Freedoms Removed Under the Guise of Safety
by David Klein
by David Klein
by David Klein: The
Tobacco Freedom Index
lately become synonymous with the above title. In order to go on
any type of air travel in the US one must now go through thorough
searches via body scanners. Something that began with Metal detectors
has now progressed to shoes being taken off to full soft core pornographic
body scanners to potentially being felt up in very personal areas
of our bodies.
wisdom says that this is quite alright to ensure our safety as passengers
aboard flights ever since that tragic day in 2001 and thwart attempts
from subsequent terrorist threats. This is a very good reason to
mandate that these types of very intimate searches be performed.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. I submit that there
is something extremely wrong with this from the perspective of freedom
and personal liberties.
A quick analysis
of recent TSA trends or rather the logic they employ tells us much
about the future if nothing is done to prevent further advances
into our most private of parts (pun intended). The TSA was implemented
after the failure of the FAA to stop the terrorist attacks of September
11th, 2001. In good old leviathan fashion, one failed
Government agency was replaced by another Government agency. After
security was ramped up, we were told to remove laptops from our
bags and put them into separate containers. Furthermore we were
told to remove all liquids from our carry-on or place them into
1.5oz to 3oz containers and/or
1 quart-size clear plastic, zip-top bags holding 3 ounce or smaller
containers. Once a terrorist decided to attempt to place an explosive
in his shoe we were all consequently told to remove our shoes when
going through security. Amazingly enough someone figured out a way
around the system and decided to try and put an explosive device
in their underwear!
Of course, this lead to the full body scanners and the very intrusive
pat downs of both male and female twins (I donít need to spell this
out, do I?).
has taken this in stride and has cooperated with the TSA. However
once our personal space is invaded, in this instance the most personal
of spaces, we must all say enough is enough. Where does this stop?
Sure, currently there are isolated cases of abuses
by the TSAís newly granted powers, where brain-dead drones harass
I would like to see if any of our overlords in Washington D.C. have
had any experiences such as these or endured such treatments. Who
is to say that these abuses can be contained? What if their frequency
increases? These are questions a responsible individual must ask
himself or follow the rest of the herd where war is peace, freedom
is slavery and ignorance is strength.
surmise that right now terrorists are figuring out a way to implant
explosive devices inside of their skulls, a device that contains
materials that are not picked up by the metal detector or shown
in the full body scanners and much less felt during "grope
downs". This terrorist successfully boards a plane and the
rest you can figure out for yourself. Consequently the TSA implements
another security measure where your brains are scanned and bombarded
with rays in order to check and see if you have any devices implanted.
The idea here is to make you ask the question, where does the intrusiveness
stop? When is it no longer okay? Where do we draw the line? Why
do terrorists only want to set off bombs in airplanes? Wouldnít
it affect a lot more people and send a louder message if the suicide
bomber did so in the terminal where there is no security checkpoint
and anyone can waltz into a crowded area unchecked? Should we not
have two levels of security then, one to enter the terminal and
one to enter the gate area? Wait, what about other transportation
centers such as Bus Terminals and Train Stations?
are all hypothetical scenarios and questions. How about the legality
of unreasonable searches and seizures of the masses? I was under
the impression that all Government representatives take an oath
to uphold our constitution, the supreme law of the land. Does the
blatant oversight of the 4th amendment imply that the
USA has become a land in which its own laws are not followed by
its legislative body? "Oh, but the document is quaint and desperate
times call for desperate measures". I submit that it is precisely
in times of danger where we should be the most observing of our
laws to ensure that our rights and freedoms are protected and not
usurped in times of danger and peril. "Those who give up Essential
Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty
nor Safety". ~ Benjamin Franklin
applicants for TSA jobs, is it safe to expect that they employ normal
folks who have no hidden intents such as those of a sexual nature?
After all a background check may reveal a clean record but it will
not reveal a well hidden distorted mind. The usual defense parroted
by all is that these agents are just doing their jobs. Please do
not get lost in the extremism of the following example but simply
understand the logic behind it, in Nazi Germany many citizens were
just doing their jobs too. This does not justify their actions at
all. It states that one is clearly incapable of thinking for himself
and just takes orders regardless of their egregious nature. This
type of apathy and acceptance is reminiscent of Pastor Martin Niemollerís
came first for the Communists,
And I didnít speak up because I wasnít a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
And I didnít speak up because I wasnít a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
And I didnít speak up because I wasnít a Jew.
Then they came for me,
And by that time no one was left to speak up"
This is not
the strong American stance that built such a rich and prosperous
nation in its early stages. This type of complacency is inexcusable
in a free society with inalienable rights. There are free market
solutions that would fare much better than the aforementioned. One
must always remember that the private sector responds to constantly
evolving demands and must adapt quickly in order to maintain profitability
whereas the public sector responds to itself and always lags adaptability
as it does not require profitability (see Post Office/Amtrak) due
to the Governmentís full monopoly of fiduciary media.
Born in Brazil, David Klein [send
him mail] is a graduate from the University of Central Florida
school of Business. He is currently working in the energy industry,
and is a student of the Austrian School of Economics.
2010 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part
is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.