Re: The balance of power in airport security screening

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Bob Frankston <Bob19-0501 () bobf frankston com>
> Date: February 4, 2010 1:59:13 PM EST
> To: dave () farber net, 'ip' <ip () v2 listbox com>
> Subject: RE: [IP] Re:  The balance of power in airport security  
> screening

> I also should mentioning that my mention of "temperature" was a  
> reference to the idea of boiling creatures by raising the  
> temperature gradually so that they don't notice it.
>
> The challenge we face is with a myriad of assaults which battles do  
> we choose to fight and which do we choose not to. I do appreciate  
> people taking a stand against security theater but also understand  
> why we accept it. The key is to keep the pain level low enough that  
> it doesn't become a priority -- at least not to those who could  
> affect policy.
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Frankston [mailto:bob2 () bobf frankston com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 10:54
> To: dave () farber net; ip
> Subject: RE: [IP] Re: The balance of power in airport security  
> screening
>
>
>
> I'm not defending "we adapt on move on" -- just observing.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: David Farber [mailto:dave () farber net]
>
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 10:16
>
> To: ip
>
> Subject: [IP] Re: The balance of power in airport security screening
>
>
>
> Editors comment -- I really object to the just "we adapt and move  
> on". I would repeat the Germans priest comments but maybe Ben's is  
> more fitting.  "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a  
> little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." djf
>
>
>
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>
>
> From: "Bob Frankston" <bob2 () bobf frankston com>
>
> Date: February 4, 2010 11:32:16 AM EST
>
> To: <dave () farber net>, "'ip'" <ip () v2 listbox com>
>
> Subject: RE: [IP] The balance of power in airport security screening
>
>
>
> Let’s get a reality check here. Sure there are many of these excesse 
> s and there are principles at stack but for the most part the proces 
> s operates pretty smoothly, especially for frequent flyers who know  
> the routine. When an airport is shutdown it makes national news beca 
> use it’s the exception.
>
>
>
> This is why there is so little pressure for change – few people run  
> into these problems. Admittedly easy for me to say – people who have 
>  chronic issues such as the wrong name or look might think very diff 
> erently.
>
>
>
> I’m not going to judge whether that’s good or bad. I’m just  
> noting that we adapt and move on. Sure it was a tad easier before we 
>  had all these security checks. Remember they were introduced in the 
>  60’s when hijacking flights to Cuba and insurance bombs were the ma 
> in concern and the temperature has ratcheted up so TSA seems like bu 
> siness as usual.
>
>
>
> Of course I’m writing this in flight. Security did want to run may b 
> ackpack through an extra time because of the all the gear – all very 
>  friendly.
>
>
>
> From: Dave Farber [mailto:dave () farber net]
>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 06:31
>
> To: ip
>
> Subject: [IP] The balance of power in airport security screening
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------
>
> 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