Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain

Since the failed terrorist attach on Christmas day, travelers have been bracing themselves for the virtual anal probe that is coming to airport security in the form of full body scanners. On Fox News tonight, Ann Coulter, whose body scan image would likely fetch a fair amount on Ebay and one for which I would join in the bidding, joined ranks with the ACLU in decrying another ineffective government intrusion in the form of safety.

I've long complained about the inane and outright ludicrous security procedures in place at our nation's airports. We sheeple continue to flock to and through security turnstiles on our way to meetings and reunions because we've little alternative when faced with needing to be across our great continent in a short period of time. As TSA officials ogle our nearly nude images, saying they've got us by the short hair is appropriate when discussing our alternatives for transportation.

Instead of focusing on more likely terrorist subjects through profiling, all of us will have our "secrets" laid bare before the almighty agents of national security.

I only wish our leaders in our government's legislative body would be as forthcoming in their transparency. Despite several campaign promises of openness in debate, the health care bill will be finalized in secret, behind doors so thick that no scanner can penetrate.

CSPAN, the network The ONE promised to let host this debate has pledged to provide any resources needed to fully and unbiasedly cover this debate over nearly a quarter of our national expenditures. This pledge has fallen on the deaf, or more likely uncaring, ears cradling the heads of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Not only will the debate be held in secret, these bastions of open debate are looking to suspend long held congressional traditions to protect their fellow party members from having to openly support this travesty.

So as you empty your pockets, take off your shoes and belts and jackets and socks and under-wire bras in order to sit in a too small seat and pay $7 for a beer, you can take solace in the fact your representatives in Washington will be secure, behind closed doors, making deals and hiding pork in thousands of pages of drivel designed to wrench control over the health of our nation.

S2

Gotta be the shoes

In every organization there seems to be someone in a position of above average authority who spends his/her time making up things for people to do in order to justify their existence within the company. You can probably picture this person wherever it is that you work. I just hope it isn't you!

There has to be a herd of these organizational chart bloating hippos spewing CO2 into the offices of Homeland Security and the TSA. It is no secret I possess a Big Gulp size disdain for many of the so-called security hoops we are forced to jump through like Tu Tu clad Chihuahuas on an episode of America's Stupidest Videos. Most of them make no sense. I defy anyone to tell me "you just don't understand the whole picture or understand the real security measure". To that I call bull.

Four 3 ounce bottles of a liquid in a one quart bag is equal to twelve ounces of that liquid. Let me carry a damn water bottle!

I showed my driver's license and boarding pass to the bored looking personality devoid (except in Utah, they seem to be nicer there) watchdog not more that 15 yards away from the metal detector. Why is it I have to show it to the guy on the leeward side of the detector?

I wrote a few weeks ago about losing my 1 inch pen knife but that my 4 inch scissors went through uncontested. I'll bet I could even run around with them without drawing too much attention.

Today, at the Ontario, California airport, my well honed security line procedure was rudely interrupted by the latest nonsense sent forth from the Cathedral of Knowledge in our nation's capital. After showing my license, I put it away, get to the moving baggage way through the security tunnel of love and I grab two bins. Bin one gets my laptop, because nothing else can go in with it. Bin two is occupied by my projector and belt. My shoes come off and go in the carry on sleeve recently vacated by my projector and all goes off to be violated by Xray beams in the dark little box while a TSA voyeur looks for anything that looks like it might be dangerous...or fun.

I can complete all that faster than most parents can fold up the damn stroller they think they need to carry on the plane.

Today I was informed that a NEW procedure has been in place and now shoes must go directly on the moving belt. This really is no big deal. I put my shoes on the belt and watched them move along like the Cross Trainers of some defeated exerciser standing still on his treadmill. What irks me about this is the complete and utter stupidity of this change.

I am skeptical of the security advantage of taking our shoes off in the first place but now isolating them even more is ridiculous. I take the shoes off my feet and put them beside my belt on the moving belt while the second set of shoes I brought with me remain snug in my carry on bag not more than one foot behind them. This helps how?

I comply with these procedures only because of my desire to get from one place to another but if the TSA feels this instills anyone with a sense of confidence or security, they are deluded. The exact opposite is true. Most terrorists convey an image of more bravado (really cowardice but that is a different topic) than brains but I wonder if the same is true of those trying to catch them in the hallowed halls of Homeland Security.

Until the day comes when common sense returns, I will just make sure I wear socks without holes in them.

I am secure in my opinion on security

News today is that soon to be sanctified President-elect Obama is planning to restructure the war on terror that has been successfully run by George Bush since 9-11-01. I define success as the fact that it has been 7 years, 3 months and 27 days since those attacks and the cowards who prey on innocents have yet to launch another successful attack on United States soil.

In picking Leon Panetta, a policy wonk who has about as much business running the CIA as perennial wife loser Drew Peterson does dating, Obama is, as the AP states:

“…sending an unequivocal message that controversial administration policies approving harsh interrogations, waterboarding and extraordinary renditions -- the secret transfer of prisoners to other governments with a history of torture -- and warrantless wiretapping are over, said several officials.”

In addition to watering down our waterboarding tactics The ONE is planning on returning all the “freedom fighters” held in Guantanamo back to the place where they were fighting innocent civilians for their freedom to kill more innocent civilians in the name of Allah.

A driving force in this decision to change our tactics seems to be the new administration’s concern about other countries’ feelings about us. Spain, India and others didn’t approve of the way we were treating terrorists. You know, trying to kill them before they kill us and all. Their tactics seems to working a bit less well than ours.

The thought of being less than vigilant in prosecuting the war on terror leaves me terrified. Our forces have to be successful 100% of the time to prevent tragedy. The suicide bomber needs only succeed once; although repeat performances by them truly are quite rare. Perhaps Shirley McLean knows a few who’ve been successful more than once.

Without waterboarding and warrantless wiretapping of 9-11 planner Khalid Sheik Mohammed we would never have gotten the treasure trove of information this sick individual possessed. It didn’t take long for this hero of the cause to squeal like a little girl and tell us everything he knew. I just wish it could have been on pay per view. Put on right before a Girl’s Gone Wild show and we might avoid another bailout.

Many of the Bush administration’s tactics may be viewed as harsh or uncivil but war is that way. I can offer a few suggestions on changes in security while we are on the subject. First, how about we let people wear their shoes going through airport security? I’d rather take my chances on catching a would be bomber lighting up his Air Jordinians than have to wade through the haze of foot odor. I am thinking it is this cloud that is watering the eyes of the TSA watchers who miss the occasional water bottle. These bombers have a tendency to be so obvious as to even attract the attention of Rappers who, in this case, do the right thing.

And how about doing away with the 3.4 ounce bottles in the quart bag? I can’t even fathom what this accomplishes? A one quart limit is fine. Oprah should adopt that and a one dozen donut limit but I digress. How does breaking this quart total into smaller bottles accomplish anything? I can divide my aftershave Monk-like into 4 exactly equal 3 ounce containers and put them into a quart zip lock baggie. Once the government contractor has given me approval and rerun my wire laden computer bag a few more times until I draw the ire of everyone in line behind me I could easily dump the four containers into one large twelve ounce bottle. So why can’t I just take the damn twelve ounce bottle? I am thinking an investigation into possible kickbacks from ZipLock and Tiny Containers, Inc. to the TSA and Homeland Security might be in order.

I like the fact we have people whose job is to try to out think those who think up ways to do the unthinkable. But really, is the guy who came up with the zip lock baggie idea still around? God forbid he is in charge of anything. Security is not the place for inane, knee jerk or feels good solutions. Nor is it the place for political correctness. Let’s spend more time looking for terrorists and less time collecting Perrier bottles.

S2

Can you fit a square pigeon in to a round hole?

Take a look at this guy…



And this guy….



And him.



Admit it, the second you saw these photos several beliefs regarding them entered your mind. Your personal biases exposed themselves. All three images were found by searching internet dating sites. In no particular order I found them:

One is from Yahoo Personals. Posing as an adult woman, as opposed to the 16 year old cheerleader I usually portray in online, I looked for a man with a post-graduate degree, full time employment and making over $100,000 a year.

One is from Gay.com where I searched for a man in my zip code. No other options for a search were provided. I guess the guys on that site aren’t as picky as the women on Yahoo. More options might have been available had I actually joined the site but…I wasn’t about to do that.

The third is from LDS Singles.com and I looked for a guy 21-61 in my zip code. I guess the Mormons are about as picky as the gay guys although I did have to join, the site not the religion, in order to view any results. I signed up Mrs. Bald Man just in case the missionaries are about to be dispatched to our house.

My lawyer says it is better that I don’t post the links directly to their profiles nor should I identify which one came from which search. I will let your imaginations run wild as to who is who but I will say my lawyer is the one who told me Gay.com existed.

The point of this exercise is to begin a discussion about stereotypes and biases. I’ll admit it, I place people in to pigeon holes within 3 minutes of meeting them and I base a lot of the interactions I have with them according to which hole they've been assigned. I like to think I am good at it. In fairness, the three photos above were picked because they make a snap judgment virtually impossible. I am sure if you actually met the three men in question the site that they were found on would be as clear as the nose on a person of Middle Eastern descent whose religious affiliation is not Muslim’s face.

In today’s climate of political correctness and diversity training, stereotyping and profiling are practices so infuriating they’d make my lawyer throw a hissy fit. But face it; stereotypes exist because they reflect a predilection or commonality that resides within a certain community. Often there are historical or social reasons for the development of these traits and, over time, given the intermingling of races, societies and cultures that we have today, the prominence of these traits are lessened. That said, stereotypes provide us with a baseline on which to form an opinion that is as clear as any photograph taken by a Japanese tourist.

Not every Italian is mute without his hands. Not every Irishman is a big drinker. Not everyone who voted for Obama was ill-informed and stupid. There’s a large enough percentage of each of these though that makes there continued use as a reference valid and accurate.

Stereotypes can be based on things other than nationality, race or sexual orientation. Think accountant. Think auto mechanic. Think stripper. I’m sure each of these occupations conjured an image in your mind and, unless you are my lawyer, the stripper was the most enticing. Stereotypes based on occupation are probably the most accurate of any as these are self-assigned in most cases. Certain types of people are drawn to certain occupations. Think radical religious suicide bomber.

Most of the time, the elimination of stereotypes and profiles serves one well in daily interactions. That guy in the next bathroom stall tapping his foot and waiving his hand under the divider who is setting off your Gaydar could simply be listening to his MP3 player and in need of toilet paper. Just as often our instincts, which are influenced heavily by our preconceived biases, serve us well too. If someone walks like a thug, talks like a thug and dresses like a thug, they are probably a thug; or a rapper.

Those of us clinging to our guns and bibles know full well that certain stereotypes are allowed in today’s society. Those of us who trod along slowly in an airport security line putting our 3.1 ounce zip locked baggy encased liquid bottles in the x-ray buckets wonder why others are not. I’ll type the requisite “not every Muslim is a terrorist line” but I do it grudgingly. I know full well not every Muslim is a terrorist. However, in the past 30 years, nearly every terrorist who has been worth his 40 post-explosion virgins has been Muslim. For this reason, every time I see someone of Middle Eastern descent get upset when they are randomly selected for a more thorough pre-flight inspection complain I think, “what an Ass.” And every time I see a pasty white suburban housewife with three kids in tow and a WWJD sticker on her suitcase submit without complaint to the same random pre-flight search I think, “What an ass” and “I wonder if she ever was a stripper”.

If I wear a raincoat and carry a camera to an elementary school playground on a sunny day, I should expect to be looked at with a jaundiced and skeptical eye by those around me. Simply being in an airport and getting on a plane is not a crime for anyone who is Muslim. But I think they should understand when they are looked at a bit differently. It is because of others in their faith that this is happening. Perhaps if they spoke out a bit more, this stereotype would be proven false and we could change from thinking Muslim = Terrorist to Muslim = “those guys who stop and face Mecca all the time”.

S2