TRUE TRAVEL

by Tirekicking Today

When teams of inspecting agents first appeared at airports after 9/11, most travelers welcomed the enhanced scrutiny of passengers and their luggage. Fear of another attack was the order of the day. Reasonable precautions were prudent, in order to ensure safe air travel.

Metal detectors appeared only minimally intrusive and had a logical purpose. X-ray scanning of baggage made sense. Privacy advocates weren't so sure, but this wasn't a time to risk letting such thoughts be heard, especially by agents on the lookout for "suspicious" comments and actions.

As the security steps escalated, frequent travelers weren't quite as enthusiastic. Random secondary searches at flight gates delayed the boarding process and caused plenty of detainees to lose precious luggage space in the overheads to more fortunate, unscathed passengers. Lack of concern for the plight of flyers on the part of ill-trained, underpaid inspectors didn't help. Yet for the most part, the rallying cry of fear continued: We'll put up with it, as long as it helps "keep us safe."

Searching for tangible weapons was only the beginning. Because dangerous substances could conceivably be transported in liquid form, liquid substances were simply banned. Then came the easing of restrictions, allowing liquids only in small containers, tucked into a plastic bag of prescribed dimensions, removed from luggage for separate screening. Shortly after Richard Reeves, the "shoe bomber," was caught trying to set fire to one of his shoes while in-flight, passengers at airports around the world suddenly had to remove all footwear before entering the "magnetometers."

Throughout its history, the Transportation Safety Authority (TSA) kept closing that proverbial barn door, long after the horses had escaped and gone on to a better life elsewhere. Only after the fact were steps taken, whose impact could exist only if a terrorist chose to follow the same nefarious path as his captured predecessor. All along, the authorities have given terrorists no credit for even a shred of intelligence, assuming that they lacked the imagination to deduce alternative ways to conduct their tragic misdeeds.

Other nations, led by Israel, took even stricter steps toward turning air travel into a nightmare. The next step was inevitable: use advanced technology to inspect people more thoroughly than ever. Europeans first faced the indignity of being compelled to step into cramped boxes, subjected to puffs of air that would allegedly discover dangerous weapons or substances, before being released from this captivity. Other boxes used limited X-ray technology to deliver an image of the inhabitant's entire body to a supposedly disinterested, far-off inspector.

Naturally, the frightful boxes made their way to U.S. airports. This time, some passengers began to question the risk of harm that might emanate from such devices. Others felt queasy and uncomfortable at the thought of someone looking over their bodies, effectively seeing through their clothing, despite governmental assurances that only a rather vague image was visible.

The latest devices use "backscatter technology," without the need to step inside a box. Instead, the hapless traveler must stand sideways at the appointed spot between two big boxes, raise both hands in an appropriate posture of surrender, as the image of their body makes it way to the person who can either let you pass or block your progress to the gate. Don't be surprised, too, if a moderate-level hand search follows the undignified stint in the inspection space.

Somewhere along the way to these current devices, a few travelers went further than those who worried about personal privacy and bodily harm, insisting that the TSA had finally crossed the line into dangerous territory. As a matter of principle, some of us have been saying "no" and declining to participate, believing such intrusive electronic inspections are distressingly reminiscent of police-state actions, and unworthy of a civilized nation that prides itself on freedom and respect for the individual.

Some of us further allege that the U.S. Government does little to address the real causes of terrorist behavior, and indeed continues to take taunting steps that are sure to incite resentment and anger among many Third World people. Add a dose of demagoguery from radical clerics, and the stage is set for yet another terorist assault - no matter what presumed precautions are taken.

What do we get for our refusal to participate, dubbed "opt out" in TSA jargon? We're taken aside, made to stand a while until a suitable TSA agent emerges, then taken to a special area for a hand search. Anyone who hasn't flown lately might envision a relatively cursory inspection, perhaps waving that familiar "wand" at certain suspect areas of the body. Sorry, that's kid stuff. What happens today to opt-outers is a full body search of the sort that might be expected when entering a penitentiary, having been sentenced as a dangerous criminal.

After ensuring that every single item has been removed from pockets and placed with your luggage, including your boarding pass and driver's license or passport, the inspecting agent meticulously rubs his eager hands into and across every surface and crevice of your body, feeling all around the waistband of trousers, leaving no spot untouched. As a sop to privacy, you're informed that he (if you're male) will be using the back of his hand when feeling around "sensitive areas," as if that would make anyone feel more at ease. After the full body search is completed, he uses a machine to test the rubber gloves he's been wearing, to make sure no trace of any questionable surface is present.

Does the intensive hand-search have anything to do with terrorism, or with weapons? Of course not. In the view of those who protest, it's nothing more nor less than punishment, directed at those who fail to enthusiastically embrace the latest intrusive technology that makes air travel an even worse nightmare than before.

The fearful among us immediately pipe up, warning that any easing of security techniques is aiding the terrorists, and you're at least indirectly responsible for any attacks that come to pass. That assertion deserves a carefully considered answer: b___s____ (please pardon the crudity). Here's a bit of news: the terrorists won. They won years ago, by inducing western nations to enact increasingly intrusive and invasive methods of treating their own citizens as criminals.

Some of us will continue to protest by declining to comply with invasive electronic techniquies. Will those techniques cease? Not a chance. If anything, they're likely to escalate further yet as technology produces ever nastier ways of treating ordinary citizens as dangerous crimimals. Who can say what wicked machine is coming next to an airport near you - and to every one you visit.

While these eager hand-inspectors wait at the sidelines, other TSA agents evidently have received a memo from headquarters: be more friendly, to make the security process more pleasant. That appears to mean greeting travelers with a caustic smile, almost daring them not to smile back. Are they really glad to see you? Don't bet on it. Far more likely, not unlike immigration agents who initiate everyday conversations with new arrivals in order to hear your accent, it's just a ruse. It's one more directive from on high, this time suggesting - or demanding - that agents adopt a friendlier pose.

When "opting out" is no longer an option, I'm ready for the next step in protest. That's the day I stop flying - or at least, limit flying to urgent situations only. My only hope is that a few others will join in this ultimate thumbing of our collective noses at the dubious excesses perpetrated by those who claim to "keep us safe."

Note: This complete TSA story is available now for your publication. Contact us at JF@tirekick.com for details.