Saturday, October 30, 2010

TSA News Roundup

  • Dubai's airport won't get scanners (yet). Good for them! The reason? Because of "concerns they pose health hazards to travellers." Although I agree that the health hazards have not been even remotely addressed, this is really secondary. If it turned out that the scanners were safe, would you still think it's okay for your government to see you naked?

  • Here's an extremely unenlightening story: "TSA to phase in new pat-down procedures" What's missing is a description of what these "new pat-down procedures" are. Another article from MSNBC says that the TSA is not revealing details for security reasons. Give me a break! The whole point here is control. They want to keep the flying public on their toes and cover their butts when a TSA employee goes too far. Don't "opt out" because the alternative is an complete unknown (compared to the complete unknown of the scanners?)!

  • Reason picks up the Michael Roberts story. I agree that it is stupid that pilots have to go through security, given that they would not need any bombs to hijack the plane. But, why doesn't Reason point out that this what the TSA is doing is an affront to our civil liberties? Nonetheless, I applaud Michael Roberts' heroism here, and particularly note his perfect response to Andrew Napolitano's question on FreedomWatch last week:
AN: Why did you resist [the scanner and pat-down].
MR: Well, why wouldn't I resist that? It's outrageous. They've lost their minds. Actually, I'm just appalled that everybody is submitting to further and further infringement on our basic liberties.