All you need is fear!

In My Humble Opinion
1

Wondering if anyone else considers excessive the unfocused fear that seems pervasive in much of the US these days.

Just got back from DC, where I and my family had the pleasure of being treated as potential criminals for the pleasure of visiting our capital. Worst was at the Washington Monument. First my wife got rudely shoved by failing to move quickly enough from one outside line to another. Of course, the ranger doing the shoving did not see that she was waiting for someone to pass in front of her, so he shoved her right into the other person.

Then, when confronted with the incredibly high security inside, and I asked what they were looking for, they cited 9/11. Sorry guys, I don’t have a hijacked 727 in my pocket. Nor do I intend to fly the monument into the Pentagon.

And waited for approximately 30 minutes for a line of maybe 40 people to be cleared to visit the Library of Congress. Terrorism alert! They’re coming after our books!

I go into federal courthouses nearly every day. And they have far less intrusive security than I had to submit to in order to enter the National Art Gallery.

Traffic patterns and parking are disrupted. Gotta deny terrorists convenient parking for the Lincoln and Jefferson Memorials.

In Chicago Mayor Daley cites a fear of terrorism as justification for his nighttime destruction of Meigs Field.

And who - the federal government, the states, or local governments - will be able to afford these security measures? What else will need to be sacrificed to sustain them?

It seems to me that many security measures I encounter are excessive. And I dislike the change I see in which Americans are becoming accustomed to consenting to more and more invasive searches. So long as you refuse to identify exacty what you are looking for, you can justify essentially any measure.

<sarcasm>Of course, every day that I don’t get gassed, shot, bombed, hijacked, etc. by terrorists, Iraqis, or other nameless/faceless foes, adds to the success of these much needed measures.</sarcasm>

2

Bowling for Columbine, Michael Moore’s fine film, touched on this topic. It seems to be a lot of things, unfortunately. The media is all about VIOLENCE AND CRIME AND COULD YOU BE NEXT?! for starters.

3

I do agree with you that our nation’s leaders are using fear as a tool to reach their own means. However, the policies you cited were inconveniences that do have rational reasons:

Your wife being pushed had little to do with any policies related to terrorism. It sucks, the guard was rude, but his pushing your wife has little to do with terrorism.

They know you don’t plan on flying the monument into the pentagon. They’re not looking for an attack similar to 9/11, they’re looking for people packed with plastic explosives, guns, knives, etc… The Washington Monument stands for a lot in our nation, if it were destroyed people would be saying “what if it were the White House?” or “What if it was the pentagon?”.

Long wait at the Library of congress… Again… the “what if”… If they hit something like the L.O.C. they could hit the Whitehouse, not far away.

You may go to federal buildings every day, but none of those are visited by millions a year and are in our nation’s capital (and also none of them hold some of the most spectacular art of our nation, if you destroy priceless pieces of art you will anger MANY people)… and its near the whitehouse… Again… the “What ifs”.

"Gotta deny terrorists convenient parking for the Lincoln and Jefferson Memorials." Or deny them the chance to park a van packed with explosives next to them.

I do agree with your central point, though. I don’t agree with the use of our govt.'s policies and its manipulation of the mass media to scare the public (and the other parts of the government that act as their checks and balances) into giving them what they want. Our nation benifits from our fear. If we were not told there was reason to be afraid, even though we arn’t given proof only “Its bad, but its on a need to know basis”, we wouldn’t support the war.

My $0.02

4

Those were just a couple of examples of what I consider the trend to daily consent to more and more unreasonable and unnecessary searches.

Re: the washington monument, my suspicion is that they were so uptight because they are using it for surveillance. They had one of the 2 windows facing each direction blocked off, and there appeared to be some electronic equipment inside the enclosures. If so, they weren’t effective enough to stop tractorman!

They were on the watch for people with electric implants. A family with us had a 12 year old daughter with an insulin pump. They took the girl from the family and “processed” her through a back entrance. They would not allow either parent to accompany her. The parents were quite upset.

Say what you will about “profiling,” but if this family fit any noninsane image of a threat, I’ll eat my hat. Yes, the terrorists planned ahead, by having midwestern families implant their young with explosive devices cleverly disquised to resemble insulin pumps. Sneaky devils!

Also, they had you take off your coats, empty all of your pockets (not just of metal objects), physical patdown, walk through metal detector, visual search of bags, send coats and bags thru detector, and then you were wanded. That is what caused me to ask what they were looking for, because it seemed so excessive for anything necessary to detect a gun, knife, bomb, etc. The only thing I could imagine was a container of poison, etc.

I would have a difficult time expressing the hostility with which my inquiry was met. Which pissed me off. But I quickly realized that I had to shut my mouth and submit unquestioningly to whatever they proposed, or else I and my family would likely be barred from visiting the monument, or potentially worse. Which REALLY pissed me off, as a patriotic and law abiding citizen and taxpayer, simply desiring to take my family to visit my nation’s capitol.

I would be far more eager to willingly consent to such searches if I were given ANY idea why they were considered necessary. IMO, such an approach, leaning towards openness, even at the potential cost of increased risk, is consistent of my idea of what life in this country should be like. Instead, the sole answer is a consistent mantra of “9/11,” with a couple of “Iraqs” tossed in to muddy the issue.

In any event, I’d far rather the unidentified “they” take out a hunk of marble, instead of a bunch of living breahing people. Moreover, I might not be able to drive my van up to the monuments, but could stroll in with my backpack filled with whatever I wished.

Other minor inconveniences. Every time we entered the hotel parking lot, I had to show photo ID, and open my hood and trunk, as well as have the mirror undercarriage inspection.

In Chicago, they periodically increase security around the federal buildings. Most frequently, when protests are expected in the surrounding plazas. I wonder if the security is to protect the buildings and workers against terrorists, or protesters.

In that vein of security, I personally am more fearful of one of Chicago’s black riotgear clad finest going off on me, than meeting misfortune at the hands of someone exercising their rights of speech and assembly.

Yes, each of these indignities/inconveniences by itself is exceedingly minor. But added together, they do not suggest to me the direction I desire my country to go in.

In words I clipped from an Esquire columnist some time back:
Authority, if it is to work in the long run, must have in its tiny little heart a kernel of sanity.
It is that tiny kernel that I too often find lacking these days.

5

What? They were afraid that terrorists would blow something up befor the city could?

6

Dinsdale Check out the very interesting book Culture of Fear by Barry Glassner.

http://www.bordersstores.com/search/title_detail.jsp?id=2814772

7

Thanks for the book rec, Hello.
And I’ve been meaning to see BfC GM.

Had another minor, silly one today. Went for my lunchtime run but, I guess since I just got back from vacation, I forgot to bring my ID with me. Came back and really had to work to be allowed to get in to my locker to show them my ID.
I have nothing metal on me and would eagerly pass the metal detector and be wanded/frisked.
The building houses federal office and is open to the public, but requires photo ID and passage thru metal detector.
The guards in question recognize me - we exchange greetings and small talk just about every day. Yet they needed to call a sargeant. (I understand they are just doing their job.)
But what do they fear? That I am going to strangle someone with a shoelace?

BTW - ran past Meigs. They now have some nifty huge lit-up Xs propped up on the runway. Should look nifty for the holidays!

8

What do you suppose would happen if the local pilots all converged on Chicago and started flying around? You know, maintaining proper altitude and all, fly in the same direction so as to avoid running into each other. Just to prove a point.