EDITORIAL: Our Maginot Line in the sky |
||||
| BorisVM | Imagine finding that as you boarded a commercial flight at McCarran International Airport, you'd been falsely identified by a U.S. air marshal as a potential terrorist. Placed on a "watch list" without being told why, you could face intrusive searches each time you travel -- and even find yourself barred from air travel entirely. Former Clark County School District Superintendent Carlos Garcia found himself on one of those mysterious "watch lists" in 2004 -- barred from obtaining his boarding pass from the airport's electronic kiosks, waiting in line every time he flew until the staff could determine he wasn't that other, particular "Carlos Garcia" who was, for some reason, deemed "suspicious." "My biggest frustration is that there's got to be a way to get off the list, and no one seems to know what it is," Mr. Garcia told the Review-Journal at the time. There is a way, supposedly. You can apply for a clearance indicating you're "OK" -- a process that requires you to give up any remaining privacy you may retain, providing the federal government with far more information about you than they have any right to know. Still, even if they've been singled out inappropriately, many Americans might still voice the opinion, "It's better to be safe than sorry. I'm sure it was just an honest mistake." But what if it wasn't? What if it turned out our air marshals, threatened with losing raises, bonuses and special assignments unless they submit at least one "Surveillance Detection Report" per month, turned out to be simply choosing people at random, meeting a monthly quota by placing on these lists innocent Americans who the marshals have no reason to suspect at all? That's exactly the way U.S. air marshals based in Las Vegas have said it works, according to a Denver TV station. And the marshals have produced documents that show their performance reviews are directly linked to producing "enough" SDRs, KMGH-TV, Channel 7 reported. In one example, a tourist leaving Las Vegas became the subject of a SDR merely for snapping a photo of the Las Vegas skyline as his plane rolled down the runway. "You're saying that was not an accurate portrayal of a potential terrorist activity?" the station's reporter asked. "No, it was not," the air marshal replied. "Every false report represents an enormous waste of resources," wrote Barry Steinhardt, director of the ACLU's Technology and Liberty Project, in a letter last week to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. "Every man-hour spent hassling the innocent is time not spent on real security issues." In fact, what does our current "transportation security" regime really do, other than "waste resources" in the process of "hassling the innocent"? Millions of productive passenger hours and billions of taxpayer dollars are spent making sure everyday Americans who exhibit none of the characteristics of terrorists -- including old ladies in wheelchairs and pain-wracked patients headed out of town for medical treatment -- are groped and stripped of their nail files, their sewing kits, their cigarette lighters, even bottles of their own breast milk. The Transportation Security Administration won't even release a list of what is and is not allowed, its "rules" shifting constantly and sometimes made up on the spot. All this to what avail? Every one of the Sept. 11 terrorists went through the metal detectors and answered the silly questions about who packed their bags. The system batted zero: It caught not a single one. In Israel and in European countries which have seen many more hijackings, security officers devote their time to politely questioning a smaller number of passengers who actually trigger their suspicions, rather than attempting to herd the entire flying public through senseless cattle chutes. Is the TSA really about catching terrorists, or is it about making the public "feel better," while actually hoping to catch Americans carrying non-prescribed drugs, constitutionally protected firearms or what the IRS considers "too much" cash? If the air marshals have to make up phantom "suspicious persons" to get promoted and keep the clerks busy, might that not be evidence that we're putting all this money and energy in the wrong place, that perhaps our enemies are smart enough to be setting up their next strike somewhere else? In 1940, after all, the French rested secure, knowing how much they'd invested in their "impregnable" Maginot Line. But the Germans never attacked the Maginot Line. They went around. |
|||