In Fairness To The TSA
Do you ever wonder whether the TSA reads about such things? I certainly do. And courtesy of TSA's "Blogger Bob," whose real name is Bob Burns and who feeds his family on the public teat, we now know that they do. Burns commented to Amy's post, and wrote a post of his own based on the same comment:
Here we go again… TSA seems to be a frequent and a convenient subject on Amy Alkon's blog. The writer’s language characterization towards TSA and our employees is offensive to say the least. Name calling, insults, the whole gamut...
In her latest screening incident, she’s angry because a supervisor wouldn’t give her the name of an officer who had just screened her. An officer who – by the way - by all accounts other than Ms. Alkon’s, did her job by the book. It is more likely that she wanted this information so she could post the officer’s name on her blog as she’s done before with other incidents. In fact, she named and publicly accused one of our officers of rape after a routine pat-down in an earlier allegation.
The old Reagan ploy, "here we go again." That mean Amy Alkon, calling us mean names and saying mean things about what we do. "Offensive to say the least." Why won't she be nice to us? Why must she offend us? Why?
Blogger Bob acknowledges that a supervisor refused to give Amy the name of an "officer" who works for the government and, in the course of
his her "duty," touched her. Though in Burns' world, his people say it was by the book, and only the one person who doesn't get a TSA paycheck disagrees. Since that makes it the TSA's word against Amy's, where popular vote seems to carry the TSA day, Amy loses. But what of the refusal of the officer whose name couldn't be read, or the supervisor who refused to give it up?
Blogger Bob, despite his lengthy rant against the evils of mean Amy, never gets back to that detail.
Instead, Burns goes on to point out all the things Amy does that darken his TSA heart.
Ms. Alkon says all sorts of things in this post, but what Ms. Alkon doesn’t tell you is that from the moment she entered our checkpoint, she began making statements such as “TSA gets paid to molest passengers and touch their private areas.” Does that sound like somebody who wants to get through the checkpoint smoothly? No, it sounds like somebody who makes a living by agitating situations and writing about them.
Does Amy sound like an Agitator? Maybe, if agitator is someone who questions and challenges things that government functionaries do to her that they shouldn't. To claim she makes a living at it is a bit peculiar, but given that Bob feeds off the tax rolls, his concept of how people who work for a living earn an income is probably a bit skewed. Government employees assume nobody would lift a finger unless they were getting money out of it, since that's how they roll. Kinda makes them sound like marketeers, now that I think about it.
But Burns, still never returning to the concealment of the identity of the TSA guy whose fingers found Amy's private parts, decides to provide a civics lesson rather than explain why it's cool with the TSA that their people hide in the shadows.
We understand that not everybody likes or agrees with TSA’s policies and procedures. Part of what makes this country great is that we can openly complain on blogs such as this one, but I think it’s only fair that the blogger in question should be fair and accurate about what they write about and also consider the privacy of the individuals involved. After all, these individuals are doing the job the way they’ve been trained to do it. They show up to work daily with the intent of protecting our Nation’s transportation network.
Hidden within this flag waving is this little gem: "These individuals are doing the job the way they've been trained to do it." So Bob, you train your "officers" to conceal their identities? You train your supervisors to conceal identities too? Is there a class on it in TSA school, Concealing Identities 101?
Rather than put Amy Alkon in her place, Burns' embarrassing effort gives her the chance to directly respond:
"TSA gets paid to molest passengers and touch their private areas." Does that sound like somebody who wants to get through the checkpoint smoothly?
No, it sounds like someone who wants to defend our constitutional rights.
You, Bob Burns, are terrible person. You take money in order to support the violation of our rights. Being a prostitute would be a far more noble profession. In that case, consenting adults remove their clothes in a consenting exchange.
Got a problem with that constitutional thingy Bob? Well, you asked. But then, Amy unloads.
Caught one single terrorist, Bob?
Ouch. That must hurt. After all, nobody wants to have their nemesis point out that at the end of the day, they're just a cog in the wheel of such a worthless failure. So many touchings. So many Americans offended. So many constitutional rights sacrificed, and not a single terrorist caught.
The efficacy of the TSA's efforts isn't much in debate. Millions of Americans have removed their shoes, been exposed to radiation, had parts of their children's bodies touched that no one is ever supposed to touch, all so that they can catch a terrorist. But they haven't. And no, the argument that these methods have kept the bad guys away doesn't fly any more than it proves the existence of space aliens, who similarly haven't been caught.
But Bob, what about your people concealing their names? A thousand words murdered to tell us how mean Amy Alkon is, but you never tell us why it's okay with the TSA that their nametag wearing officers are allowed, taught, to conceal their identities? Is it really because they're scared that Amy Alkon will write something mean about them?
It does make America great that we can openly complain on blogs about the TSA, Bob. America would be greater still if functionaries like you didn't work so darn hard to whine about how mean those complaints can be, and instead explained why your people hide their identities from the public to prevent their being held accountable for misconduct. It's only fair, Bob.