Tag civil rights

TSA: The Tickle-and-Slap Authority

Personally, I am very pleased that there has been so much noise this week about the outrageous “scope-or-grope” policy that the TSA has unloaded on the public, and I reallyreallyreallyreally hope it doesn’t simply lapse into the Internet Joke Meme of the Week. There is a genuine opportunity at pushback on a scale so large that the federal government might actually have to rescind their paranoid delusional policies and reconsider exactly how much the price of airport security is really worth.

My blog-buddy Jack Cluth has a great round-up post today featuring many of the stories that have emerged this week. Some of the stories, like the one about the TSA agent frisking a screeching three-year-old, are not new (that particular incident occurred in 2008), but I think that only reinforces the point that this shit has gone on more than long enough, and the recent insistence on even more intrusive pat-downs for people who refuse to be exposed to the “pornoscan” is only the latest outrage, not the first.

Next Wednesday, November 24th, is National Opt-Out Day. Organizers are trying to convince as many air travelers as possible to refuse to scanned by the new “naked picture” scanners and insist on being given a physical pat-down by a TSA agent on what happens to be the single busiest air travel day of the year in the United States. Needless to say, if they are at all successful, the organizers will bring airport passenger processing to its knees while people are groped and manhandled over and over again. Americans are not at all used to this sort of political action, which is only a mere shadow of actions like the recent strikes in France over pension “reforms”, but it is about time that these things start to happen.

If you are flying somewhere next Wednesday, please consider doing your part to try to stop the crumbling of civil rights in this country and tell the TSA “you gotta touch my junk”.

Meanwhile, I find this factoid extremely illuminating: A British risk-assessment consultancy has ranked all the countries of the world by their immediate risk for terrorist action and the United States is ranked 33rd. In fact, none of the Western “democracies” fell into the high-risk category, with Greece being the European country at greatest risk at #24. We are all being played for enormous suckers by very dark and dangerous forces in our own country, and this pushback may be the last chance we have to stop them.

EmailStumbleUponRedditFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Related Posts:

Three Down, Three To Go

The breaking news of the afternoon is that Governor John Baldacci of Maine signed the bill legalizing same-sex marriages in that state only one hour after the bill came to his desk today. Yesterday, the Maine House of Representatives passed the bill by a vote of 89-57, but it was unclear if Baldacci would sign it, since he has expressed opposition to similar legislation in the past. The expectation was that he would leave the bill unsigned and let it take force of law on its own, rather than indicate his personal support.

His comments at the signing acknowledge the strong likelihood that opponents of the measure, which include the Roman Catholic Church (as usual) and a group called the Maine Family Policy Council (you typical fundie freakshow fascist crowd), would be able to generate enough signatures to send the law to referendum in November. Maine laws allows any legislation to be overturned by a simple majority of voters in a statewide election. In the past, Mainers have used this “people’s veto” to overturn other legislation.

Popular opinion in Maine is pretty equally divided about gay marriage — 50% against, 47% for, 3% undecided — so there’s no guarantee that sending the law to referendum will overturn it, but Maine is the third New England state to legalize gay marriage and the fourth in the United States. Vermont will legalize same-sex marriage when a state supreme court decision goes into effect in September, and New Hampshire is very close to passing a bill as well, so it is possible that by November, five of the six New England states will have legal same-sex marriages (Rhode Island will likely not pass any bill until after the 2010 election). That could have a lot of impact on the outcome of a “people’s veto” in a state that has been on a liberal trend for the last few years.

It’s worth noting that here in Massachusetts we are coming up on the fifth anniversary of legalizing same-sex marriages, and so far there have been no reported meltdowns of anyone’s heterosexual marriage as a result, no people trying to marry monkeys, dogs, or turtles, and no widespread round-up of small children to be taken to gay re-education camps. If the Christians don’t want to allow same-sex couples to marry within their churches, that’s their business, but their bigotry and inhumanity does not belong in public law.

EmailStumbleUponRedditFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Related Posts:

“There Is No War On Terror”

I am late to the party on linking you to this story, but it also didn’t seem to get a huge amount of attention from the “MSM” when it was fresh: Sir Ken Macdonald, the head of the Crown Prosecution Service in the UK (sort of a national version of what we call “District Attorneys”) recently spoke to the British Criminal Bar Association and publicly repudiated the notion of a “war on terror”.

In the course of his remarks, Macdonald said that overzealous and “fear-driven” efforts to curtail civil rights represented a threat to the rule of law:

“It is critical that we understand that this new form of terrorism carries another more subtle, perhaps equally pernicious, risk. Because it might encourage a fear-driven and inappropriate response. By that I mean it can tempt us to abandon our values. I think it important to understand that this is one of its primary purposes.”

“London is not a battlefield…On the streets of London, there is no such thing as a ‘war on terror’, just as there can be no such thing as a ‘war on drugs’. The fight against terrorism on the streets of Britain is not a war. It is the prevention of crime, the enforcement of our laws and the winning of justice for those damaged by their infringement.”

Substitute American place names as appropriate, please. This message really needs to be heard widely and understood thoroughly. The only war is the one we started in Iraq for no valid reason whatsoever. How long can Americans propel themselves to undo the fundamentals of their own society based solely on the fear-driven response to a single incident?

EmailStumbleUponRedditFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Related Posts:

Through A Cellphone Darkly

Michael Agger has a piece on Slate this week decrying the ubiquity of camera-phones.

His chief complaint is that by putting cheap-and-easy cameras into the hands of every single yob in the world, the world is now deluged with more crap pictures than ever before. More unfortunately, he says, it also has invented a whole new realm for antisocial behavior that makes use of the simplicity of photographing the event for posterity: the nuisance assaults called “happy slapping” that turned into a bit of an issue in the U.K., the inevitable upskirt shots, and other acts of vandalism. Oh, and the inability of celebrities to go about their daily lives without being photographed (color me unsympathetic on this one).

He only hints at the broader implications of the potential presences of sometimes hundreds of cameras in public situations. The most notable one being the availability of on-the-spot photography of disasters, emergencies, crimes, and other situations that previously required the presence of the newsmedia to capture — the occasional fortuitous presence of a news photographer at a major unexpected event has allowed history to capture very few such moments as they happened, but for the most part photographic or other recorded evidence has generally been after-the-fact. He acknowledges that this is a generally good thing, resulting in better access to such events without the control mechanisms of journalistic or governmental gatekeepers.

Public officials are beginning to see this for themselves. Earlier this week, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced a new plan that will allow people to send their own digital images and even video to the city’s 311 (city services) and 911 dispatchers (link via BoingBoing). Witness a mugging? See a building catch on fire? Need to prove that your garbage isn’t being picked up on time? Send the city a picture or a video to document your issue.

Okay, that sounds good, right? But the downside is that the city is now recruiting its citizens to essentially spy on one another, using a troublesome reliance on the veracity of photography as prima facie evidence. It might not be quite as sinister as the East German Stasi requiring neighbors to report on fellow neighbors, or even former Attorney General Ashcroft’s discredited plan to institute neighborhood patrols by mailmen and utility workers, but it’s absolutely a first step in that direction. Americans decry the overabundance of CCTV security cameras in Britain, but in the “post 9-11 world” have been more than willing to rat on just about anybody that seemed even remotely out of place. Now they are being given the green light to take pictures of anything they think is wrong and send it to the police. The potential for abuse on the part of camphone wielding panic-mongers AND overly zealous law enforcement and governmental personnel is simply ENORMOUS.

EmailStumbleUponRedditFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Related Posts:

They Stamp Them When They’re Small

barcodetat.jpg

Sorry, but the implications of this just aren’t good: a biotech company in St. Louis has announced that they’ve developed a chipless RFID system using ink that can be tattooed onto skin harmlessly. On top of that, the ink can be colorless, creating an “invisible” tattoo. Its signal is not hindered by the presence of hair on the skin, and is detectable without line-of-sight from 4 feet away.

The ostensible use for this product, says the biotech firm, is to provide a less intrusive RFID-based system for tagging and identifying livestock, pets, and even food products. Oh, and military personnel.

Yep, people. Tattooing people with a permanent, always-trackable, “invisible” mark that allows them to be electronically monitored and/or detected by anyone with a scanner capable of picking up RFID signals from a few feet away. The last time there was this sort of systematic plan for tattooing people for easy identification, it didn’t turn out so well.

Despite the undoubtedly honorable intentions of the biotech company involved, it is all too easy to imagine that, given the current degradation of civil liberties in this country, the extension of this technology to the general public would be a strong temptation to the evildoers who run the government.

EmailStumbleUponRedditFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Related Posts:

All Original Content Copyright © BrianKaneOnline
All Other Content Copyright © Its Original Authors

Built on Notes Blog Core
Powered by WordPress

Switch to our mobile site