Quote:
Ah, the airport, where modern folk heroes are made. The airport, where that inspired flight attendant did what everyone who's ever been in the spam-in-a-can crush of a flying aluminum tube - where we collectively pretend that a clutch of peanuts is a meal and a seat cushion is a "flotation device" - has always dreamed of doing: pull the lever, blow the door, explode the chute, grab a beer, slide to the tarmac and walk through the gates to the sanity that lies beyond. Not since Rick and Louis disappeared into the Casablanca fog headed for the Free French garrison in Brazzaville has a stroll on the tarmac thrilled so many.
Spoiler
Who cares that the crazed steward got arrested, pleaded guilty to sundry charges, and probably was a rude, unpleasant SOB to begin with? Bonnie and Clyde were psychopaths, yet what child of the '60s did not fall in love with Faye Dunaway and Warren Beatty?
And now three months later, the newest airport hero arrives. His genius was not innovation in getting out, but deconstructing the entire process of getting in. John Tyner, cleverly armed with an iPhone to give YouTube immortality to the encounter, took exception to the TSA guard about to give him the benefit of Homeland Security's newest brainstorm - the upgraded, full-palm, up the groin, all-body pat-down. In a stroke, the young man ascended to myth, or at least the next edition of Bartlett's, warning the agent not to "touch my junk."
Not quite the 18th-century elegance of "Don't Tread on Me," but the age of Twitter has a different cadence from the age of the musket. What the modern battle cry lacks in archaic charm, it makes up for in full-body syllabic punch.
Don't touch my junk is the anthem of the modern man, the Tea Party patriot, the late-life libertarian, the midterm election voter. Don't touch my junk, Obamacare - get out of my doctor's examining room, I'm wearing a paper-thin gown slit down the back. Don't touch my junk, Google - Street View is cool, but get off my street. Don't touch my junk, you airport security goon - my package belongs to no one but me, and do you really think I'm a Nigerian nut job preparing for my 72-virgin orgy by blowing my johnson to kingdom come?
In "Up in the Air," that ironic take on the cramped freneticism of airport life, George Clooney explains why he always follows Asians in the security line:
"They pack light, travel efficiently, and they got a thing for slip-on shoes, God love 'em."
"That's racist!"
"I'm like my mother. I stereotype. It's faster."
That riff is a crowd-pleaser because everyone knows that the entire apparatus of the security line is a national homage to political correctness. Nowhere do more people meekly acquiesce to more useless inconvenience and needless indignity for less purpose. Wizened seniors strain to untie their shoes; beltless salesmen struggle comically to hold up their pants; 3-year-olds scream while being searched insanely for explosives - when everyone, everyone, knows that none of these people is a threat to anyone.
The ultimate idiocy is the full-body screening of the pilot. The pilot doesn't need a bomb or box cutter to bring down a plane. All he has to do is drive it into the water, like the EgyptAir pilot who crashed his plane off Nantucket while intoning "I rely on God," killing all on board.
But we must not bring that up. We pretend that we go through this nonsense as a small price paid to ensure the safety of air travel. Rubbish. This has nothing to do with safety - 95 percent of these inspections, searches, shoe removals and pat-downs are ridiculously unnecessary. The only reason we continue to do this is that people are too cowed to even question the absurd taboo against profiling - when the profile of the airline attacker is narrow, concrete, uniquely definable and universally known. So instead of seeking out terrorists, we seek out tubes of gel in stroller pouches.
The junk man's revolt marks the point at which a docile public declares that it will tolerate only so much idiocy. Metal detector? Back-of-the-hand pat? Okay. We will swallow hard and pretend airline attackers are randomly distributed in the population.
But now you insist on a full-body scan, a fairly accurate representation of my naked image to be viewed by a total stranger? Or alternatively, the full-body pat-down, which, as the junk man correctly noted, would be sexual assault if performed by anyone else?
This time you have gone too far, Big Bro'. The sleeping giant awakes. Take my shoes, remove my belt, waste my time and try my patience. But don't touch my junk.
Further reading:
Ann Coulter, Napolitano: The Ball’s in My Court Now
“Please have your genitalia out and ready to be fondled when you approach the security checkpoint.”
NewsRealBlog, The Top 10 Insanities of Airport Security
EDIT - might as well cross-post from the funny pic thread:
|||Oh yeah I heard about this. Pretty funny actually. I do think that it's a little invasive to do such a pat-down. A regular one is fine but one step shy of a full body cavity search? Ouch...|||Nice topic, me and my mom just had a lot of fun talking about this. I'll add some:Attention indignant, foot-stomping crybabies with megaphones:
Do you yell at your doctor when he touches your junk, too? Gonna have him arrested, hernia or no?
Your viewed-via-xray-scanner-naked body isn't something worth remembering. Trust me. You think it's like a photograph of you naked, posing, with a smile on your face, or something? You think it's something that is possible of arousing anyone, at all, ever? You're fooling yourself, supermodel. That drunk picture of yourself at the Halloween party that you put on Facebook is more sexual than these scanners, and you're only barely modest about that! Trust me, once you've moved on thru the line, the person who viewed it wouldn't be able to pick you out of a police lineup.
Furthermore, your junk isn't a sacred historic relic. You are one face in a crowd, literally. Once you're moved on thru the line, that guy who did your pat-down won't sit at his station, longingly thinking of the joy he felt when he was close to you, because it was so satisfying for him that he's still caught up in the moment. He has done 100's of them in the last week and will do 100's more in the week to come. Your particular "session" with him will not be memorable in any way. Ever. It isn't sexual touching. It isn't sexual in any way. It's just a guy (who would probably rather be doing any number of other things) wearing rubber gloves, with an upleasant job doing his job the way he was trained to do it.
Oh, and finally: there needs to be some kind of accountability. These blowhards who are getting on national TV/the interwebz and complaining bout this garbage right before Thanksgiving/Christmas need to be held accountable for their actions over the holiday. I bet you anything that these angry, loud people will do exactly as the TSA tells them when it comes time to get on their plane, because if they don't they don't get to go to grandma's.
In short: QQ more. Why don't you go blog about it?
(hehe!)
edit: curious, though, why is this thread "obama nation"? the 1st post didn't mention the president at all, and none of the links are to some "obama nation" place? am i missing an inside joke of the OTF?|||Quote:
Yes, I know all too well that this springs from rank GOP stupidity. I had thought the DHS might not be a completely asinine decision, but I always recognized it in the TSA.
I don't think you can fairly blame this on solely the GOP. The left was in lockstep post 9/11 and it's from those rampant civil rights abuses that we get nonsense like this.
Quote:
Further reading:
Ann Coulter, Napolitano: The Ball�s in My Court Now
�Please have your genitalia out and ready to be fondled when you approach the security checkpoint.�
Some of the poorest writing I've ever seen you link. I highly advise no one waste their time reading it. The gist of it is that the author thinks our security system is poor. That's really all you need to know.
Quote:
NewsRealBlog, The Top 10 Insanities of Airport Security
Better than the former link, but that's its only real redeeming quality.
Quote:
EDIT - might as well cross-post from the funny pic thread:
This was worth posting. The man Tyner, now oft quoted, is absolutely right: in any other circumstance this would qualify as sexual assault. Given they grope children too, they should be looking at decades in prison. I can't see how anyone would support this system. There isn't even any evidence that it works!
************************************************** *******
Quote:
Do you yell at your doctor when he touches your junk, too? Gonna have him arrested, hernia or no?
Do you yell at ambulances when they take you away? No? Then what's the big deal with kidnapping! If you can't tell the difference between a consent based, non-coercive, evidence supported medical exam for the purposes of the patient's health and a TSA agent groping passengers with no evidence or cause, strictly on a randomly selected basis, in a coercive environment, then there is something seriously amiss with your analytical skills.
Quote:
Your viewed-via-xray-scanner-naked body isn't something worth remembering. Trust me. You think it's like a photograph of you naked, posing, with a smile on your face, or something? You think it's something that is possible of arousing anyone, at all, ever? You're fooling yourself, supermodel.
I gather you have absolutely no experience with or knowledge of sexual criminals?
Quote:
It isn't sexual in any way. It's just a guy (who would probably rather be doing any number of other things) wearing rubber gloves, with an upleasant job doing his job the way he was trained to do it.
Indeed. It's not like sexual perverts gravitate towards professions that enable their specific perversions or anything. I'm sure they definitely don't enjoy the ability to pick out the pretty girls in line and see them naked or watch them get groped. What sort of adult male enjoys seeing adult females naked!
Besides, we all know that this is clearly worse on them than it is on you. Sure, they get to violate every right to privacy you have, but think about how unpleasant it is for them! Truly we should just ignore the civil liberties of the American people and focus on the real victims here: the TSA.|||Quote:
Do you yell at ambulances when they take you away? No? Then what's the big deal with kidnapping! If you can't tell the difference between a consent based, non-coercive, evidence supported medical exam for the purposes of the patient's health and a TSA agent groping passengers with no evidence or cause, strictly on a randomly selected basis, in a coercive environment, then there is something seriously amiss with your analytical skills.
I gather you have absolutely no experience with or knowledge of sexual criminals?
Indeed. It's not like sexual perverts gravitate towards professions that enable their specific perversions or anything. I'm sure they definitely don't enjoy the ability to pick out the pretty girls in line and see them naked or watch them get groped. What sort of adult male enjoys seeing adult females naked!
Besides, we all know that this is clearly worse on them than it is on you. Sure, they get to violate every right to privacy you have, but think about how unpleasant it is for them! Truly we should just ignore the civil liberties of the American people and focus on the real victims here: the TSA.
The word "grope" -- I don't think it means what you think it means. Or rather, it doesn't apply here. A pat-down doesn't involve "groping". When you say it does, it shows that you're being dishonest, and implies that you're being dishonest to prove a point.
The full body scan image != a naked picture. It's not "seeing an adult female naked". The scan images aren't even close to photography. This is plain to see with a google images search.
Additionally, a bit of research shows that the person who views the scans isn't in the same place as the person being scanned -- so when you suggest that someone can "pick pretty girls out" you're being not only dishonest, but alarmist.
What's more, the scan images aren't saved to a disk and saved for dubious uses after the fact -- they're purged within moments of the person being cleared through the line. This is also easy to learn if you look, and I'm sure you've looked.
Finally, your privacy isn't being violated in a manner which is coerced. When you bought your ticket, you agreed to abide by the security measures. To say that you're being "coerced" is also dishonest and alarmist.
That's quite a bit of dishonesty you've written, then. Fun to read, but not fun to make policy by.|||Oh boy. When you're changing up definitions for words, you can't be calling someone dishonest.
grope
verb \ˈgrōp\
gropedgrop�ing
Definition of GROPE
intransitive verb
1
: to feel about blindly or uncertainly in search <grope for the light switch>
2
: to look for something blindly or uncertainly <grope for the right words>
3
: to feel one's way
transitive verb
1
: feel up
2
: to find (as one's way) by groping
— grope noun
— grop�er noun
And who says a visual depiction has to be photography in order for it to be a naked picture? I've seen those scans and let me tell you that some of them can be VERY personal.
I would post the image directly here but I actually think that it might break some forum rules. So here is the link instead.
http://www.angelsfortruth.com/blog/2...verted-images/|||Quote:
The word "grope" -- I don't think it means what you think it means. Or rather, it doesn't apply here. A pat-down doesn't involve "groping". When you say it does, it shows that you're being dishonest, and implies that you're being dishonest to prove a point.
grope
/groʊp/ Show Spelled [grohp] Show IPA verb, groped, grop�ing, noun
�verb (used without object)
1. to feel about with the hands; feel one's way: I had to grope around in the darkness before I found the light switch.
(http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/grope)
What do you think they're feeling about with, their noses? I suggest you also take the time to research the word "dishonest." I think you may be surprised to find that "using words accurately" is not one of the definitions.
Quote:
The full body scan image != a naked picture. It's not "seeing an adult female naked". The scan images aren't even close to photography. This is plain to see with a google images search.
This is like bring your dictionary to work day. Picture: 1. a visual representation of a person, object, or scene, as a painting, drawing, photograph, etc.: I carry a picture of my grandchild in my wallet. Naked: 1. being without clothing or covering; nude: naked children swimming in the lake. Are these visual representations of people without clothing? Why yes, yes they are. That's kind of the whole damn point of the machine.
Quote:
Additionally, a bit of research shows that the person who views the scans isn't in the same place as the person being scanned -- so when you suggest that someone can "pick pretty girls out" you're being not only dishonest, but alarmist.
Indeed, thank god we have this wall of separation between coworkers. They couldn't possibly get off on the public groping, or set up buddies to enjoy it, or even vicariously enjoy humiliating the targets of their sexual desires. No, in America people of authority would never abuse it for sexual gratification. As for being alarmist, you're damn right I am. When my government institutes a policy of sexual assault without probable cause, in direct violation of my 4th amendment rights, I tend to raise alarms. It's just this thing I do.
Quote:
What's more, the scan images aren't saved to a disk and saved for dubious uses after the fact -- they're purged within moments of the person being cleared through the line. This is also easy to learn if you look, and I'm sure you've looked.
That must be why none of them ever show up on the internet. Thank god we have the TSA to both violate and protect our civil liberties.
Warning: the above link contains a video that you may activate at your discretion. The images have been edited to remove identifying features, but it still may be considered NSFW. Also, it's worth pointing out that this machine uses a less intrusive imaging technique than the ones in airports.
Quote:
Finally, your privacy isn't being violated in a manner which is coerced. When you bought your ticket, you agreed to abide by the security measures. To say that you're being "coerced" is also dishonest and alarmist.
You get randomly pulled out of line and told that either you get groped or have naked pictures of you taken. If you disagree, not only are you forbidden to fly but the TSA can prosecute you for over 10,000$. That is the definition of coercion.|||http://i.imgur.com/Ahyi3.jpg|||Quote:
The word "grope" -- I don't think it means what you think it means. Or rather, it doesn't apply here. A pat-down doesn't involve "groping". When you say it does, it shows that you're being dishonest, and implies that you're being dishonest to prove a point.
The full body scan image != a naked picture. It's not "seeing an adult female naked". The scan images aren't even close to photography. This is plain to see with a google images search.
Additionally, a bit of research shows that the person who views the scans isn't in the same place as the person being scanned -- so when you suggest that someone can "pick pretty girls out" you're being not only dishonest, but alarmist.
What's more, the scan images aren't saved to a disk and saved for dubious uses after the fact -- they're purged within moments of the person being cleared through the line. This is also easy to learn if you look, and I'm sure you've looked.
Finally, your privacy isn't being violated in a manner which is coerced. When you bought your ticket, you agreed to abide by the security measures. To say that you're being "coerced" is also dishonest and alarmist.
That's quite a bit of dishonesty you've written, then. Fun to read, but not fun to make policy by.
This entire post is dishonest apologia.
There have been reported incidents where agents have, indeed, singled out pretty girls or otherwise made sexual remarks. Likewise, there have been incidents where images were stored (and later used to mock a fellow TSA agent). In fact, the ability for the machines to store and send via via a network were TSA requirements. http://gizmodo.com/5690749/
Additionally, the naked scanners allow the viewer to clearly make out genitalia. I don't think you have the right to dictate whether someone considers this invasive or a virtual strip search.
Finally, several security professionals, including those who keep the Tel Aviv airport secure, have stated that these procedures are unnecessary, intrusive and little more than security theater.
Edit: Schneier speaks sense: http://www.schneier.com/blog/archive...ckscatter.html|||Guys, it's not a grope. It's a freedom pat.
No comments:
Post a Comment