- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostA La Carte (11/17)
- Next Post »Church History Surveys
The Machines Will Save Us!
- 11/17/10
- 32
With the year’s biggest travel day fast approaching and with new airport security regulations in place, the media is buzzing about measures the TSA is imposing upon travelers in order to keep the skies safe. Popular news aggregators like Drudge Report are giving this extra attention, perhaps making it seem a bigger story than it actually is. Yet in recent days all of the major outlets have also been picking up on it. Everyone’s talking about what we have to go through in order to fly. Since the TSA was created in the wake of 9/11, it has gradually been clamping down, demanding more and more restrictions on how we travel, what we travel with, and how we will be screened before we do so. And sooner or later people are going to say, “Enough is enough.” It seems like the latest measures may have pushed people toward that tipping point.
It’s an interesting conundrum we find ourselves in. Most of us travel by air on a regular or at least semi-regular basis. And all of us want to enjoy peace of mind while we are cruising along at 550 miles per hour. And so we welcome some level of screening—the kind of screening that allows the 99.99% of us who have no evil intentions to pass through quickly, easily and conveniently, but at the same time ensures that all the bad guys will get caught. We know that there are millions and millions of innocent people processed through those lines in order to weed out the very few terrorists.
It’s the humiliation that most people object to, I think. Before 9/11 airport security was a slight annoyance, but by no means a major bother. But then the rules changed. They had to, I suppose. But soon we were taking off our shoes, then having to ensure we had only travel-size cosmetics, and then actually take those cosmetics out so the TSA could see them. And then came the infamous full body scanners, the machines that digitally remove your clothes so the agents can peer underneath to see what you might be carrying on or in your body. Of course it also gives them a pretty good view of the particulars of your body. The alternative, should you choose to opt out of the scanner, is a thorough pat-down, one that is quite invasive and involves hands rubbing over the inner thigh, the genitals and the breasts. I went through one of these last time I flew and it involved all of that, including hands inside the waistline. It was conducted professionally and by a member of the same sex, but it was still more than a little unnerving.
So what is the TSA to do? They are between a rock and a hard place, between their mandate to protect the skies and passengers who are ready to say, “Enough!”
What’s particularly interesting to me as I think about the whole situation is the TSA’s reliance on high-tech solutions to this problem. As I wrote a book about technology (look for it on April 1, 2011) I noted that humans are prone to idolize technology, to put our trust in it, to believe that it is the first and best place to go when dealing with our problems. And ironically, this is especially true when it comes to problems caused by other technology. So when we have so many emails that our heads spin, we do not look for a solution that reduces our reliance upon email; instead, we look for ways to better filter it. And when technology has given terrorists advantages over us, we turn to technology to find ways of rooting them out. And this is where the body scanners come in. They are the latest and greatest, the machines that leave us all naked and exposed before the authorities. If only we can get everyone to walk through those machines, we will be safe, right?
But I can’t help but wonder if putting our trust in technology here is a mistake. Israel offers an interesting contrast, one that uses technology to a certain extent but places greater trust in low-tech solutions. Israel relies upon people—trained agents who look for certain human behaviors that will tip them off to someone who has evil intentions. They ask benign questions, they look you in the eyes, and they study your behavior. All the while other agents are wandering around the airport, simply looking for people whose behavior would tip them off. Here’s a description of what happens when you pass security in an Israeli airport: “‘First, it’s fast -- there’s almost no line. That’s because they’re not looking for liquids, they’re not looking at your shoes. They’re not looking for everything they look for in North America. They just look at you,’ said Sela. ‘Even today with the heightened security in North America, they will check your items to death. But they will never look at you, at how you behave. They will never look into your eyes … and that’s how you figure out the bad guys from the good guys.’” It’s a very different solution for the exact same problem.
This is not necessarily to say that one approach is right and the other is wrong. Rather, I simply find it so interesting to see that we tend toward the technological solution. There seems to be something in the heart, something within us, that wants to put its trust in the latest and greatest, in the best technology. We find comfort there. Israel represents the exception here, the one that has been willing to put its hope not in machines but in people, not in the highest technology but in the lowest. And their track record would seem to say that it has worked just as well; better even.
Meanwhile in North America we walk through the body scanners, finding comfort in their mere presence, finding comfort in knowing that this is the frontline, the most advanced technology. The machines will save us. They have to.
As for me, I am traveling in a couple of weeks and have no intention of walking through the body scanners. Not only do I object to the uncertainty of the radiation I’d be exposed to, but I also just plain don’t like them. I object. So I suppose that means another pat-down. I don’t like it, but it’s the cost of flying today.
I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I worship and serve as a pastor at 
Releasing on April 1, The Next
Published in 2008, this book
This is a guide that calls men,
This review of the bestselling
New to the site? You can get
This is a guide written
Comments (32)
Tim you are spot on with this. We do have a tendency to overtrust technology. But we know from experience that machines will not save us from harm, from evil, or from death itself.
We have all of these things to insulate us from the ills of life and yet inside we still long for relationship. The longings of the soul can never be matched by technology.
Oh. And don’t touch my junk, either!
David, “Salt and Light” www.RedLetterBelievers.com
Though I think your conclusion is off by a bit, the reason we tend toward technology is to avoid being called a racist and profiler if we “look at people” as the Israelis do. Their method has proven effective and simple. Ours will not, and can not. No longer. And yet we are inclined to worship something, so we project it onto technology.
The other problems are that people are waking-up to the fact that the vast majority of what we’re put through at the airports is nothing more than “security theatre”…it makes it appear that something is being done to protect us, but the holes in the system are gaping…and at this point in time they are also geared towards fighting yesterday’s battle.
Someone tries a bomb in their shoes, we take off our shoes…even if we’re wearing flip-flops. Someone tries liquid explosives, we get our little zip-lock to restrict our carrying capacity. Someone tries a bomb in their underwear and we get the “porno scanners” or a government approved sexual assault for ourselves, our wives and our children. What happens when someone inserts explosives rectally?
But there are massive problems…who’s screening the screeners? The employees who work in the secured section of the airport? The luggage handlers and caterers?
Anyone else had stuff stolen from their now unlocked luggage? There are repeated reports of theft from the actual people paid to rummage through your luggage.
Then there is the elephant in the room…profiling. Until we’re willing to really LOOK AT PEOPLE and realize the dual truths that the airline incidents and attacks since 9/11 haven’t been carried out by nuns, toddlers, grandmothers in wheelchairs, Scandanavian tourists or radical Buddhists, but instead there has been one extremely distinct point of similarity between ALL of the attackers…until we’re willing to take this fact into the security equation, I don’t see much hope for us to reverse the tide of the ever increasing curtailing of our freedoms and liberty while flying. I’d anticipate we’ll get to the point where we all check-in and are given “hospital gowns” to fly in while surrendering all of our belongings.
It is an interesting dilemma. We continually give up rights in exchange for security. Are we any more secure? Debatable. Another disaster that we can’t anticipate is always around the corner, I suppose. At the same time, we have to ask what have we really given up. A lot of people think the government is actually tapping our phone lines and we’re all subjects of “Big Brother.” I don’t think that’s the case either. As more medical issues have been discovered, we’ve subjected ourselves to more and more invasive health screenings, because we’ve realized it’s for our own good.
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Benjamin Franklin
Tim,Nice article. In the US, Law enforcement isn’t allowed to look people in the eyes and make judgments about who should and who should not be looked at based on their look, demeanor, culture, skin color, facial hair, etc. Our President gets upsets and badmouths a state in your union when they decide that they are going to enforce certain laws that prevent illegal aliens. We are in a PC mess.
If you want to keep airplanes safe, lets do it like the Israelis and use our eyeballs to spot the people who actually want to kill us.
Here is a good place to start -> 100% of all airplane terrorists who use airplanes as missiles have been muslim. Start there. So far, there have been no soccer mom or senior citizen terrorists.
I don’t know what the right answer is, but I know I will be avoiding flying for awhile. I think if I have to watch some punk security guard put his hands all over my wife, bad things are gonna happen.
z.
I tend to be one that is thankful and willing to put up with a long security process as I believe that it is important. But there are limits and I do feel that they have been overstepped in the most recent changes…
I never felt so safe and confident of a healthy security as I did when traveling into Tel-Aviv. And the other thing is, their screeners have all served in their army for two years and know how to use a weapon. I vividly remember well dressed young ladies at the security check in and others of both genders interacting with the passengers, asking questions. All very polite, but very serious.
Sadly, I am not looking forward to flying in the future…although I really enjoy it.
Hi Tim,
I’m a frequent reader and new commentor.
I agree with the substance of your post and I, too, will object to the TSA scanners and will instead be patted down. Not that it’s much better. Since this is my first flight since the scanners have been put in, it may be last.
I do want to push you though because I think there may be some inconsistencies in the way you handle this issue when compared to similar issues like MP3 piracy and pornography.
You objected to MP3 piracy because it violates the 8th Commandment. The scanners you seem to object to for more political and personal reasons. However, I think the TSA scanners are just as much a violation of the 7th Commandment (against adultery) as MP3 piracy is of the 8th. With all the prohibition against uncovering nakedness in Leviticus ( 18:6 - 20), a society formed by a biblical worldview would not stand for this kind of invasion of their bodies. We would be like Shem and Japheth covering Noah’s nakedness, fighting like them for the dignity and honor of our brothers and sisters in Christ.
I know some say that “uncovering nakedness” is an idiom for sexual intercourse but that doesn’t make the idiom disappear, as if the text could be transubstantiated. There is a reason why the LORD said it the way that he did.
Unfortunately, we live in a society of Ham’s, who like TSA officials, are happy to inspect the flesh of their fathers, mothers, brothers, and sisters from a remote location with the click of a mouse and a small credit card fee. Because we haven’t been able to fight off pornography in the church, we shouldn’t be surprised at pornography at the airport I suppose.
So, what I want to push you on is this: are the TSA scanners a violation of the 7th commandment? If so, the objection must be much stronger than a personal distaste at the invasion of privacy or the danger of radiation; the objection must be that it impinges on the holiness of God.
Tim said, “What’s particularly interesting to me as I think about the whole situation is the TSA’s reliance on high-tech solutions to this problem. As I wrote a book about technology (look for it on April 1, 2011) I noted that humans are prone to idolize technology, to put our trust in it, to believe that it is the first and best place to go when dealing with our problems. And ironically, this is especially true when it comes to problems caused by other technology.”
A great example of this is from the movie/DVD Food Inc., which I recently watched via Netflix. One of the most vivid examples of Tim’s statement from the movie is when it stated that one of the problems caused by infusing “technology” into the food system is when the multi-national corporations that control our food system decided to start feeding corn to cows (instead of grass), one of the negative results of which is that corn in the cow’s digestive system causes E. coli to grow which then infects the resulting meat product. Rather than using a low-tech solution of simply allowing the cows to eat grass for just 15 days (which would kill 80% of the E. coli), the multi-national corporations decided to use technology instead and add yet another level of unhealthiness to our food supply by “cleaning” the meat with ammonia! It’s simply too incredible to believe!
It’s just another bad result of our worldview of pragmatism and our worship of science & technology - rather than living our lives based on a biblical worldview and worshiping the One, True God!
I also like what Tim said about how Israel seems to still believe in at least some of what the Bible teaches about mankind. How they are looking at the people (and attempting to determine what is in their hearts) rather than to the objects.
Good stuff, Tim! Thanks!
If you really want to get away from trusting technology, ground the planes! We’d all be a lot safer and people who are in such a hurry to get from place to place would quit whining about their privacy.
TSA checks have become legislated molestation.
This whole situation reminds me of the experiment in the aftermath of World War 2, trying to analyze why so many Nazi soldiers “obeyed orders” when those orders involved such monstrous wickedness. People were told they would be administering mild electric shocks to a person behind a screen by pushing a button. They were told they had to complete the entire series of button pushes, no matter what they heard behind the screen. As the button pushes increased, the person behind the screen began to cry out in pain. If the person doing the experiment began to hesitate out of sympathy, a supervisor would remind them they had agreed to complete the experiment and they could not stop.
Everyone complied, even when they heard screams of pain. (There was no actual person being tortured, of course.)
We are being told that if we want to travel quickly, or travel overseas, we must permit strangers to either see us naked, or grope us in public,.
It’s legislated, mandated molestation.
Funny you should make a post discussing this. Just yesterday Voddie Baucham posted on his facebook account a video of a man refusing the full body scan.
Pretty interesting stuff.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UqM56e-kRA
Yes, TSA is between a rock and a hard place. I began my airline career in the 60s at a medium-size airport in the south. When Arafat and his crew began the skyjackings, US airlines were told to start screening passengers. For what seemed an eternity, it was up to the airline personnel to man the checkpoints and do the searches. Every public contact employee did his tour of duty. I remember dreading going to work, asking the questions, examining tickets and luggage when the passenger fit the profile (yep). Back then all we had were the wands, no pass-through detecters, no xray machines for luggage. Oh happy day when the feds decided to attach a transportation tax and hire the security.
Israel is different because their very survival depends on being different. They admit to being at war. The US won’t make the same admission.
I think that profiling might be part of the answer, but not all of the answer. The problem is that people really are fairly bad judges of what is going on around them. When you allow profiling arrests of people, those that are suspected are arrested at a higher rate compared to an area that does not allow profiling. It may be that more people are being caught, but it may be that the profilers are just seeing what they want to see and arresting people that seem like they might be trouble.
By US government reports about 2/3 of those arrested and detained (and at least some of them tortured) at Guantanamo were found to not have been arrested for any credible reason, but once they were in detention it is very difficult to admit we were wrong and let them go, in part because of how we treated them when they were in custody.
The other issue is that almost everyone seems to think we really need this type of security, but it is very expensive and at this point, it seems completely ineffective. These same funds and effort have an opportunity cost. The increased cost and effort will cause some to drive, a much more dangerous activity. Children in particular are much more likely to die in a car than any other activity. So if we save one plane from a bombing, how can we be sure that an equivalent number of additional people did not die in car accidents because they chose not to fly because of the increased cost and hassle.
Very interesting perspective. I think our education system in the US is probably the biggest reason why we are so enamored with technology. We’ve reached a point of lowest denominator here so that no one could reasonably be expected to read character at the pay of a TSA agent. America is fast becoming the land of give me the most for doing the least. Our culture seems to thrive on the lack of personal accountability to the point of denying anyone’s right to hold an expectation of performance from us. No one is willing to work, yet everyone wants it all easy.
The same mentality is why we as a group have the hatred toward the TSA procedures. Personally, if my being inconvenienced for a few minutes means a better chance of innocent lives being spared, I’m OK with that.
Wes,I have a lot of friends who did all sorts of stupid things after watching that movie.
Here is the truth:http://www.safefoodinc.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=…
I’m with you on this one, Tim. Maybe if we were squeezed (no pun intended) in only one area; long lines, lack of service, etc. we might go along. At this point, we’re talking about waiting in long lines, being groped or viewed disrobed, and then waiting for hours at a time for a plane which may or may not take off and deliver us where we had planned. Add to that all of the nickel and dime charges, the poor service on the plane, and lost luggage when you land? More people are opting out.
As someone who had “elite” status on 3 major airlines, I don’t fly now unless it’s an overnight across the country. And as a family, we enjoy the time spent together driving.
Sorry airlines, you lost me.
Here is one solution:
Abolish the TSA. It’s an over-reactive and expansive waste of money. Let each airline be in charge of security themselves. After all, they are the ones with the real skin in the game. The airlines have a more intense interest in keeping their flights safe than does the federal government. The airlines would take a much more serious hit from any terrorist attack than the government would. Besides … how many instances can you think of where the government does a better job at something than does the private sector?
I am with Chad. Let the free market determine things.
If you want total pat downs and cavity searches for all boarding, pick the airlines who do that. If you want to take your chances and be left alone, do that. If you want to fly on an airline that allows you to fly armed, do that. If you want to have old-fashioned security checks without the virtual nudity and virtual molestation, do that. Or choose an airline that profiles. All those that fit the profile will probably avoid that one.
Then see which airlines can operate profitably. Let the consumer decide.
I would also like your opinion, Tim, if you were to have your wife or daughters traveling with you. Would you go for the scan or the pat down for them? I don’t know what I would do. It is one thing to decide to allow for yourself to be groped like that. But your wife? Your kids?
I don’t mean to monopolize the comments, so this is my last one, but why not have armed guards on each plane? Would that not be cheaper, more effective, less invasive, and a huge time saver?
What am I missing here?
This whole “be prepared for your genitalia to be seen or groped in order to fly” thing strikes me perversely as an attempt to work a form of “profiling” into a court-proof methodology. After all, it means only the modest are forbidden to fly on the basis of their refusal. Which singles out mostly religious folk: Islamic women, conservative Jewish women (and maybe men), and Christian men and women (I would hope). I expect many older folk will decline to fly as well.
I am not sure it will help with Islamic men of the suicide terrorist variety, however. As attested by the 9/11 group, they seem to be rather cavalier about the Muslim moral code when heaven inevitably awaits them on the other side of the “boom”.
[revised from my similar posting on Blog & Mablog]
So, what I want to push you on is this: are the TSA scanners a violation of the 7th commandment? If so, the objection must be much stronger than a personal distaste at the invasion of privacy or the danger of radiation; the objection must be that it impinges on the holiness of God.
Well, technically speaking, the scanners see beneath the skin, so it’s more flesh than skin they’re seeing. It’s nakedness, I guess, but it’s something more than that almost. I don’t know that the 7th commandment really applies here. If we apply it here, don’t we have to apply it to the doctor as well?
I would also like your opinion, Tim, if you were to have your wife or daughters traveling with you. Would you go for the scan or the pat down for them? I don't know what I would do. It is one thing to decide to allow for yourself to be groped like that. But your wife? Your kids?
That’s a really tough question. My wife would make up her mind on her own, though I’m guessing a patdown by a female TSA agent wouldn’t bother her anymore than it bothers the rest of us (which is to say that she wouldn’t feel molested). As for the kids, I really don’t know. I’m glad I’m not flying with them in the near future.
Chad, sorry, but I can’t agree with you on this. It’s not the airlines job to protect themselves other than normal safeguards that any business should reasonably be expected to provide. And I can think of one thing the government does better than the private sector: national defense. That’s essentially what we’re talking about here.
Interesting article by Doug Wilson on the Third Ammendment and TSA scanners.
http://www.dougwils.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=817…
My husband, son, daughter-in-law, grandson’s fiancee and myself will be flying soon to be with our grandson when he graduates from basic training in the US Air Force. It makes me so happy to read of the changes in the pre-flight check in we will have to undergo to get on the airplane! I who hate flying and feel that I have to hold my breath, hold the seat until my hands are white from lack of circulation can hardly wait for this temporary inconvience! Every night on the news there are updates on the current status of the scanners, new law suits, etc….. oh joy! I agree with Marie’s thought.
Right, Liz! Those people who travel on business should go by donkey cart, as I’m sure you do when you go out to get the family groceries. And those whiners who find the scanners a violation of their modesty should just get over themselves. And survivors of sexual assault, who find the new procedures an intolerable reminder of the violations they’ve endured in the past, well, they don’t have to fly, do they? Let them all eat cake.
And what does the Lord require of you? Act justly and do mercy, and walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
Nice quote: “walk humbly.” Yes. Don’t fly.
I agree with everything in this entry, Tim. Every word.
And although I don’t have any kids, I am getting married soon and my wife-to-be and I will be flying quite a bit over the next 6 months. It’s frustrating to think she may have to go through this. Thank God I don’t have children! I can not imagine having to decide what’s worse: having my child molested or having them possibly being exposed to unhealthy radiation!
The problem with the scanners is they cannot view inside body cavities. What’s next?
Tim,
Very interesting. I posted something about the whole flap yesterday. To me it is disturbing that political correctness trumps a process like the one utilized by the Israelis which works very well and isn’t invasive. I felt more comfortable travelling to Israel a few years ago then into Washington National a few weeks ago. Strange days indeed.