Is This a Wait-and-See Story?
Jan 5th, 2010 | 68 responses
UPDATED: Darleen Click at Protein Wisdom simultaneously links to this post, and embraces her inner sixth-grader. Click and laugh.
The right is all over this story about Michael Yon being handcuffed and questioned at the Seattle airport. For them, this is an open-and-shut case of overzealous airport security hassling an obviously harmless American citizen. Now, I’m not saying that Yon needed to be arrested, or treated like a security risk. But it’s the reasoning behind the conclusion that I object to. I mean, get a load of these characterizations (links to individual posts can all be found at Memeorandum):
“Milblogger/independent war correspondent extraordinaire Michael Yon…” (Michelle Malkin)”
“I don’t think Mike‘s going to make a federal case of this, but it might be worthwhile to train security folks on what it is they’re doing.” (Greyhawk; bolding is mine)
“The problem is not the airports. The problem is jihad. The war is not at the check in counter. If the response from the O administration is more harassment of Americans [non-Muslim Americans, natch], we have signed our own death warrant.”
That last is Pamela Geller, who throws in her defense of profiling further down:
“But CAIR maintains special status for Muslim supremacists (Muslims Americans who care about this country would be happy to adhere tosecurity guidelines).”
Not non-Muslim Americans, though. They have every right to be outraged if they are stopped and questioned at the airport — no special test for being considered loyal and concerned Americans for them.
Here is another one, from “Stable Hand” at The Jawa Report:
“A freelance journalist puts his life on the line to tell the truth about the war against the terrorists and he gets handcuffed??? God help us all.”
Wow, if that does not say it all. Yon “reports” the various wars that the United States is involved in from the viewpoint of the U.S. military and the supporters of endless war on the far right. There is nothing inherently wrong, unethical, or unprofessional about that — if one is honest about the point of view your reporting represents. But Yon is not, and neither are his cheerleaders.
As for the arrest itself, whether the Canadian Border Police had legitimate concerns or not, I think it might be wise to gather more information before leaping to the conclusion that the airport security people involved are idiots, or that Yon is blameless (in the sense of behaving provocatively; not in the sense of being an actual security threat).
Even James Joyner is skeptical:
We’ve got only Yon’s side of the story thus far and it honestly doesn’t make much sense. While I’ve never flown in and out of Seattle, I’ve flown in and out of the country several times post-9/11 and have never been asked, coming or going, how much I made or anything more personal than “What’s the purpose for your visit?” If, however, they are asking these sort of insipid questions — let alone handcuffing people who refuse to answer them — our airline security system has even more problems than I thought.
Certainly, the blast of arrogant entitlement that wafts off of this:
When they handcuffed me, I said that no country has ever treated me so badly. Not China. Not Vietnam. Not Afghanistan. Definitely not Singapore or India or Nepal or Germany, not Brunei, not Indonesia, or Malaysia, or Kuwait or Qatar or United Arab Emirates. No county has treated me with the disrespect can that can be expected from our border bullies.
is pretty repulsive. Yon would do better to cultivate the sense of humor demonstrated by Joan Rivers after her nightmare experience in Costa Rica — much more harrowing than Yon’s (emphasis is mine):
Joan Rivers was among the many travelers to get snared in the heightened-security frenzy that overtook airports after the December 25th failed terrorist attack. Rivers wasn’t allowed on her Newark-bound flight in Costa Rica this past weekend by a “jittery Continental Airlines gate agent” who thought the two names on her passport, which reads “Joan Rosenberg AKA Joan Rivers,” seemed “fishy.” Rivers wrote of her experience:
“If I were going to make up an alias, I wouldn’t pick Rosenberg. I’d pick Jolie or Pitt…Do terrorists wear Manolo Blahniks? I can tell you Donna Karan does not make anything that hides a bomb…I tried the tears; they didn’t work. I tried reasoning. I couldn’t bribe because I didn’t have any money. I said ‘I’m going to have a heart attack over this,’ so the woman called the paramedics.”
Rivers ultimately found someone who “took pity on her” and drove her 6.5 hours to Costa Rica’s main airport in San Jose to get her on a flight back to the U.S. on Monday. Rivers, a wealthy celebrity diva, isn’t necessarily the most sympathetic victim of post-Christmas Day terrorist hysteria, but the New York Daily News notes that many New York-area travelers are reporting similar horror stories. Rivers claims she was signing autographs at the Costa Rican airport while gate agents refused to let her on the flight.
68 Responses to “Is This a Wait-and-See Story?”
Did you ever see the Seinfeld episode where Jerry tells Elaine that the original title of War And Peace was actually War What is It Good For. Sort of fits you to a tee.
I did not see that episode, but I appreciate the thought.
Thank you, Federale. This is helpful information, and I'm sure a lot of people here appreciate that you provided it.
And, maybe there should be a separate I Love Yon/I Hate Yon thread.
I agree. Not necessarily that there should be a separate thread, but I agree with your underlying point that the argument over Yon's writing is starting to get seriously off the topic of my post, which was Yon being stopped at the Seattle airport.
I apologize for my part in that.
It's way off.
“I had no idea that teaching university, writing books, and speaking to anti-war groups was so lucrative.”
Chomsky is an institution. (He's quite a capitalist, too.) He has made being a far-left fringist (anti-American crank) into an institution. His books and other written works are probably better known by far than his occasionally being played on the radio such as on Alternative Radio or other fringist outlets.
It's way off.
dduck, you are right. My statement was inaccurate. It's not starting to get seriously off the topic of my post; it's way off the topic of my post.
But let's agree to agree on this, because I would not want to go off-topic on this point, too.
Yeh.
Chomsky is an institution. (He's quite a capitalist, too.) He has made being a far-left fringist (anti-American crank) into an institution. His books and other written works are probably better known by far than his occasionally being played on the radio such as on Alternative Radio or other fringist outlets.
This explains why his books never make the New York Times bestseller list (or any bestseller list, actually), and why he is never interviewed on CNN or Fox News or MSNBC or ABC Nightly News or CBS Nightly News, or NBC Nightly News, or… oh, okay, I'll stop there.
“His books and other written works are probably better known…” Well, you save yourself from complete ridiculousness there with the qualifier “probably.” But your statement is still foolish, and meaningless, too, since you really do not have any accurate idea of how often Chomsky is featured in alternative media outlets, or how well-known or popular those alternative media outlets are, or how his media appearances compare in frequency or popularity to his book sales.
Come on. Admit it now. You really don't know. You just threw out a statement you want to be true w/o knowing whether it is or isn't.
“I'll stop there”
Yep. That's enough of an evil “corporate right-wing media” offenders' list. [chuckle]
That's what happens when someone is so fringist left that conventional and well-left liberals find him fringist or controversial. (He remains vastly popular and having a fan or even informal cult following, with a new generation of ignorant kids every year replacing anybody who has outgrown him or otherwise learned better. Some will never outgrow that mindset, as I have heard examples of more than once on Alternative Radio, and I'm not only referring to the normal host there, or on the guests who are recorded and broadcast.)
“But your statement is still foolish, and meaningless, too”
Oh, the irony. It might have been complete had you included “illogical.”
Mr. Federale – source? Or just speculation on your “facts” in evidence?
We are just talking about the facts, not the various laws and statutes you cite, although I do not dispute that airport police/security would have superior jurisdiction over CBP.
Speak up and cite your source/show your evidence of what you purport to be the facts.
oops, that should be “would NOT have superior jurisdiction.” Sorry
Yeah, but I have been attacked by Blackfive and Confederate Yankee. Apparently they mistake Yon's public posts on his and his Thai friend's travails with CBP with being harrassed by DHS. Of course, none has addressed the TSA v. CBP issue or the other issues. They just attack me for daring to post. I guess as far as Blackfive is concerned, milblogging is ok, but fedblogging isn't. Funny we all get paid by the same taxpayers.
Judicious and fact based deductive reasoning as well as superior knowledge base.
Fedblogging?
Fedblogging!
You are publicly admitting to being a federal employee of the DHS throwing around accusations of which you either have *no* knowledge or else are part of your *job* and no one is supposed to object to that? Neither the people nor your employer?
No one is supposed to wonder about retaliation? Government employees have lost their job for taking it upon themselves to wage political battles by violating the privacy of citizens. You use your position as authority, to say, yes I *do* know the facts and you should listen to me.
And if that's *true* then you are in violation, absolutely, of Privacy Act and likely other serious security and privacy policies pertaining to your work.
Or *else* you know absolutely nothing and are abusing your association with the DHS.
Grats honey, for making Yon's case *for* him.
You don't even doubt him, do you.
Do you doubt Yon, Julie? As it happens, I have read variations of Federale's explanation from several other credible sources, and it certainly rings true.
Mr. winston_oboogie, can you explain to me why you think federale must cite his sources and show you evidence “of what he purports to be the facts” when you accept Yon's version of events apparently on faith?