Threatening random civilians to keep a populance in fear is very close to the definition of terrorism, actually.

…And considering that security procedures are close to useless for preventing terrorist attacks, I can’t help but think that demoralizing people is the point of the security kabuki at airports. …it’s well worth remembering that it was a bunch of Republicans who instituted these rules and they do better electorally if people are living in fear and have grown accustomed to the idea of authoritarian society.

But of course.

I haven’t flown since 2002, but Natasha and I flew several times after 9-11-01, and the way they handled wheelchair users like her made this all blindingly obvious–both by the way they acted in default mode, and how they reacted when we managed to break the ice of their routine by calmly pointing out how impossible it was for her to comply with their peremptory orders.

Unlike a lot of other wheelchair users who typically fly, Natasha’s chair was unpowered–which on the whole is a great convenience in flying, because airlines have legitimate issues with the batteries that power electric wheelchairs. But this mean that I was her “motor” as well as steering system, and so we blew out their mental circuits because I could not be searated from her. Nor could she “Step out of the chair, ma’am!” as she was routinely ordered to do.

I found the attitude of the process rude, demeaning, and terrorizing–as long as we were moving on track. Once it became clear that Natasha and I couldn’t fit into their little pre-planned slots, after a moment of embarrassment or two, the people involved became much more humane and helpful. Clearly it wasn’t a amtter of crude, rude people, but a procedure designed to make them so.

There is a darker side to this that I am loathe to elaborate on on the Net-let me just say–if we had indeed had nefarious intentions, we could have done a lot more harm than the average pair of travellers, and as far as I could see there was nothing to stop us from doing so. Further deponent saieth not.

DHS grounds air marshalls for having names similar to the no-fly list

Federal Air Marshals (FAMs) familiar with the situation say the mix-ups, in which marshals are mistaken for terrorism suspects who share the same names, have gone on for years — just as they have for thousands of members of the traveling public.

One air marshal said it has been “a major problem, where guys are denied boarding by the airline.”

“In some cases, planes have departed without any coverage because the airline employees were adamant they would not fly,” said the air marshal, who asked not to be named because the job requires anonymity. “I’ve seen guys actually being denied boarding.”

A second air marshal said one agent “has been getting harassed for six years because his exact name is on the no-fly list.”

It cracks me up that they recommend circular needles. Dude, I could totally garrote someone with my Knitpicks Options Harmony set Typo alert, mnemosyne: you left out the phrase “on an aircraft, just for a change” after the word “someone”.

I am surprised they haven’t privatize it and outsource the inspection to call center in Thailand. (much nicer people’ tho)

Logan Armpit had basic issues with, well, hygeine and signage and organization and that scared me as well. The place was a poorly run disaster waiting to happen on 9/11/01.

’sfunny. I flew out of Logan in March 2001, and on September 11, I knew instinctively that at least some of the planes had gone out of there. For someone with experience of European airports, Logan was just frakking shambolic.

On the constitutional issue: I’m with Phoenician. The negative liberty model was an innovation in its time, and while it’s nice of the US constitution to imply that certain rights were pre-existing, it’s just a formulation. ‘If only more blog smackdowns were this easy’, says Grammar RWA. Oh, silly commenter: I’ve got a couple of large volumes of John Locke that would leave quite a bruise. The notion that those rights pre-exist is constituted in the statement that they cannot be violated. Rights do not float around like dandelion fluff: they have to be asserted and defended. Curiously, they’re like trademarks: the most ’self-evident’ of rights will vanish if you don’t lay claim to it.

It’s a sign of genuine weakness. It’s a sign that they don’t really know what the fuck to do, so they do something that they think looks like knowing what the fuck to do.

In that sense, it’s almost sad, because I’ve flown out of airports where the security is both polite and incredibly incisive. The TSA people are just trained like the robots in HHGTTG to sound like they have an authority in bestowing that their practices clearly don’t deliver.

As a result, I go through the motions, because it’s all bullshit. On the other hand, I’m a pale motherfucker with a non-scary-foreigner surname, and as such, don’t get the sharp end.

I’ve not had a lot of problems with the kabuki, but since 9/11, I’ve only flown between Nashville (politest city in the US), and DC, where they know what the fuck they’re doing. And on many of those flights I had a freaked-out kitty with me (RIP, Independence Air), so that probably helped.

Once, at Dulles, I’d forgotten about the beautiful penknife my father had given me, which I’d slipped into my carry-on days before. The TSA lady was kind enough to run it back to him just outside the checkpoint so a treasured almost-heirloom didn’t get the heave-ho. I thanked her profusely.

Another time, in Nashville, I’d forgotten to check my purse for the cheap lighters that breed there like cheap t-shirts in the dresser. Poor guy wound up with a veritable bouquet of lighters that took him two hands to hold. He asked me what I wanted to do with them; I was like, “For God’s sake, toss ‘em, they’re junk!” And I apologized, again profusely.

I spent years waiting tables and tending bar, though, so I tend to approach public service people with all the generosity of spirit and cheer I can muster, just out of solidarity.