Social proof

[Cathryn]

The following article from 'psychology today' is a good example of the unnecessary and invasive 'body scanner' search and the possibility that there is more to this search than meets the eye. This guy, a 65 year old American PhD psychologist and his wife also a psychologist, on an internal flight returning from holiday where they were reliving their marriage from 44 years earlier.

The guy went through the scanner, then the official pulled him aside for a further search on the grounds that he detected something unusual in his 'groin area'! Well it would be the groin area wouldn't it?

I think he might have gone further than he did in describing his experience had he not been writing about marriage his specialist subject on the website. Anyway, it seems like good social proof of the idiocy of the US and the perverse treatment of its citizens.


http://tinyurl.com/28uqb4c

Original link before shortening...
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/building-great-marriages/201011/where-have-all-my-civil-liberties-gone?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

[Gonzo]

I have to say, for an educated man, a psychologist no less, he sounds pretty uninformed and naïve.

Frankly, when I saw the "full body scanner" in front of me as we were beginning the screening process at LAX, I was kind of looking forward to trying out this new technology. My optimism didn't last very long.

He was looking forward to trying it out. I'm betting he has no idea as to the hazards, which makes me wonder, how you can get the truth to guys like this?

I will ask this simple question of those of you who are reading this - how does a 65 year old man, with gray hair, his bride of 44 years by his side, and one who has a very clean record of service to education for 42 years, get treated like a common criminal - or worst yet, a terrorist - when all I was doing was getting on an American airplane as a frequent flyer with a Gold Card? What has happened to my country?

Here he demonstrates a belief that only dangerous looking people and criminals get selected. Somehow he can't imagine how an educator of 42 years can be seen as anything other than pure and harmless. He must think that everyone captured in Iraq and Afghanistan are criminals or terrorists as well.

When I was an undergraduate at the University of Missouri in the 1960's, my English teacher required me to read "1984" by George Orwell. I dutifully read the book. And the truth is, I thought it was funny. I never imagined that America would come to the vision of George Orwell. Well, think again.I am very worried about my country. I never imagined that I would be humiliated by my own government. And all in the name of security for Americans. Our government has, in my humble estimation, crossed over the line.

The sleepy eyes are trying to wake up. But where was his head for the last decade? He's only know seeing it for the first time. Could this actually be the typical educated American?

Where is the ACLU? Where are those Americans that profess to protect our civil liberties? My experience in LA was a watershed moment in my life. I have always loved my country and believed in all the liberties outlined in our Constitution. But my government has let me down.

Ah, looking for the saviour. Here he shows that he doesn't pay attention to this crazy stuff because he expects benevolent agencies to watch his back. He has no role to play in protecting his country's constitution or citizens because others will do it for him.

This really helps show what the truth is up against and how successful the programming has been. There are several layers of programming and selfish detachment from society that the matter of any real situation has to percolate through before a critical awareness can form.

The signs are everywhere and yet he only saw one, and it was when it affected him directly. Perhaps, hopefully, he will begin to see a few other signs from this point forward instead of rolling over and going back to sleep.

Gonzo

 

[Hildegarda]

how does a 65 year old man, with gray hair, his bride of 44 years by his side, and one who has a very clean record of service to education for 42 years, get treated like a common criminal - or worst yet, a terrorist - when all I was doing was getting on an American airplane as a frequent flyer with a Gold Card? What has happened to my country?

Here he demonstrates a belief that only dangerous looking people and criminals get selected. Somehow he can't imagine how an educator of 42 years can be seen as anything other than pure and harmless. He must think that everyone captured in Iraq and Afghanistan are criminals or terrorists as well.

He is somewhat naive, yes, but here he is raising a good point about how a screen should be run if it actually WERE to weed out dangerous people (should they actually exist). Instead of going through all the noise (the law-abiding people) manually, they should be trying to cut down on the noise by selecting the people who act suspiciously or do something wrong, and zero down on them, that would be much more efficient. Instead, they harass everybody but let those suspicious people slide right through, which exposes the whole thing as a sharade that it is. THis is exemplified in an article posted in SOTT the other day:

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/218071-The-Things-He-Carried-Why-Airport-Screening-Doesn-t-Work

On another occasion, at LaGuardia, in New York, the transportation-security officer in charge of my secondary screening emptied my carry-on bag of nearly everything it contained, including a yellow, three-foot-by-four-foot Hezbollah flag, purchased at a Hezbollah gift shop in south Lebanon. The flag features, as its charming main image, an upraised fist clutching an AK-47 automatic rifle. Atop the rifle is a line of Arabic writing that reads THEN SURELY THE PARTY OF GOD ARE THEY WHO WILL BE TRIUMPHANT. The officer took the flag and spread it out on the inspection table. She finished her inspection, gave me back my flag, and told me I could go. I said, "That's a Hezbollah flag." She said, "Uh-huh." Not "Uh-huh, I've been trained to recognize the symbols of anti-American terror groups, but after careful inspection of your physical person, your behavior, and your last name, I've come to the conclusion that you are not a Bekaa Valley - trained threat to the United States commercial aviation system," but "Uh-huh, I'm going on break, why are you talking to me?"

As I stood in the bathroom, ripping up boarding passes, waiting for the social network of male bathroom users to report my suspicious behavior, I decided to make myself as nervous as possible. I would try to pass through security with no ID, a fake boarding pass, and an Osama bin Laden T-shirt under my coat. I splashed water on my face to mimic sweat, put on a coat (it was a summer day), hid my driver's license, and approached security with a bogus boarding pass that Schneier had made for me. I told the document checker at security that I had lost my identification but was hoping I would still be able to make my flight. He said I'd have to speak to a supervisor. The supervisor arrived; he looked smart, unfortunately. I was starting to get genuinely nervous, which I hoped would generate incriminating micro-expressions. "I can't find my driver's license," I said. I showed him my fake boarding pass. "I need to get to Washington quickly," I added. He asked me if I had any other identification. I showed him a credit card with my name on it, a library card, and a health-insurance card. "Nothing else?" he asked.

"No," I said.

"You should really travel with a second picture ID, you know."

"Yes, sir," I said.

"All right, you can go," he said, pointing me to the X-ray line. "But let this be a lesson for you."

pretty crazy

The signs are everywhere and yet he only saw one, and it was when it affected him directly. Perhaps, hopefully, he will begin to see a few other signs from this point forward instead of rolling over and going back to sleep.

I think the article is a positive thing overall, from the point of view of social proof. As has been pointed out, he is writing a column on marriage. He also appears to be one of those "salt of the earth" type of a person: hard-working, unpretentious, squeaky-clean, not overburdened by doubt yet morally sound as an obyvatel. If THOSE people see something wrong with this, that goes far as an example to follow for other people.

 

[Cathryn]

Yea, it is as you say.. vis 'the just world theory'. The guy got a shock, will it help him awaken, I don't know. I have followed a trail on this subject and found this one, also on 'Psychology Today..

_http://tinyurl.com/29dfkq8

the original is
_http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/extreme-fear/201011/is-the-terrorism-threat-imaginary?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

The authur of the article interviews a guy who's a "cryptology expert and security consultant Bruce Schneier, who since 9/11 has been one of the most pointed critics of the government's anti-terrorism security programs."

It seems he is saying the intention of the security scanners is to be seen to be doing something to combat 'terrorism' as opposed to doing nothing, by ramping up the fear level. That the procedures put in place will not detect determined or real 'terrorists'. Either he doesn't really understand why fear levels are being ramped up, or he's in their pay, or he is rationalising something he just can't understand. Personally I go for the 'vectoring blog' and when the psychologist 'victim' goes searching for meaning he can go peacefully back to sleep.

Interesting though, imaginary terrorism being discussed.

(Jeff Wise)

Has there been a case since 9/11 of an attempted hijacker being thwarted by airport security?

(Schneier)None that we've heard of. The TSA will say, "Oh, we're not allowed to talk about successes." That's actually bullsh*t. They talk about successes all the time. If they did catch someone, especially during the Bush years, you could be damned sure we'd know about it. And the fact that we didn't means that there weren't any. Because the threat was imaginary. It's not much of a threat. As excess deaths go, it's just way down in the noise. More than 40,000 people die each year in car crashes. It's 9/11 every month. The threat is really overblown.

This bit appears to contradict itself..."Because the threat was imaginary." with " It's not much of a threat." So he says it is imaginary and then says just very low threat. So which is it?