No Peek, No Grope, No Fly

Like many folks, I've been reading closely the stories about the federal government's new policies and procedures regarding searching or scanning passengers before boarding airplanes. Here's what I've learned (a quick Internet search will get you all these articles and more):

> These new scanning machines take naked pictures of you. The government assures us they won't ever be stored, copied or distributed. Of course, we always trust government assurances, right?

> The alternative to a scanning machine is very intimate "pat down"--which one comical member of Congress, Sen. Claire McCaskill called "love pats": har, har. Here's what the "love pat" includes: the government agent moves his or her hands up and down your legs, arms, and torso, including your private parts and--pardon me--between your buttocks.

> Many travelers are saying "opt out" when you go to the airport. Now the alarmed TSA head, John Pistone--who said that you give up many of your rights when you buy an airline ticket (did you know that? Which rights, Mr. Pistone? Am I allowed to know? Or did I give up that right already?)--is now trying to intimidate and shame citizens into going along with the body scans. His tone: how dare someone cause other people problems?

> Perhaps you've heard of the man out west who refused the body scan; and was told, ok then we pat you down; he said, famously, "if you touch my junk, I'm going to have you arrested." That of course caused all sorts of alarm; since when do cattle talk back to the herders?

> Have you seen the photos and videos? A nun in full habit being subject to this "love pat"; terrified children who cry out, in vain, "stop touching me!" Another boy who strips off his shirt; a bladder-cancer patient who wears a bag, whose explanations and cautions are waved off; and as a result his bag is disturbed and he's covered in his own urine. "Love pat." It's for your own good, don't you know?

> The man who refused to have his junk touched was told, if he refused, he couldn't fly. He said, OK; and turned to leave. He went to get a refund on his airline ticket and left. An agent of the TSA went public with the government's intention to investigate and prosecute this threat to society and fine him up to $10,000. His "crime"? He wasn't allowed to leave. Remember, you gave up your rights when you bought that airline ticket. Oops, sorry we didn't tell you first.

> There are videos and recordings and photos; but did you know the government is confiscating them when they can? One of the rights we apparently gave up was the right to have these actions of our government open and transparent. If police pull someone over to the side of the road, they routinely record it; but the TSA curiously doesn't want anyone taking pictures of how they protect us.

Now, we're all being told that this is all regrettable, but absolutely necessary; the only alternative is fiery death! If you don't go along, you're helping the terrorists! (Remember when protest was patriotic?)

So for our benevolent overlords, I have two questions:

1. How do you explain the fact that Israel does not do this? Instead, Israel looks for people who are likely to cause trouble, rather than look for objects, even on people they know are no threat. (Did you know they were doing all this to the pilots? Did you know they confiscated nail-clippers from U.S. soldiers returning from defending our country? The country is in the best of hands.)

The Israelis have "profiles" and then conduct rapid-fire questions of those who fit the profile. As I understand it, the questions serve to smoke out liars--as common sense would dictate.

Think about this: think about this very hard: the Israeli's goal is to get the murderer, the threat, off the plane. But the current tactics of our government seem willing to the let the terrorist get on, as long as s/he's sufficiently disarmed. Which policy makes you safer?

Why can't we do what the Israelis do?

Some will claim it is too intrusive of our civil rights. No, really! Stop laughing! I'm serious! Yes, they would say that's worse than see-through-clothing "body scans" or being groped.

Others claim that what works for a tiny country won't work for us. Really? How many TSA agents do we have? How much has been invested in these machines?

I actually think this is closer to the truth--but the truth being that it's just a whole lot easier--from the viewpoint of the Overlords, our benevolent Protectors--to herd folks through scans, than it is to engage in interrogations. And the first answer, while ludicrous, is also true in this sense: our laws have been so distorted, and we have fostered so much litigation, that the fear is anything that doesn't treat everyone exactly the same, will spawn a lawsuit.

In other words, fellow cattle, they are more afraid of a lawsuit than they are bothered by groping you.

Here's my other question...

2. The government's stated purpose is to frustrate the cleverness of the terrorists in concealing explosives and weapons. OK, then; given what we're doing now, what would a clever killer do to evade these techniques? What would work?

It's not very hard to think of, even if its repulsive to most of us: they will find ways to hide their explosives inside their bodies.

If I were able to ask Ms. Napolitano, the head of the Homeland Security Agency, a series of questions, I'd ask: "have you evaluated the threat of that next step? What have you concluded? And what remedies are you considering against it?"

Because these current procedures--which are justified SOLELY because they are the only way to protect us all--will not protect us from that. Others, far more clever than I am, have said they can think of lots of ways to cause problems on an airplane, while still passing these invasive searches.

Since the government's current answer is simply to see the terrorists' escalation and raise it, by stripping away yet more of our rights and dignity, the logic of the government's thinking is yet more invasive searches. I will let you figure out what that next level of "love pat" might be like.

Well, since the government says I give up my rights when I buy an airline ticket, then I know what I'm going to do.

No body scans; no groping; no flying.

I realize I may face a situation where flying becomes necessary. But I'm going to do my best to avoid flying until this changes. If and when I have to fly, I'll decide then which form of assault on my person, by my government, is to be chosen.