The balance of power in airport security screening

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Richard Forno <rforno () infowarrior org>
> Date: February 3, 2010 9:04:57 AM EST
> To: dave () farber net
> Cc: ip <ip () v2 listbox com>
> Subject: Re: [IP] Re:    The balance of power in airport security  
> screening

> While I agree w/the original poster's note (keeping in mind the  
> present-day UK is far beyond Orwell's thinking at the time)  isn't  
> DHS buying 450+ scanners following the crotchbombing attempt?  That  
> would suggest a similar "scan-or-walk" policy will be here in the US  
> at some point, for that size of a purchase is too big to be  
> "optional" for American travellers.
>
> For me, don't mind security.  What I do resent is the "faceless  
> bureaucracy of the state" that seems to epitomize TSA.  Comply-or- 
> walk.  Don't question.  Perpetally wondering if anything you do or  
> ask will land you on a watchlist you can't get off of until you die,  
> and even then, maybe.
>
> As to what to do?
>
> (1)  Reduce flying.  I know I have.  I pretty much figure it'll be a  
> wasted day when planning my schedule, and then have some fudge- 
> factor on the end if I need it.  To wit -- what used to be a 2 hour  
> shuttle from DC to NYC   is a half-day-or-more affair since you  
> never know what kind of security lines there will be when you get  
> there or what will happen once you do get screened.   Which brings  
> me to ....
>
> (2) Reduce exposure to chaos.  I fly ONLY non-stop since 9/11.   
> Why?  From a 'homeland security' perspective you reduce the risk of  
> having your flight delayed due to terminals being flushed and  
> passengers rescreened because they found a tweezer in the mens room  
> (circa 2002) or because some romantic putz wants one last peck from  
> his girlfriend and violates security.  Or, if you want to play it  
> safe or as a capitalist.....
>
> (3) Buy stock in Cisco and HP to capitalize on their telepresence  
> services being used by folks fed up with this Homeland Hores--t done  
> in the name of protecting the country.
>
> -rf
>
> On Feb 3, 2010, at 08:09 , David Farber wrote:
>
> > At least for now, one choice is to avoid flying through the UK  
> > airports on a connecting basis at least. If there were a  
> > significent drop in business the airlines would react.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > On Feb 3, 2010, at 7:31 AM, Gordon Syme wrote:
> >
> > Prof. Farber,
> >
> > for IP if you wish:
> >
> > According to http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8490860.stm  
> > passengers
> > 'selected' to be scanned by the full-body scanners (the article  
> > does not
> > specify if they are X-ray or not) have no choice, they must either
> > submit to the scan or not fly. There is no alternative pat-down or
> > similar.
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------
> > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
> > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
> > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com