Why are we listening to someone with a picture of a cute kittie, whose name is codename yam, who is "good friends" with a Tub Stacking *******... Like V2+15 and others have said; WE ARE NOT PASSENGERS!!!! Please guys, TAKE A FUKCING STAND, and say NO! Stop pussy-footing around when it comes to TSA... This is ludicrous.
SpatialD, great letter, I think it's a step in the right direction!
[QUOTE=SpatialD;411012]Interesting point of view. Of course, if the founders valued their security more than liberty, this country wouldn't be so amazing, would it? In fact, it wouldn't be at all.
If we buy into the notion that protecting this amazing country requires subjecting ourselves to the tyranny of the state, then the terrorists have overwhelmingly succeeded in destroying America - rather, seducing us into destroying it ourselves.
It was the oppression of their own government at the time that incited the American Revolutionaries (whom the state labeled terrorists) to declare their independence, and the birth of this amazing country. Of course, all the king wanted was a few pennies on the price of tea and a stamp tax so he could protect them from the threat of wild and evil savages determined to cause as much destruction of both their lives and economy as possible. Why didn't they just pay what he asked? You'd think they would've been grateful for his protection.
There is nothing new under the sun. The world is not a different place. It's still the world.
Spatial, My view is more for the "flying passenger" and this being an option for screening them. I think this is a great technology that needs to be used. Is it perfect? No.. But if it can stop one fool from getting somthing on board and killing innocent travelers then I'm all for its use. I agree that as a crew we should have Crew Pass.
- The TSA has announced, and the company has informed the pilot group directly, of changes to the screening policy to which I do not consent.
- Recognizing that the day may be fast approaching when I reach an impasse in the security line with some flunky who won't let me in the door, I anticipate a potential conflict which may be likely to affect the operation.
- Being a responsible, all growed-up professional, I'm taking a proactive approach to the situation rather than waiting until said day to call my chief pilot and tell him I can't get to the gate to work my flight because I refuse to step into the government's peep show machine or turn my head and cough for the man in the blue shirt, to which said chief pilot would likely reply, "Didn't you get the FIL? Why did you wait till now to tell us about your conscientious objections?"
- I have included background information and other details to ensure that anyone who gives a shite will have a clear understanding of the issues at stake and the thought process behind my position. In this regard, I am simply appealing to the common interest we all share in this situation as human beings and stakeholders in the air transportation industry.
- If you, or the actual recipients of my letter disagree with me on any of these points, it does not bear on my convictions in the least. Therefore, I still feel it's my duty to communicate my dissent early and in no uncertain terms (see point #3 above). If my message gets brushed off, so be it. Due diligence has been served on my end, which is all I'm trying to do here.
Hope that makes sense now. If not, maybe somebody can translate it into Purrrrsian.
We now bypass security in a few places where metal detectors are in place. Where the scanner/frisking program is up and running, I haven't seen anything to indicate that there will be another option for pax or crew (except where they have crew pass, perhaps). I've seen the scanners once or twice, but always with the metal detectors in use as well. They specifically directed me to the metal detectors, but the pax were being ushered into the scanners like sheep with no clue what was even going on as far as I could tell.
And for those who aren't familiar, here's what's going on: