.

I hate it. I hate the inconvenience because I know it's deliberate and an end unto itself, and it makes none of us any safer.

[Lisa Simeone]

I second everyone who says it is, in fact, not making us any safer. It's called security "theater" for a reason.

[Glen]

Common sense? Common sense??? Don't you know that's been outlawed? What pre-9/11 thinking!

Frisking grannies in wheelchairs and confiscating sippy cups are degrading and outraging beyond words, but my favorite story involved Congressman Dingel from Michigan.

He set of alarms repeatedly. He was literally strip searched, down to his underwear. Turns out that his artifical hip was to blame. Can't you see the ultimate scenario? "Tut, tut, sir. You know we have to examine it. Take it out."