9 ms·

Scroll to the end for a frightening contrast with the TSA poster of a terrorist photographer: Don't let our planes get into the wrong hands. If you question it

Scroll to the end for a frightening contrast with the TSA poster of a terrorist photographer: Don't let our planes get into the wrong hands. If you question it, report it. Call local law enforcement. Report to your airport manager. And you know he's a terrorist because he is pointing a telephoto lens at an airplane!

joezydeco 7y ago
We found a compromise in our city where plane spotters register with the local police and can be in certain areas outside the airport boundaries. The program labels itself an "Airport Watch" like a community watch but, really, it's just so everyone is less suspicious of each other. But I suppose if we actually saw something odd we would phone it in between swapping our lenses.
- dingaling 7y ago
  Those sorts of schemes alao exist in the UK even though it's prefectly legal to spot from public land outside an airport. But there is a disturbing flipside to such groups; I was once 'questioned' by police outside London Gatwick because some members of London Airport Watch had reported me due to my 'Irish' accent. But they gave the impression that such reports were more to harrass and deter non-local enthusiasts. You'd think that airline enthusiasts of all people would be open and inclusive, but sadly not.
  - joezydeco 7y ago
    I've encountered the same thing. I'm standing on public ground but was continually asked why I didn't join the program. I eventually bought the lanyard so they would leave me alone. I think it's more about some random outsider going somewhere they shouldn't and wrecking the program for the ones that want it to stay around. It's self-protection.
- dontbenebby 7y ago
  Ironically it's probably good to have these folks around. If someone breached the perimeter, they might be the ones to raise the alarm - you can't patrol the entire fence. I knew people who did urban exploration in undergrad, and there were a few times they picked up a payphone to alert about things like water leaks, termites, or when they once ran into someone they suspected was burgling. Smart institutions know that respecting harmless folks can pay dividends.
keyle 7y ago
He's wearing a hoodie, shady people wear hoodies! Sad times.
- wahern 7y ago
  Shady people do wear hoodies. Sometimes non-shady people do, too. But imagine you're a convenience store clerk, are you going to be more suspicious of the person with a hoodie or a person without, all else being equal? Sometimes people wear hoodies just because they feel self-conscious or don't want to feel exposed or vulnerable. No coincidence that it's mostly teenagers and young people who wear hoodies. That's understandable. But it's also fair for people to be suspicious of people not willing to expose themselves to public scrutiny. There's a correlation between diverse societies and smiling. Why? Because smiling is a compensatory signal in environments prone to heightened suspicion or stress. Hoodies disrupt this and other social signaling mechanisms. Humans evolved extremely expressive facial signaling mechanisms, afterall, many of which are subconscious.
  - grenoire 7y ago
    > There's a correlation between diverse societies and smiling. I would like to request source.
    - wahern 7y ago
      There's been several recent research papers on it. Here's an Atlantic article discussing some of them: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/05/why-americans-smile-so-much/524967/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/05/why-amer... See also https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4840223/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4840223/ and https://wp.comminfo.rutgers.edu/vsingh/wp-content/uploads/sites/110/2017/10/ACMMM_Singh_Diversity_Smile.pdf https://wp.comminfo.rutgers.edu/vsingh/wp-content/uploads/si... Hardly conclusive, but I think the general principle that hoodies disrupt facial signaling and identification is hard to dispute. Also I think it's self-evident that disruption and anonymity is a primary reason (absent weather) they're worn in the first place. That doesn't imply nefarious motivations, but it does correlate with some kinds of nefarious behavior. Walking into a bank with a ski mask/balaclava isn't a great idea, even if you just came off the slopes. Why deny that? Same basic logic applies to hoodies, notwithstanding that they're much more common and give less reason to be suspicious in most circumstances. That doesn't mean they don't warrant any heightened suspicion whatsoever. None of this justifies accosting and shooting unarmed people, especially unarmed children, any place. OTOH, telling people, especially kids, that there's nothing wrong with hoodies whatsoever sends the wrong signals about how people should socially engage in their communities and in public; it excuses withdrawal. Even though I live in California where almost nobody takes off their hat when walking indoors, I've taught my 4-year-old kid to do so and he does so instinctively. (I grew up in the Deep South where it was expected, though I never actually wore hats as a kid.) I did this not because I think anybody else cares or because it intrinsically matters, but because it helps teach him to be comfortably conscientious about how he presents himself in different contexts. I also discourage him from using the hood of a hoodie unless he has good reason to; especially for kids the act of wearing the hood is an act of withdrawal, which is not a good habit to get into, especially in American culture. He won't grow up poor like I did so none of this may ever matter for him--he'll likely always travel in privileged circles. But that's not guaranteed. These life skills might prove to be useful some day.
maxxxxx 7y ago
I don’t get it. Do terrorists watch airports with their big lenses? Is this a real risk?
- reallydontask 7y ago
  All is fair in love and security theatre, I suppose
- Sharlin 7y ago
  It doesn't matter how real a risk it is. It's "suspicious" and that's plenty enough cause to harass people in the post-9/11 security theatre. Nobody ever got fired for choosing IBM, and [almost] nobody ever got fired for being "too cautious".
- 0xffff2 7y ago
  At this point my baseline assumption is that anything that receives TSA attention is not a real risk. What this is is a concrete thing that they can point to to justify their existence, even if the thing isn't a real threat and shouldn't actually help to justify their existence.
dx034 7y ago
At London trainstations, police asks you to notify them if you're a train spotter. That way they won't bother you (unless you start taking pictures of the infrastructure instead of trains) and you can help them reporting suspicious behaviour (as someone waiting for trains most of the time). It's all about communication. If people see the police as their partner, they'll be happy to help them do their job (at least in the UK).
- Nextgrid 7y ago
  Why would taking pictures of the infrastructure be illegal?
  - reallydontask 7y ago
    It's not illegal, AFAIK, just suspicious, at least to some people.
  - Simple_Guy 7y ago
    because people think that terrorists will do that when they plan their attacks. obviously you can just pretend to be vlogging
  - frereubu 7y ago
    After the 2005 bombings in London, which targeted public transport networks and the people on them, the security services are understandably concerned about similar attacks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_July_2005_London_bombings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_July_2005_London_bombings
  - mc32 7y ago
    It’s why we can’t have good things. Someone will abuse the privilege. Just earlier we had a post about people pulling the emergency brakes on NYC subway cars. For decades it was fine. Suddenly people are causing some chaos. That’s about it. People will exploit weaknesses and we all lose.
    - dontbenebby 7y ago
FabHK 7y ago
> you know he's a terrorist because he is pointing a telephoto lens at an airplane I picked up my brother at SFO a few years ago, and walked around outside the airport terminal building to get a good view of the runway and take a picture of the Lufthansa A380 my brother was landing in, when an SUV pulled up with security and asked me what I was doing and told me to go away. Not a restricted area or anything. Maybe I got the benefit of the doubt (not being detained and all) because I just had a smartphone, no telephoto lens.
- weka 7y ago
  You can't expect logic from people all the time. Why both making it restricted area if they can have some schmuck in a SUV pull up every time someone enters?
hammock 7y ago
For more info, see this TSA document that lists the "Eight Signs of Terrorism" for general aviation (page 11) https://www.tsa.gov/sites/default/files/2017_ga_security_guidelines.pdf https://www.tsa.gov/sites/default/files/2017_ga_security_gui... 1. Surveillance 2. Elicitation 3. Tests of Security 4. Funding 5. Supplies 6. Suspicious people 7. Rehearsal 8. Deployment
- d33 7y ago
  That doesn't sound like them describing themselves at all...

joezydeco 7y ago

We found a compromise in our city where plane spotters register with the local police and can be in certain areas outside the airport boundaries. The program labels itself an "Airport Watch" like a community watch but, really, it's just so everyone is less suspicious of each other. But I suppose if we actually saw something odd we would phone it in between swapping our lenses.

dingaling 7y ago
Those sorts of schemes alao exist in the UK even though it's prefectly legal to spot from public land outside an airport. But there is a disturbing flipside to such groups; I was once 'questioned' by police outside London Gatwick because some members of London Airport Watch had reported me due to my 'Irish' accent. But they gave the impression that such reports were more to harrass and deter non-local enthusiasts. You'd think that airline enthusiasts of all people would be open and inclusive, but sadly not.
- joezydeco 7y ago
  I've encountered the same thing. I'm standing on public ground but was continually asked why I didn't join the program. I eventually bought the lanyard so they would leave me alone. I think it's more about some random outsider going somewhere they shouldn't and wrecking the program for the ones that want it to stay around. It's self-protection.
dontbenebby 7y ago
Ironically it's probably good to have these folks around. If someone breached the perimeter, they might be the ones to raise the alarm - you can't patrol the entire fence. I knew people who did urban exploration in undergrad, and there were a few times they picked up a payphone to alert about things like water leaks, termites, or when they once ran into someone they suspected was burgling. Smart institutions know that respecting harmless folks can pay dividends.

keyle 7y ago

He's wearing a hoodie, shady people wear hoodies! Sad times.

wahern 7y ago
Shady people do wear hoodies. Sometimes non-shady people do, too. But imagine you're a convenience store clerk, are you going to be more suspicious of the person with a hoodie or a person without, all else being equal? Sometimes people wear hoodies just because they feel self-conscious or don't want to feel exposed or vulnerable. No coincidence that it's mostly teenagers and young people who wear hoodies. That's understandable. But it's also fair for people to be suspicious of people not willing to expose themselves to public scrutiny. There's a correlation between diverse societies and smiling. Why? Because smiling is a compensatory signal in environments prone to heightened suspicion or stress. Hoodies disrupt this and other social signaling mechanisms. Humans evolved extremely expressive facial signaling mechanisms, afterall, many of which are subconscious.
- grenoire 7y ago
  > There's a correlation between diverse societies and smiling. I would like to request source.
  - wahern 7y ago
    There's been several recent research papers on it. Here's an Atlantic article discussing some of them: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/05/why-americans-smile-so-much/524967/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/05/why-amer... See also https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4840223/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4840223/ and https://wp.comminfo.rutgers.edu/vsingh/wp-content/uploads/sites/110/2017/10/ACMMM_Singh_Diversity_Smile.pdf https://wp.comminfo.rutgers.edu/vsingh/wp-content/uploads/si... Hardly conclusive, but I think the general principle that hoodies disrupt facial signaling and identification is hard to dispute. Also I think it's self-evident that disruption and anonymity is a primary reason (absent weather) they're worn in the first place. That doesn't imply nefarious motivations, but it does correlate with some kinds of nefarious behavior. Walking into a bank with a ski mask/balaclava isn't a great idea, even if you just came off the slopes. Why deny that? Same basic logic applies to hoodies, notwithstanding that they're much more common and give less reason to be suspicious in most circumstances. That doesn't mean they don't warrant any heightened suspicion whatsoever. None of this justifies accosting and shooting unarmed people, especially unarmed children, any place. OTOH, telling people, especially kids, that there's nothing wrong with hoodies whatsoever sends the wrong signals about how people should socially engage in their communities and in public; it excuses withdrawal. Even though I live in California where almost nobody takes off their hat when walking indoors, I've taught my 4-year-old kid to do so and he does so instinctively. (I grew up in the Deep South where it was expected, though I never actually wore hats as a kid.) I did this not because I think anybody else cares or because it intrinsically matters, but because it helps teach him to be comfortably conscientious about how he presents himself in different contexts. I also discourage him from using the hood of a hoodie unless he has good reason to; especially for kids the act of wearing the hood is an act of withdrawal, which is not a good habit to get into, especially in American culture. He won't grow up poor like I did so none of this may ever matter for him--he'll likely always travel in privileged circles. But that's not guaranteed. These life skills might prove to be useful some day.

maxxxxx 7y ago

I don’t get it. Do terrorists watch airports with their big lenses? Is this a real risk?

reallydontask 7y ago
All is fair in love and security theatre, I suppose
Sharlin 7y ago
It doesn't matter how real a risk it is. It's "suspicious" and that's plenty enough cause to harass people in the post-9/11 security theatre. Nobody ever got fired for choosing IBM, and [almost] nobody ever got fired for being "too cautious".
0xffff2 7y ago
At this point my baseline assumption is that anything that receives TSA attention is not a real risk. What this is is a concrete thing that they can point to to justify their existence, even if the thing isn't a real threat and shouldn't actually help to justify their existence.

dx034 7y ago

At London trainstations, police asks you to notify them if you're a train spotter. That way they won't bother you (unless you start taking pictures of the infrastructure instead of trains) and you can help them reporting suspicious behaviour (as someone waiting for trains most of the time). It's all about communication. If people see the police as their partner, they'll be happy to help them do their job (at least in the UK).

Nextgrid 7y ago
Why would taking pictures of the infrastructure be illegal?
- reallydontask 7y ago
  It's not illegal, AFAIK, just suspicious, at least to some people.
- Simple_Guy 7y ago
  because people think that terrorists will do that when they plan their attacks. obviously you can just pretend to be vlogging
- frereubu 7y ago
  After the 2005 bombings in London, which targeted public transport networks and the people on them, the security services are understandably concerned about similar attacks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_July_2005_London_bombings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_July_2005_London_bombings
- mc32 7y ago
  It’s why we can’t have good things. Someone will abuse the privilege. Just earlier we had a post about people pulling the emergency brakes on NYC subway cars. For decades it was fine. Suddenly people are causing some chaos. That’s about it. People will exploit weaknesses and we all lose.
  - dontbenebby 7y ago

FabHK 7y ago

> you know he's a terrorist because he is pointing a telephoto lens at an airplane I picked up my brother at SFO a few years ago, and walked around outside the airport terminal building to get a good view of the runway and take a picture of the Lufthansa A380 my brother was landing in, when an SUV pulled up with security and asked me what I was doing and told me to go away. Not a restricted area or anything. Maybe I got the benefit of the doubt (not being detained and all) because I just had a smartphone, no telephoto lens.

weka 7y ago
You can't expect logic from people all the time. Why both making it restricted area if they can have some schmuck in a SUV pull up every time someone enters?

hammock 7y ago

For more info, see this TSA document that lists the "Eight Signs of Terrorism" for general aviation (page 11) https://www.tsa.gov/sites/default/files/2017_ga_security_guidelines.pdf https://www.tsa.gov/sites/default/files/2017_ga_security_gui... 1. Surveillance 2. Elicitation 3. Tests of Security 4. Funding 5. Supplies 6. Suspicious people 7. Rehearsal 8. Deployment

d33 7y ago
That doesn't sound like them describing themselves at all...