![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
TRUST US, WE WOULDN’T STRIP-SEARCH YOU IF YOU WEREN’T IN GRAVE DANGER
And now, a TSA recruitment poster waiting to happen:
[Via Radioactive Lingerie]
Okay, it’s not all that funny when you think about the reality behind the joke. But that, for me, is kind of the point.
The TSA has become such a bad joke that people don’t take it seriously anymore. Between strip-searching the elderly, enhanced patdowns and yr naked pictures on the internet thanks to body scanners that don’t even work, when people think of the TSA now, they don’t think of an efficient security barrier to prevent terrorist attacks on airplanes – they think of them as jackbooted buffoons who think cupcakes and breast implants might be bombs, and that six-year-old kids might be packing.
And when asked to justify all this, their general response is: “Trust us, we know what we're doing.”
Security expert Bruce Schneier explains why expecting the public to accept this is a tall order:
Carry on securing,
This is dF
[Via Radioactive Lingerie]
Okay, it’s not all that funny when you think about the reality behind the joke. But that, for me, is kind of the point.
The TSA has become such a bad joke that people don’t take it seriously anymore. Between strip-searching the elderly, enhanced patdowns and yr naked pictures on the internet thanks to body scanners that don’t even work, when people think of the TSA now, they don’t think of an efficient security barrier to prevent terrorist attacks on airplanes – they think of them as jackbooted buffoons who think cupcakes and breast implants might be bombs, and that six-year-old kids might be packing.
And when asked to justify all this, their general response is: “Trust us, we know what we're doing.”
Security expert Bruce Schneier explains why expecting the public to accept this is a tall order:
... [former TSA administrator] Kip Hawley doesn’t argue with the specifics of my criticisms, but instead provides anecdotes and asks us to trust that airport security—and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in particular—knows what it’s doing.
He wants us to trust that a 400-ml bottle of liquid is dangerous, but transferring it to four 100-ml bottles magically makes it safe. He wants us to trust that the butter knives given to first-class passengers are nevertheless too dangerous to be taken through a security checkpoint. He wants us to trust the no-fly list: 21,000 people so dangerous they’re not allowed to fly, yet so innocent they can’t be arrested. He wants us to trust that the deployment of expensive full-body scanners has nothing to do with the fact that the former secretary of homeland security, Michael Chertoff, lobbies for one of the companies that makes them. He wants us to trust that there’s a reason to confiscate a cupcake (Las Vegas), a 3-inch plastic toy gun (London Gatwick), a purse with an embroidered gun on it (Norfolk, VA), a T-shirt with a picture of a gun on it (London Heathrow) and a plastic lightsaber that’s really a flashlight with a long cone on top (Dallas/Fort Worth).
At this point, we don’t trust America’s TSA, Britain’s Department for Transport, or airport security in general. We don’t believe they’re acting in the best interests of passengers. We suspect their actions are the result of politicians and government appointees making decisions based on their concerns about the security of their own careers if they don’t act tough on terror, and capitulating to public demands that “something must be done”.
Exactly.
I recommend reading the whole article.
And that was a pretty serious post that was essentially an excuse to post that saucy magazine cover, wasn’t it?
He wants us to trust that a 400-ml bottle of liquid is dangerous, but transferring it to four 100-ml bottles magically makes it safe. He wants us to trust that the butter knives given to first-class passengers are nevertheless too dangerous to be taken through a security checkpoint. He wants us to trust the no-fly list: 21,000 people so dangerous they’re not allowed to fly, yet so innocent they can’t be arrested. He wants us to trust that the deployment of expensive full-body scanners has nothing to do with the fact that the former secretary of homeland security, Michael Chertoff, lobbies for one of the companies that makes them. He wants us to trust that there’s a reason to confiscate a cupcake (Las Vegas), a 3-inch plastic toy gun (London Gatwick), a purse with an embroidered gun on it (Norfolk, VA), a T-shirt with a picture of a gun on it (London Heathrow) and a plastic lightsaber that’s really a flashlight with a long cone on top (Dallas/Fort Worth).
At this point, we don’t trust America’s TSA, Britain’s Department for Transport, or airport security in general. We don’t believe they’re acting in the best interests of passengers. We suspect their actions are the result of politicians and government appointees making decisions based on their concerns about the security of their own careers if they don’t act tough on terror, and capitulating to public demands that “something must be done”.
Exactly.
I recommend reading the whole article.
And that was a pretty serious post that was essentially an excuse to post that saucy magazine cover, wasn’t it?
Carry on securing,
This is dF