missing the forest for the trees

If you want to see what the Thousands of Sexual Assaulters think of American citizens exercising their rights as protected by the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution, you need look no further than this all-too-gloating post at the TSA weblog (link obfuscated in accordance with this webpage’s policy not to link to organizations that abridge basic human rights) – in it, you will find “Blogger Bob” bragging about all of the American citizens that the TSA photographed electronically nude, and how the low number of “opt-outs” is obviously indicative of general support for the new Advanced Imaging Technology porno scanners.

Unfortunately for him, Blogger Bob’s logic is as lacking as his morals.

First, those porno scanners have to be open in order for people to opt out. Both times Better Half and I flew this past weekend, we arrived at the airport way too early in the morning – about 0430 on the way out, and about 0600 on the way back. In both cases, at the checkpoints we went through, there was all of one AIT scanner operational, simply due to the absence of people qualified to run them – I guess they had not made it to work yet. While waiting in security for about 30 minutes at Charlotte, we saw one single, solitary person taken aside for AIT scanning, and she declined the opportunity, and while effectively walking through the security at SEATAC, we saw two people taken aside for scanning – but the former checkpoint had two scanners installed, and the latter had five, and both only had one device online. So, yes, leaving the porno scanners offline (which was not isolated to just SEATAC or Charlotte, from the comments to the above-linked post) lets TSA Bob claim no one opted out… because almost no one got picked to be scanned. Go figure.

Second, American citizens are now faced with a fallacious Morton’s Fork – the choice between being groped and/or sexually assaulted by a complete stranger, or being photographed electronically nude (why the choice is fallacious is a topic for another post, but suffice to say we have other options). If you were to walk up to an average person on the street, and offer them the exclusive choice (as in “no other choices are available to them”) of being thoroughly felt-up, grabbed, groped, and generally physically violated, or being photographed as a black-and-white, supposedly “anonymous” nude, which option do you think that person would take? Now that the decision has been made, however, do you think the “average person” in question supports the option he or she chose? Do you think he or she is happy with it? Or do you think he or she only chose one option because he or she hates it less than the other option?

“Hates it less” is not “approves of”, and that is where Blogger Bob’s “logic”, if you want to call it that, falls down.

Third, Thanksgiving was far too soon after the nudity scanners’ implementation to feel any real impact from any objection of the American public – people already had their flight tickets paid-for and in-hand, and given that those flights typically are not cheap, and given that the flights were likely to visit family not often seen, those people were not terribly inclined to give them up. Christmas, on the other hand, is far enough out that people may not have already purchased flights, and may now be considering alternative methods for reaching their ultimate locations – it will be interesting to see what the numbers add up to this year, as compared to previous years.

Fourth and finally, Our Glorious Leaders promised to label anyone who engaged in “the anticipated opt-out day” as “domestic extremists” – might you think that had something to do with whether or not people were willing to actually opt out? I certainly would not blame anyone for “going along” in order to avoid being arbitrarily and capriciously labelled as a terrorist by their government for daring to exercise their First Amendment-protected rights in regard to their Fourth Amendment-protected rights being violated. Hell, according to that memo, this post could be enough for me to be so labelled – does that seem in any way right, or Constitutionally acceptable, to you?

So, yes, “Blogger Bob”, you and the news media can crow to the high heavens about how the protest-that-was-not means the American people loves the TSA and wants to take it home, but, in the end, it means absolutely nothing – your organization (and, by voluntary association, you) is using force to induce a populace to behave a certain way, and then claiming that their behaving in that fashion indicates that populace agrees with it. Your organizatoin is invading people’s privacy, violating American citizens’ Fourth Amendment-protected rights, and engaging in behavior that would be, in my opinion, sexual assault anywhere else. And, worst of all, your organization, the all-vaunted and hallowed TSA, cannot claim a single gorramed success in its entire, pathetic history.

Countless authoritarian regimes and organizations have employed the same tactics throughout history, and, invariably, they all met with the same fate. How long do you think yours will last, Blogger Bob?

(Courtesy of Politics, Guns, and Beer.)