4 ms·
The real outrage in the airline industry is the fact that we allowed security theatre in the form of TSA to get so damn powerful in the first place. There is no
by arca_vorago 10y ago
The real outrage in the airline industry is the fact that we allowed security theatre in the form of TSA to get so damn powerful in the first place. There is no reason to be allowing naked x-ray vision scans, pat downs that border on or actually are assault, etc.
As Bruce Schneier said, the one thing they did right after 9/11 was to make the cock-pit doors reinforced and locked from the inside.
Do you think rich people on their own jets get TSA patdowns the same way? No. What we are creating is a state of freedom for the rich, and compliant abuse for the majority of the citizens.
Since the new TSA regulations, I have only flown twice, for these very reasons. The first time I was so outraged at the scanners I was going to protest, but they just sent me through an old school metal detector and I was on my way. The second time, I only got the scanner leaving London, and being in a different country I knew I didn't have the same rights of protest as in the US.
I once called in to NPR while in D.C. when they had a TSA guy on the air. I asked if it wasn't an obvious conflict of interest for the guy at TSA who approved the scanner purchase to immediately go to work for that scanner company, and referenced the above Bruce Schneier quote. I got some deft wiggling out of an answer and my number was blocked the next time I tried to call into an NPR show. (not calling too much, had called in maybe 4 times in the past six months)
It's like someone somewhere said, "the terrorists can't take our freedoms if we take them away first!" (Of course, the real terrorists are the bankers and financiers)
We need to rethink the patriot act, the TSA, homeland security, NDAA, AUMF, and every other peice of legislation the corrupt and/or blackmailed congress allowed to pass (in violation of their oaths) in the clamor post 9/11.
- kobayashi 10y ago>(Of course, the real terrorists are the bankers and financiers) You lost me at this point. That's hateful populist rhetoric.
- 5ilv3r 10y agoHe's saying they are more likely to hurt you.
- kobayashi 10y agoThat's not the definition of a terrorist
- arca_vorago 10y agoIt may be, but it's not wrong. I am not persuaded by such responses which fail to deal with the meat of an issue. IF you want to have a discussion about the usefulness of bankers and financiers and how the abuse they have perpetuated isn't necessarily inherent, or something like that, fine, but don't try to use apeals to emotion as if it were any sort of valid argument. My original career was in anti-terrorism, I even remember when we changed the very definition of terrorism because we didn't like the old one (because it included us), and I can tell you it is quantifiably provable the bankers and financiers are the terrorists you should fear more than the ones in a hijab. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_emotion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_emotion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_policing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_policing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populism
- cwkoss 10y agoThose poor oligarchs!
- bobwaycott 10y agoAgree completely. Sadly, betting it will never happen. Nobody in position to dismantle the TSA will ever do it. It'd take someone who's willing to accept the move as political suicide, since they'll be blamed the first time something bad happens.
- drdeca 10y agoBankers and financiers incite terror/violence for political purposes?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]