For all you folks who are traveling by air to your Christmas destination, we found this little video that takes a humorous jab at the draconian security measures being put in place at major airports around the country. There's talk that the AIT (Advance Imaging Technology . . . potentially harmful x-ray scanner that sees through your clothes) and the embarrassingly invasive Pat Downs may be started at Austin Bergstrom International Airport.
A petition is circulating opposing such severe measures being imposed on air travelers at the Austin Airport. Here's the link: http://www.petitiononline.com/OPTOUT/ About 100 have signed it already.
You may recall a recent column RoundUp Contributing Editor Charles O'Dell wrote about his refusal to be party to either of the invasive procedures at the Baltimore Airport, so he took the long ride home on a bus. He'll be traveling to the West Coast this Christmas, departing Thursday from Austin BIA. He says he may have to again resort to the bus on his return trip. "Please sign the petition," he said, "and help keep me off a bus."
We are reminded of this famous quote from Thomas Jefferson: "The natural progress of things is for government to gain ground and for liberty to yield."
13 comments:
Interesting and funny video about a serious infringement on our privacy and a violation of the 4th amendment to the Constitution. This is a byproduct of the 2008 national election and voters viewing the election as historic. It was that for sure, but not for the racial reason given. I guess we have to put up with this type of thing until 2012 when we will have an opportunity to take back America. The 2010 election was a good start but many demons still exist in government on both sides of the aisle.
Thomas Jefferson also said;
"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."
I do not see this as a byproduct of an election but more a hyper reaction to fear. I think FDR's famous quote would be more appropriate...we have nothing to fear but fear itself. Good luck and best wishes to Charles O'Dell.
Unfortunately, Osama bin Laden has worked his evil magic in America. Not only are we citizens allowing our privacy issues to be aborted by the government and the corporations who profit from these measures, but we are allowing opportunist politicians to trash the 1st Amendment re: Freedom of religion.
Ignorant, Christian xenophobe Americans who blame all Muslims for the actions of a few psychopaths in their religion are just as much to blame for our fear, complacency and loss of privacy than the TSA, our government, or the terrorists.
But don't forget the growing cadre of American terrorists - the likes of which Timpthy McVeigh was bred from - who are hiding in the dark closeted shadows of American fear and anger because, for one, we have a black President (who, unfortunately, is trying to be about as white as he can be).
Look in the mirror. We are the enemy of our own freedom. Our guns are loaded, but our minds are empty.
Do you feel that the search is more invasive due to physical touching? Did the people complaining now also complain when going through other "touchless" scanning detectors? Do you perceive a difference between the two with respect to searching?
What does 2012 have to do with our rights and our privacy? The politicians will do nothing that infringes on the rights and the profits of the corporate criminals who use our fear and safety for their own gain.
The political system is broken. Only the gullible believe otherwise.
There is a fundamental difference between physical search and non-intrusive detection methods.
We frequently go through metal detectors located in courts, jails, airports and at other public venues.
This is to protect the public against acts of violence with guns, knives and other types of metal "weapons."
Standard airport devices detect metal objects and are an alternative to a physical pat down. Wands are used to detect precise location(s) of any metal object. Shoes are removed and along with luggage pass through X-ray machines to detect contraband.
Neither metal detectors nor wands used on humans emit radiation and neither invade our personal physical privacy by exposing our intimate images with harmful radiation or by physical contact with our person.
Why would anyone feel safer because SOME air passengers are fully exposed to TSA personnel? Would having every passenger exposed with full body scanners or a pat down make you feel safer still?
But are we actually safer?
Show us any evidence these intrusive practices make us safer from a terrorist attack on an airplane.
TSA admits the underwear bomb would NOT have been detected by either the full body scanner or a pat down.
Terrorists have already turned their attention to new avenues for acts against airplanes---air cargo.
To condition our freedom of movement by air to our permission of physical search is coercion. To demand search without probable cause also violates our Constitution.
Washington bureaucrats are playing us just like politicians do---trying to make us feel safer while making insider corporations richer.
Not with my rights and my freedoms!
If we don't stand up for our rights---then we don't deserve them.
The plain fact is that we are safer on an airplane than in our cars or on a bike.
How ironic for you to quote Thomas Jefferson. Perhaps you should read his pro-gun ownership writings as well. When will you liberals learn that ALL of our rights under the Constitution are equally important?
I will defend your rights even though you are trying to deny me mine. That is the difference between liberals and conservatives.
No, the difference between liberals and conservatives is that the latter thinks having guns IS freedom.
A liberal knows having a good education and the right to control one's own economic destiny is much more powerful than an armory of guns and ammo.
Having and owning guns is the illusion of freedom - a token right given to "chumps" by the powers that control us.
@Charles:
"If we don't stand up for our rights---then we don't deserve them."
But Charles, aren't you the same individual that was arguing against 'absolute property rights' under the pretext of "community"? How 'bout carrying this sentiment over to your last argument regarding Espy?
"Neither metal detectors nor wands used on humans emit radiation and neither invade our personal physical privacy by exposing our intimate images with harmful radiation or by physical contact with our person."
Have you ever seen Dr. Strangelove?
At any rate, it would appear that you in fact have no qualms about these searches. Your only issue is the tools used to conduct the search.
"To condition our freedom of movement by air to our permission of physical search is coercion. To demand search without probable cause also violates our Constitution."
But you have no problem with other types of searches so long as they don't entail physical touching? Why do you believe that the 4th Amendment applies only to physical searches but not non-physical scanning of your person? What about your luggage?
Jesus said Be Not Afraid. Happy Birthday Jesus!
4th Amendment language: 'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable (and non-consensual) searches and seizures, shall not be violated,…” (parenthesis mine)
Just as there are no “absolute property rights” because others also have property rights, I recognize the need for “reasonable” search to protect the community against terrorist acts.
Full body scanners radiating us and intrusive personal body pat downs go beyond “reasonable” for me and for many others because these methods are harmful and have not been shown to be effective for their stated purpose.
Being a reasonable person, I consented to pass through a metal detector, to remove my shoes and pass them and my luggage through an X-ray machine that have been proven effective in averting terrorists, particularly those with metal weapons, liquid explosives and shoe bombs.
I repeat---the harmful radiation full body scanners and intrusive personal pat downs have not been shown to be any more effective despite their harmful effects on our persons.
If you are unable or unwilling to discern a difference between “absolute property rights” and “reasonable consent,” then I question your capacity or your good faith.
Your posting anonymously doesn't help either.
The one thing about the airline industry that is much better is they are operating more efficiently and effectively than a couple years ago.
Fewer cancelled flights, pilot shortages, and missing parts that need to be shipped in via FedEx. (yes, pilots are not paid their due given our safety needs).
So enjoy the pat downs from some hot guy or gal (ugh! an oxymoron when it comes to the TSA).
Yet I'm surprised the right wing trial lawyer haters haven't tried to use this one to make some ludicrous case for more tort reform. I guess we need at least one lawsuit to get their blood boiling.
Anonymous said: “The one thing about the airline industry that is much better is they are operating more efficiently and effectively than a couple years ago.”
You forgot to say that they are also charging an arm and a leg via legal price fixing. I guess you want to credit the B. H. Obama administration for this perceived efficiency and effectiveness? Air travel used to be a fun thing way back in the day. The service was perfect and people even dressed up to fly somewhere. Now flip-flops, torn jeans, huge carry-on bags and the lack of personal hygiene are the order of the day. Why is it such a chore now aside from the Muslim terrorists attacks? I can tell you, it is government regulations.
Post a Comment