Discussion on:
View:
Show:
Not to get on the government's case, or anything, but it seems like even when the government gets a good idea, it manages to screw it up. Use government agencies like the TSA as an example of how you shouldn't do security, and you'll learn something useful.
Please, let's not assume that the government is any worse than private organizations.
The Metropolitan Opera implemented one of the best examples of Security Theater I've heard of yet.
About ONE YEAR after 9/11, the Met set up a baggage check area, and began refusing entry to male ticket holders who had purses (or anything similar). The security personnel STATED that they would have allowed my wife to carry the exact same bag into the theater, but told me that I could not take it in because "the terrorists are very macho and they wouldn't involve women in their attacks on us." At the time, the first female suicide bombers were active in Israel, and the published information about the 9/11 terrorists include the fact that one of them brought his wife and children to the U.S. so that he would appear more innocent.
And that baggage check area? Because the Met didn't actually HAVE a check room, they simply cordoned off an area on the lower level, RIGHT NEXT TO ONE OF THE MAIN STRUCTURAL SUPPORT COLUMNS FOR THE ENTIRE BUILDING. People were entering the theater and handing their briefcase (and larger bags) to people standing at a table. The staff made no attempt to inspect the bags (they certainly had no equipment to detect explosives).
The Met persisted in this idiocy for several years. Eventually, they resumed normal operations.
As far as I can tell, the entire purpose of these procedures was to mollify some of their biggest contributors, by putting in place a highly visible "security policy" that would only seriously inconvenience a few customers.
So there you have it -- a Theater implementing "Security Theater!"
The Metropolitan Opera implemented one of the best examples of Security Theater I've heard of yet.
About ONE YEAR after 9/11, the Met set up a baggage check area, and began refusing entry to male ticket holders who had purses (or anything similar). The security personnel STATED that they would have allowed my wife to carry the exact same bag into the theater, but told me that I could not take it in because "the terrorists are very macho and they wouldn't involve women in their attacks on us." At the time, the first female suicide bombers were active in Israel, and the published information about the 9/11 terrorists include the fact that one of them brought his wife and children to the U.S. so that he would appear more innocent.
And that baggage check area? Because the Met didn't actually HAVE a check room, they simply cordoned off an area on the lower level, RIGHT NEXT TO ONE OF THE MAIN STRUCTURAL SUPPORT COLUMNS FOR THE ENTIRE BUILDING. People were entering the theater and handing their briefcase (and larger bags) to people standing at a table. The staff made no attempt to inspect the bags (they certainly had no equipment to detect explosives).
The Met persisted in this idiocy for several years. Eventually, they resumed normal operations.
As far as I can tell, the entire purpose of these procedures was to mollify some of their biggest contributors, by putting in place a highly visible "security policy" that would only seriously inconvenience a few customers.
So there you have it -- a Theater implementing "Security Theater!"
Setting aside the whole issue of how effective the TSA measures are at deterring undesired behavior, security theater does have a valid place in the overall security picture. For example, simply parking a police car in a visible location along a road will tend to effectively slow traffic for at least that portion of the road. It doesn't matter whether there's actually someone in it. I don't have any problem with security theater in general so long as it's properly thought out and is part of a larger security picture.
As far as the TSA concerned, I'm less concerned about how many people were actually caught doing something wrong than I am about how many potential situations may have been deterred through these measures - that is, a person who might have otherwise tried to do something but decided not to try in order to avoid getting caught. I think that's a more important statistic, when you're trying to determine whether the measures are actually effective or not, and whether the inconveniences are "worth it" in the end. I'm not saying that they don't need to do better...
As far as the TSA concerned, I'm less concerned about how many people were actually caught doing something wrong than I am about how many potential situations may have been deterred through these measures - that is, a person who might have otherwise tried to do something but decided not to try in order to avoid getting caught. I think that's a more important statistic, when you're trying to determine whether the measures are actually effective or not, and whether the inconveniences are "worth it" in the end. I'm not saying that they don't need to do better...
The current "theatre" is supposed to make the citizen consumer feel safe, but is poorly designed as a "show of security", if that is what is intended. Cardboard cops, fake cameras, and the presence of security personnel and real surveillance, along with press announcements, do the "other security theatre" quite well. Spending extra money on something that actually could increases security, but is incorrectly implemented, is just a stupid waste and annoyance to the innocent. It's like paying for a large fire department to put out fires, but they consistently point their hoses in the wrong direction. All it would take is a little turn-around to make the cost and effort actually effective, rather than simply convincing property owners that they have a large fire department to protect their property.
For example, simply parking a police car in a visible location along a road will tend to effectively slow traffic for at least that portion of the road.
That's not a very good example, considering that the presence of police surveillance (or at least the appearance of surveillance) sometimes increases traffic danger. I guess, in fact, that's a great example of how security theater can make things worse, rather than improving anything.
Red light cameras have actually led (sometimes fairly directly, often more indirectly) to higher accident rates. I've observed people behaving much more stupidly when they're busy keeping an eye on a police car in traffic nearby when I had just seen the same drivers smoothly integrated with the flow of traffic a couple of blocks or on-ramps earlier.
The biggest effect of security theater, in my experience, is a heightened state of panic. Under such circumstances, bad things tend to be more likely to occur.
That's not a very good example, considering that the presence of police surveillance (or at least the appearance of surveillance) sometimes increases traffic danger. I guess, in fact, that's a great example of how security theater can make things worse, rather than improving anything.
Red light cameras have actually led (sometimes fairly directly, often more indirectly) to higher accident rates. I've observed people behaving much more stupidly when they're busy keeping an eye on a police car in traffic nearby when I had just seen the same drivers smoothly integrated with the flow of traffic a couple of blocks or on-ramps earlier.
The biggest effect of security theater, in my experience, is a heightened state of panic. Under such circumstances, bad things tend to be more likely to occur.
that's a risk, and that needs to be taken into account when considering it as an option. However, I don't think that nullifies the proposition that it can be used effectively as part of an overall security strategy, the intent being simply to help deter someone from trying to do something in the first place. Of course, it would only be part of the overall security strategy. And when things do happen, you do also need to be able to catch that, and then make sure that the firemen are pointing their hoses in the right direction as well, to reference the other reply to my prior post.
the cardboard cops on top of WalMart sort of thing is not what is meant by "security theatre". "Security theater" is intended to convey an appearance of better security to the public, without accomplishing the actual goal of either deterring or stopping criminal activity.
If the TSA wants to do that sort of thing, they can do it for nearly free by public notice that they have some sort of "secret weapon". Not being effective with an actual program doesn't count.
With some tweaking (or maybe a TSA culture-overhaul, I don't know) they could have a real, effective security measure.
If the TSA wants to do that sort of thing, they can do it for nearly free by public notice that they have some sort of "secret weapon". Not being effective with an actual program doesn't count.
With some tweaking (or maybe a TSA culture-overhaul, I don't know) they could have a real, effective security measure.
As an Australian, i laugh a little at the security measures you guys have to go through, the airport in my city doesn't even have a metal detector, much less armed sub-humans.
But it seems to me that an important part of this picture has been missed, i mean after all, aren't these guys on a suicide mission? What do they care if they get caught? They were dead anyway, getting caught would be almost a bonus for them, because you get the publicity for whatever agenda you are pushing, without having to blow up a plane!
Another thing I laugh at from here is the fact that terrorists have one single goal, to change the way the majority of people live through the use of violence. A goal which your government achieved FOR them. If you hadn't thought the world was ending and hadn't been baying for blood, and just got on with your lives, the terrorists would have failed in their ultimate mission.
But hey, with your health care system in tatters, at least the TSA are doing a great job for prostate cancer with all those cavity checks!
But it seems to me that an important part of this picture has been missed, i mean after all, aren't these guys on a suicide mission? What do they care if they get caught? They were dead anyway, getting caught would be almost a bonus for them, because you get the publicity for whatever agenda you are pushing, without having to blow up a plane!
Another thing I laugh at from here is the fact that terrorists have one single goal, to change the way the majority of people live through the use of violence. A goal which your government achieved FOR them. If you hadn't thought the world was ending and hadn't been baying for blood, and just got on with your lives, the terrorists would have failed in their ultimate mission.
But hey, with your health care system in tatters, at least the TSA are doing a great job for prostate cancer with all those cavity checks!
TSA is only a tiny step better than the way things would have been handled post 9/11 by the security we had before. It was revealed at SFO that eighty percent of the security people weren't even citizens. We were trusting our luggage and flight safety to them before and now with TSA we get slightly better security and ten times the hassle. It's no wonder I don't fly for leisure anymore. Only if I have to and there's no way to drive, like Hawaii or Alaska, otherwise I'll drive a rentacar.
Yeah -- I got back from a week-long trip out of state on Saturday. I drove a rental car. In short, I agree that it's just not worth flying most of the time, these days.
Is Alaska an island? You certainly can drive to Alaska, albeit it is one long drive! Now if you were traveling for business then it wouldn't be prudent, but for leisure, it may. But you'll have to deal with Customs, and have your passport handy. I'm sure there are rules/regs just as with TSA (Totally Sucks A$$).
It's been a while since I've crossed the border by car, but I imagine they will let you carry more than 3 oz of liquids in your car.
To enter Canada, you can bring in no more than a carton of smokes, 40 oz of liquor, 40 oz of wine, or a 24 of beer...
And yes you can drive to Alaska via Canada, famous project from WWII days (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_highway)
You still get the same grilling by customs, but no xrays etc. I have seen drug sniffing dogs walked beside the cars, don't have a problem with that.
James
And yes you can drive to Alaska via Canada, famous project from WWII days (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_highway)
You still get the same grilling by customs, but no xrays etc. I have seen drug sniffing dogs walked beside the cars, don't have a problem with that.
James
The engine died about thirty yards off the beach... 
I wonder how many behaving anxiously are simply uncomfortable with crowds and/or afraid to fly. I'm not particularly comfortable with 'behavioral' analysis and targeting without extraordinarily skilled Psychologists/Psychiatrists doing the analysis and targeting.
However, the show must go on if the peons er... taxpayers are to be mollified. Which says oodles about the peons.
However, the show must go on if the peons er... taxpayers are to be mollified. Which says oodles about the peons.
... whether the TSA will deem their behavior "anxious" enough to search them.
Your comment about the fact that TSA is finally employing an effective technique. I never really thought about it that way, thanks for the wake up.
It's not effective yet, as far as I can tell -- but it has the potential to become effective, if they go back to R&D and try to improve on it and do some real testing.
Most of what goes on in the name of security is only theater. This certainly applies to the TSA.
We stand in cattle lines in the name of security, we get poked, prodded, told to disrobe (shoes, belts, etc), and then our belongings are subject to the whims of arbitrary search and seizure.
I ABSOLUTELY agree that this is an invasion of privacy, an intrusion against civil liberties as guaranteed by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
There is no documented proof that all of this theater has had any effect at all on terrorism or an attack.
The only consequence has been to severely inconvenience and harrass innocent people.
I avoid flights and air travel just to avoid this unreasonable behavior, not because I have anything to hide, but because I'd like to be treated with some measure of dignity and respect. Just because I bought a ticket should not mean I've ceded all of my civil rights.
Look annoyed while traveling these days? Who doesn't?! Who shouldn't?!
We stand in cattle lines in the name of security, we get poked, prodded, told to disrobe (shoes, belts, etc), and then our belongings are subject to the whims of arbitrary search and seizure.
I ABSOLUTELY agree that this is an invasion of privacy, an intrusion against civil liberties as guaranteed by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
There is no documented proof that all of this theater has had any effect at all on terrorism or an attack.
The only consequence has been to severely inconvenience and harrass innocent people.
I avoid flights and air travel just to avoid this unreasonable behavior, not because I have anything to hide, but because I'd like to be treated with some measure of dignity and respect. Just because I bought a ticket should not mean I've ceded all of my civil rights.
Look annoyed while traveling these days? Who doesn't?! Who shouldn't?!
...I had flown out of O'Hare to NYC, San Fran, St. Louis and then Austin (all round trips).
On the way back home from Austin, TSA stopped me and asked to search my bag. Apparently, I had forgotten that I had a Leatherman in my bag. Worse, it was buried where I keep my loose coins, so it looked as if I was trying to hide it.
The TSA agent in Austin couldn't have been nicer about it, and the total delay wasn't more than 5 minutes.
The relatively pleasant experience isn't why I'm sharing this.
I'm sharing because I got in and out of O'Hare (multiple times), La Guardia, SFO, and Lambert airports with what could easily be used as a weapon.
Security theater, indeed! Just don't peek around the curtain; you won't like what you see!!
On the way back home from Austin, TSA stopped me and asked to search my bag. Apparently, I had forgotten that I had a Leatherman in my bag. Worse, it was buried where I keep my loose coins, so it looked as if I was trying to hide it.
The TSA agent in Austin couldn't have been nicer about it, and the total delay wasn't more than 5 minutes.
The relatively pleasant experience isn't why I'm sharing this.
I'm sharing because I got in and out of O'Hare (multiple times), La Guardia, SFO, and Lambert airports with what could easily be used as a weapon.
Security theater, indeed! Just don't peek around the curtain; you won't like what you see!!
AMEN
The 'security' searches at airports are just plain stupid and can exist only to provide jobs and underwrite paying $4 for a bottle of water at the airport, rather than bringing one from home.
I am an fat, 60+ woman who is a member of the D.A.R. who triggers whatever every time I go to the airport. I can balance on one foot while being wanded and restrain myself while 'security' guards play with my camera.
The best was when my suitcase tested positive for explosives. My suitcase was poked and prodded for a long time. Finally, the security guard suggested my heart medication caused the false positive and suggested I wipe off my suitcase on my next trip. I agreed--without pointing out that I don't take heart medication.
None of these stupid tactics makes me feel any safer. Security Theater PERFECT
'Nother Windy City gal
The 'security' searches at airports are just plain stupid and can exist only to provide jobs and underwrite paying $4 for a bottle of water at the airport, rather than bringing one from home.
I am an fat, 60+ woman who is a member of the D.A.R. who triggers whatever every time I go to the airport. I can balance on one foot while being wanded and restrain myself while 'security' guards play with my camera.
The best was when my suitcase tested positive for explosives. My suitcase was poked and prodded for a long time. Finally, the security guard suggested my heart medication caused the false positive and suggested I wipe off my suitcase on my next trip. I agreed--without pointing out that I don't take heart medication.
None of these stupid tactics makes me feel any safer. Security Theater PERFECT
'Nother Windy City gal
If the detection program looks almost exclusively for "anxious"-looking people, an airport is probably the worst place to use it. The security screening process seems designed to induce anxiety as do the increasingly draconian, arbitrary and hard to follow rules; the airlines do nothing to help with increasingly delayed and canceled flights and missed connections. The inability to smoke in most airports and all planes means that smokers start experiencing nicotine cravings, which results in what might be considered "anxious" behavior.
As an example: I suffer from several anxiety disorders and have something of a panicky/anxious reaction to direct confrontation. I am a smoker. I am not a particularly good flyer and any type of travel makes me anxious when I have to meet a schedule.
I was detained for over an hour by US Customs in 2005 due to "looking anxious" and "sweating"
I was returning from London shortly after the 7/7 attacks. I had not been able to have a cigarette in 9+ hours, I had people waiting for me with a car, I had a Customs agent pawing through my luggage and asking pointed questions about my travel, profession, personal life, interests and other private issues; all while standing in a 90 degree customs hall wearing a wool suit and raincoat (appropriate clothing for the cool and wet day I had left in London).
As an example: I suffer from several anxiety disorders and have something of a panicky/anxious reaction to direct confrontation. I am a smoker. I am not a particularly good flyer and any type of travel makes me anxious when I have to meet a schedule.
I was detained for over an hour by US Customs in 2005 due to "looking anxious" and "sweating"
I was returning from London shortly after the 7/7 attacks. I had not been able to have a cigarette in 9+ hours, I had people waiting for me with a car, I had a Customs agent pawing through my luggage and asking pointed questions about my travel, profession, personal life, interests and other private issues; all while standing in a 90 degree customs hall wearing a wool suit and raincoat (appropriate clothing for the cool and wet day I had left in London).
The upside of all this is that the TSA is finally thinking about how to detect bad people (instead of just harassing everyone).
The downsides involve poor planning, poor implementation, poor consideration of environmental factors (such as those you indicated), using techniques that haven't really been effectively tested for effectiveness, and a slew of other problems with the whole circus. What good is focusing on trying to detect people with ill intent if the techniques you choose for that purpose don't work (yet)? The TSA seriously needs to go back to the drawing board.
The downsides involve poor planning, poor implementation, poor consideration of environmental factors (such as those you indicated), using techniques that haven't really been effectively tested for effectiveness, and a slew of other problems with the whole circus. What good is focusing on trying to detect people with ill intent if the techniques you choose for that purpose don't work (yet)? The TSA seriously needs to go back to the drawing board.
Fortunately, I'm unusually early for the flight. Good thing, because after being randomly pulled aside for the wand treatment, I'm turned back because one of the TSA drones has discovered a Cat-5 crimp tool in my carry-on. Seems that they now consider these a weapon.
Okay, so back to baggage check-in I go and hand off the bag. 2nd time through security, the same guy pulls me aside for a second wand treatment.
20 minutes or so later, it's usually the moment where I finally get to relax after a long week on the road; that moment where I'm secured in my seat and I've got my magazine pulled out for the home stretch.
All of a sudden, a flight attendant rushes down the isle, yelling "Mr. McGrew? Is there a Mr. McGrew here?". When she gets to my row I look up and says "Yes?". She says "The TSA needs to see you at check-in. They say there are explosives in your luggage!"
Talk about getting the undivided attention of a planeload of people! All of a sudden, you could hear a pin drop.
Okay. She tells me to hurry as the plane is due to leave in 15 minutes. I collect my belongings and proceed against the ceaseless flow of people trying to get to their seats as the entire cabin of the 767 watches me quite carefully. As we finally make it into the terminal, she tells me to rush to the baggage check-in asap, which I do.
When I arrive there, a TSA guy greets me and asks to see some ID. I give him my driver's license and he disappears. About 3 minutes later, he comes back and says my bag is okay. Strange.
So now I have to go through security again (at least this time a TSA person lead me to the front of the line) where THE SAME GUY pulls me aside to give my crotch the wand treatment for a 3rd time! Back through the terminal I run only to find that they've closed the doors and will not let me back on, even thought the plane continues to sit there an additional 10 minutes. (this way they get to say the plane left "on time", even though it hasn't moved an inch)
So I get to stand there and watch my plane with an empty seat just sit there, while a gate agent proceeds to type away at her terminal as though she's writing a novel about the incident. Finally, the plane pulls away, ironically with my formerly suspicious bag on board without me.
Fortunately, I do get booked on the next flight and I'll only be home 2.5 hours later than my bag is.
Such is life as a player in today's "Security Theater".
Okay, so back to baggage check-in I go and hand off the bag. 2nd time through security, the same guy pulls me aside for a second wand treatment.
20 minutes or so later, it's usually the moment where I finally get to relax after a long week on the road; that moment where I'm secured in my seat and I've got my magazine pulled out for the home stretch.
All of a sudden, a flight attendant rushes down the isle, yelling "Mr. McGrew? Is there a Mr. McGrew here?". When she gets to my row I look up and says "Yes?". She says "The TSA needs to see you at check-in. They say there are explosives in your luggage!"
Talk about getting the undivided attention of a planeload of people! All of a sudden, you could hear a pin drop.
Okay. She tells me to hurry as the plane is due to leave in 15 minutes. I collect my belongings and proceed against the ceaseless flow of people trying to get to their seats as the entire cabin of the 767 watches me quite carefully. As we finally make it into the terminal, she tells me to rush to the baggage check-in asap, which I do.
When I arrive there, a TSA guy greets me and asks to see some ID. I give him my driver's license and he disappears. About 3 minutes later, he comes back and says my bag is okay. Strange.
So now I have to go through security again (at least this time a TSA person lead me to the front of the line) where THE SAME GUY pulls me aside to give my crotch the wand treatment for a 3rd time! Back through the terminal I run only to find that they've closed the doors and will not let me back on, even thought the plane continues to sit there an additional 10 minutes. (this way they get to say the plane left "on time", even though it hasn't moved an inch)
So I get to stand there and watch my plane with an empty seat just sit there, while a gate agent proceeds to type away at her terminal as though she's writing a novel about the incident. Finally, the plane pulls away, ironically with my formerly suspicious bag on board without me.
Fortunately, I do get booked on the next flight and I'll only be home 2.5 hours later than my bag is.
Such is life as a player in today's "Security Theater".
"Attention everyone. I have hijacked this plane. Just remain calm and stay in your seats, and no one will get crimped. You! I said stay in your seat. I'll throw this crimper at you, I mean it, now get down!!"
Seriously.....
Seriously.....
Did you ever find out what the "explosives" false alarm was all about?
...that there was some sort of residue present. By the time I had arrived, they had already run multiple tests to decide that there was no such hazardous material present.
I don't feel like hunting for the story I'm thinking of, but there was more than one report of missing or mangled underwear or T-shirts (with no explanation forthcoming).
But definitely Scummy, yes. And thanks.
But definitely Scummy, yes. And thanks.
Also an aspect of "security theater": Millions of dollars of property are lifted from people's luggage each month. If the people working behind the secure lines are that compromised, then what is the point of the rest of the act?
People think the rules make everything okay, but the truth is that the rules are subject to the vagaries of human nature because a bureaucracy is run by bureaucrats (who are, contrary to popular belief, technically human). The idea of trusting power over our safety and privacy to a bunch of people who can't get better jobs in private sector security, with the knowledge that the rules are only as good as the people enforcing them, is downright frightening.
In response to LocoLobo in particular:
The answer in today's authoritarian culture is "Nobody." The answer envisioned by the founders of this nation was "the people", but increasing bureaucratic insulation and decreasing willingness of voters to think for themselves has allowed an awful lot of cruft and secrecy to accumulate in the system, preventing "the people" from exerting any kind of control or providing any kind of oversight worth a damn.
The answer in today's authoritarian culture is "Nobody." The answer envisioned by the founders of this nation was "the people", but increasing bureaucratic insulation and decreasing willingness of voters to think for themselves has allowed an awful lot of cruft and secrecy to accumulate in the system, preventing "the people" from exerting any kind of control or providing any kind of oversight worth a damn.
In my personal travels, it seems that many of those who are most vocal about "big government" and "government interference" are also quite likely to exhibit an authoritarian mindset, and support expansive authoritarian powers in government. Bit of a puzzler, to me.
I'd like more detail on these observations -- perhaps some specific examples. I feel like I'm missing something.
In my personal travels, it seems that many of those who are most vocal about "big government" and "government interference" are also quite likely to exhibit an authoritarian mindset, and support expansive authoritarian powers in government. Bit of a puzzler, to me.
It's only "big government" when you disagree with what it's doing. I've noticed that too, lately. I'm in a very conservative area of the South and many of the people in my area who now decry the intrusion of the Obama presidency into commerce had no problem with the TSA, Homeland Security, or other 9/11 consequences intruding into their privacy. I think it's related more to ideology than to any specific action, though. Go figure.
I've noticed something related to that: it's the tendency to believe government is engaged in certain activities because that's what you would do if you were in charge.
edit: clarify
It's only "big government" when you disagree with what it's doing. I've noticed that too, lately. I'm in a very conservative area of the South and many of the people in my area who now decry the intrusion of the Obama presidency into commerce had no problem with the TSA, Homeland Security, or other 9/11 consequences intruding into their privacy. I think it's related more to ideology than to any specific action, though. Go figure.
I've noticed something related to that: it's the tendency to believe government is engaged in certain activities because that's what you would do if you were in charge.
edit: clarify
He must be talking about all the supposedly "small government" Republicans who voted for McCain and Bush. Yeah, I agree -- there seems to be a lot of that kind of nonsense going around.
I didn't catch the meaning at first because I know so many libertarians that reference to people who talk about small government didn't make me think of Republicans right away.
I didn't catch the meaning at first because I know so many libertarians that reference to people who talk about small government didn't make me think of Republicans right away.
I'm not sure but I think that happened a long time ago. People don't want to think about it. It's not happening to me. Their hitting the other guy.
I think the answer is Nobody & Everbody
Just my 2 cents
I think the answer is Nobody & Everbody
Just my 2 cents
I had a similar experience once (except, I did make it back on board the plane) a couple years back.
It turned out that the cologne I brought with me managed to set off the detectors; being that it was oil based. The TSA agent actually said that it wasn't the first time the particular brand of cologne (Helmut Lang) had set off the detector.
Now when I travel, I bring cheapo after shave with me.
It turned out that the cologne I brought with me managed to set off the detectors; being that it was oil based. The TSA agent actually said that it wasn't the first time the particular brand of cologne (Helmut Lang) had set off the detector.
Now when I travel, I bring cheapo after shave with me.
Those sniffers aren't worth a dime then...if they can't tell the difference between an oil based cologne and an explosive, what's the point?
The point is security theater. Just sit patiently, like a good little subject of your government, and clap when the Applause sign lights up.
It's amazing that anyone would buy into this tripe. If the magical sniffer box can't tell the difference between an oil based cologne and a bomb, we are in deep trouble. If the TSA can't tell the difference between a bomb and a Mac Book Air (http://www.macnn.com/articles/08/03/10/macbook.air.confusing/) and a bomb, we're in deep trouble.
What really gets me going is that the TSA actually has the guts to pull out grandma or that little kid from the line because, you never know....they might be packing...
bah...
What really gets me going is that the TSA actually has the guts to pull out grandma or that little kid from the line because, you never know....they might be packing...
bah...
Now I want to see that movie! It even appears to be relevant to this discussion, judging by the synopsis.
Just beware there was a lot of controversy surrounding that film. First off, there was a huge debate as to whether it was exposing communist tendencies in society, or was itself communist propaganda.
The latter was held by "silent majority" types who saw proto "tolerance" in the message.
More direct was the controversy over lyrics to one of the major (somewhat of a 'hit') songs in the film; "me and my arrow." A lot of prudes saw a not-so-veiled phallic reference, which actually may have been the intent of the author(s) as it turned out.
As for the TSA, the real theater is observing just how much mindless BS the American people will put up with. The answer, apparently, is "all of it."
The latter was held by "silent majority" types who saw proto "tolerance" in the message.
More direct was the controversy over lyrics to one of the major (somewhat of a 'hit') songs in the film; "me and my arrow." A lot of prudes saw a not-so-veiled phallic reference, which actually may have been the intent of the author(s) as it turned out.
As for the TSA, the real theater is observing just how much mindless BS the American people will put up with. The answer, apparently, is "all of it."
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
