Come Fly With Me!
By Taylor Jones | January 10th, 2010 | PERMALINK
Me? I don’t fly much. I’ve got travel issues. I’m not afraid to fly, mind you — though I’ve never bought the notion that airline travel is much safer than traveling by car. While statistically true, it’s not the whole story. If you’re a skilled driver, don’t tailgate, pay attention to road conditions, don’t use your cell phone or send text messages, and are not drunk or half-asleep, you DO have some control over getting to your destination safely.
Not so, the passengers on the flight to Detroit carrying the Nigerian underpants bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. Well, actually, the passengers DID have some control over the situation and were able to subdue the would-be attacker. But that’s only because Abdulmutallab’s attempt to detonate his underpants went awry. Had his briefs exploded, there may well have been no survivors.
No, when it comes to air travel, I have two monumental fears: 1) Being stuck in the terminal the whole day, or overnight, whether its due to a blizzard or some guy casually walking past an unmanned security checkpoint; 2) being stuck in the plane on the tarmac for hours on end. I have some experience with the former, and the latter gives me nightmares.
…Sometimes I think the airlines are less concerned about a terrorist carrying a box-cutter aboard the plane, than a law-abiding passenger going postal when the plane sits on the tarmac for six hours. The likelihood of the former is still quite remote, while the latter becomes more likely as airline “service” continues to deteriorate.
Now, with the implementation of new guidelines by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), and CIA and FBI agents under order to “connect the dots” as intently as they solve their sudoku puzzles, perhaps we can all fly with a little less fear of exploding undergarments or footwear? But what’s certain is that negotiating airport concourses and boarding your flight will be more arduous than ever.
As for privacy concerns raised by libertarians regarding full-body scans at airports, I say, get over it! In fact, the TSA should hire perverts to operate the scanning machines. However ghastly the thought, these degenerates would never be late for work, never get bored, and NOT miss a thing! Mentally balanced TSA employees, on the other hand, would quickly find the task of examining scan after scan intolerably dull. Dangerously dull.
Trust me on this. Having taken life drawing classes during college, I can tell you, the thrill of sketching naked ladies (or guys, depending on the audience) quickly wanes. It was a three-hour class, and our instructor would bang on a big trash barrel with a cane, periodically, to keep students from nodding off and dropping their charcoal sticks on the floor. When that didn’t work, he would have us break for five minutes of calisthenics.
Only the criminally depraved can could stare at body scans all day, five days a week, remain alert and keep our country safe! Keep them chained to their posts for public safety, if necessary, but they’d probably stay put of their own accord.
Better yet, we could do what an editor friend of mine suggested: have everyone show up at airports for a pat-down, wearing only trench coats and sneakers. Or maybe we could all just fly in the buff — passengers, flight attendants and pilots alike? Who knows — mass displays of public nudity might eliminate the threat from Muslim extremists altogether!
Fly naked? I’ll do it if you will.
Well, thanks for stopping by. If you’d like to see additional samples of my work, please click here.
Comments
Comment from Soapboxlady
Time February 8, 2010 at 1:45 am
It sure won’t be the United States of America that figures it out first because we will be too busy searching white haired old grandmothers for bombs at the airports while being politically correct and too afraid to search young Muslim men. God forbid we should upset anyone of the Islamic faith!
You said it yourself, John Brynes:
“our government must apply every valid preventative approach to identify a potential terrorist. ”
….and this should include profiling as well as detecting certain behaviors that would indicate a person is about to kill himself and others.
In this day and age, no one should be upset at being singled out for a search. It’s what will keep us all safe.
Now if we could get those doing the searching to do a better job…….Most of them look half asleep and like they were wishing to be some place else.
Comment from John Byrnes
Time January 10, 2010 at 8:44 am
We don’t need to profile!
We don’t need to profile. At the Center for Aggression Management, we use easily-applied, measurable and culturally-neutral body language and behavior exhibited by people who intend to perpetrate a terrorist act. This unique methodology utilizes proven research from the fields of psychology, medicine and law enforcement which, when joined together, identify clear, easily-used physiologically-based characteristics of individuals who are about to engage in terrorist activities in time to prevent their Moment of Commitment.
Since the foiled terrorist attack by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian national on Northwest Flight 253 to Detroit, the President has repeatedly stated that there has been a systemic failure as he reiterates his commitment to fill this gap in our security. This incident, like the Fort Hood shooting, exemplifies why our government must apply every valid preventative approach to identify a potential terrorist.
The myriad methods to identify a terrorist, whether “no-fly list,” “explosive and weapons detection,” mental illness based approaches, “profiling” or “deception detection” - all continue to fail us. Furthermore, the development of deception detection training at Boston Logan Airport demonstrated that the Israeli methods of interrogation will not work in the United States.
All media outlets are discussing the need for profiling of Muslim Arabs, but profiling does not work for the following three reasons:
1. In practice, ethnic profiling tells us that within a certain group of people there is a higher probability for a terrorist; it does not tell us who the next terrorist is!
2. Ethnic profiling is contrary to the value our society places on diversity and freedom from discrimination based on racial, ethnic, religious, age and/or gender based criteria. If we use profiling it will diminish our position among the majority of affected citizens who support us as a beacon of freedom and liberty.
3. By narrowing our field of vision, profiling can lead to the consequence of letting terrorists go undetected, because the terrorist may not be part of any known “profile worthy” group – e.g., the Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh
Our unique methodology for screening passengers can easily discern (independently of race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, age, and gender) the defining characteristics of human beings who are about to engage in terrorist acts.
The question is when will our government use true “hostile intent” through the “continuum of aggressive behavior” to identify potential terrorists? Only when observers focus specifically on “aggressive behavior” do the objective and culturally neutral signs of “aggression” clearly stand out, providing the opportunity to prevent these violent encounters. This method will not only make all citizens safer, but will also pass the inevitable test of legal defensibility given probable action by the ACLU.
As our Government analyzes what went wrong regarding Abdulmatallab’s entrance into the United States, you can be assured that Al Qaeda is also analyzing how their plans went wrong. Who do you think will figure it out first . . . ?
Visit our blog at http://blog.AggressionManagement.com where we discuss the shooting at Fort Hood and the attempted terrorist act on Flight 253.