Comic Artist Detained For Script Containing 9/11 Type Scenarios 441
Comics writer Mark Sable was detained by security at Los Angeles International Airport because he was carrying a script for a new issue of his comic miniseries, Unthinkable. Unthinkable follows members of a government think tank that was tasked with coming up with 9/11-type "unthinkable" terrorist scenarios that now are coming true. Sable wrote about his experience saying, "...I was flagged at the gate for 'extra screening.' I was subjected to not one, but two invasive searches of my person and belongings. TSA agents then 'discovered' the script for Unthinkable #3. They sat and read the script while I stood there, without any personal items, identification or ticket, which had all been confiscated. The minute I saw the faces of the agents, I knew I was in trouble. The first page of the Unthinkable script mentioned 9/11, terror plots, and the fact that the (fictional) world had become a police state. The TSA agents then proceeded to interrogate me, having a hard time understanding that a comic book could be about anything other than superheroes, let alone that anyone actually wrote scripts for comics. I cooperated politely and tried to explain to them the irony of the situation. While Unthinkable blurs the line between fiction and reality, the story is based on a real-life government think tank where a writer was tasked to design worst-case terror scenarios. The fictional story of Unthinkable unfolds when the writer's scenarios come true, and he becomes a suspect in the terrorist attacks." It's too bad that the TSA can't protect us from summer blockbuster movies and not just graphic novels.
Proof please. (Score:5, Insightful)
Any proof that he was detained and that this happened? Otherwise I'm tempted to believe that it is a stunt to advertise his comic.
Watch Closet Land (Score:4, Insightful)
The 1991 movie "Closet Land", starring Madeleine Stowe and Alan Rickman paints a horrifying picture of just how far a government might go in tracking literary "subversives". Sounds like mr. comic book writer is a lot more "at risk" than the childrens' book author in this movie.
I Can See It... (Score:3, Insightful)
I can see the grossly under-paid TSA Employees thinking: "Yay! We got one! We got a terrorist!" Too bad they don't go to school to learn the difference between Art and Terror Plans!
Re:Proof please. (Score:4, Insightful)
Even if false, what does that say about society today if this is even believable.
Re:it is sad.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:it is sad.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Slashvertisement (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:it is sad.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Describing something that somebody has a perfect right to do as "asking for it" makes you a sniveling authoritarian bootlicker and a complicit bystander to abuse of authority.
Re:Proof please. (Score:5, Insightful)
That we have mob mentality? That isn't just today, that has been the case since we learned to use tools.
Re:it is sad.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Who in their right mind would assume that securing an airplane would require reading a passenger's private documents?
He was asking for it. No.. he was begging.
The only people begging for it are the submissive right-wingers who worship authority.
Re:That the guy's an idiot? (Score:5, Insightful)
Unless there's a way to blow up the aircraft with said papers their content shouldn't matter.
Now if you were packing C4 and detonators you should probably be checked out. But plain old information? Without acting on it, information is basically harmless.
Re:He forgot the most important part (Score:5, Insightful)
But he wasn't just stopped.
I get stopped all the time, it's annoying, but not a big deal.
They not only stopped him, but then read his personal papers, and held him while they questioned him about them.
Papers are not bombs, or weapons. You cannot hijack an airplane with a script, whether it's for a comic book or a movie, or just a pure fantasy scenario you wrote for yourself to pass the time.
As such, TSA has absolutely no business, no right, and no authority to read them.
The fact that their employees are so badly trained that they actually believe they have this authority, and the fact that the average citizen is so badly informed that they believe it also, is just scary.
The irony that the papers they were reading were a fictional account of a government agency grabbing more authority than they should have is just the funny part of it all.
Re:Proof please. (Score:4, Insightful)
My experience as a foreign national living and working legally in the US and traveling across the Atlantic somewhat frequently, is that the TSA agents are high school dropouts at best and totally idiots. The level of intelligence is so low that they have problems grasping the most rudimentary issues ecplained to them.
This is exactly what you get when you have decided that the work they are doing is not worth more than minimum wage.
Re:Proof please. (Score:1, Insightful)
Is this tongue-in-cheek, or are you serious? I am pretty sure your post is 100% factual, regardless of whether or not you meant it to be.
Re:Proof please. (Score:5, Insightful)
Any proof that he was detained and that this happened? Otherwise I'm tempted to believe that it is a stunt to advertise his comic.
I'm tempted to believe that you believe that the President wasn't actually born in Hawaii.
Ok, I'll bite. The answer is no in the case of Obama's citizenship, because they presented reasonable evidence that they had looked into it and presented valid documents. If I wanted to be a conspiracy theorist I might start saying things like "But those documents might have been fake, false testimony" blah blah blah. But because I'm not willing to investigate the matter myself, I have to take what is presented at face value and its a waste of ones time to think about it any more if you're not going to look into it yourself.
This article however has no investigative journalism to it. No visible attempt was made to contact the TSA for their comment on the matter and it only appears that they listened to what Mark Sable had to say about it and wrote an article based on only that. This is why good journalism is important and why blogs can be bad at times. After reading the article Slashdot linked too, I did a search on news.google.com for Mark Sable and couldn't find much else about it other than the same story. This makes me skeptical about whether it actually happened and thus my initial inquiry.
And since things like this have happened many times before (PR stunts), proof needs to be asked for.
Re:We finally figured out step 2 (Score:1, Insightful)
Step 2) CLAIM to get detained by TSA, spread story over /.
Fixed that for you.
Maybe, Maybe not... (Score:5, Insightful)
So far, the larger part of the comments here have dealt with the fact that this might be a scam.
IMHO, it's probably not. If you've heard some of the stupid shit from cops and other government bureaus that I have, this is right up their alley. Remember - these guys by and large aren't really trying to do the job they say they're out to do. And they're nowhere near as competent and knowledgeable as they imagine they are. I've been told before that the fact that the devil chicks I have tattooed on my forearms have some meaning in these exact words : "Don't think we don't know what those horns mean! We're not stupid!". Uh, yes, you are. They're devil chicks. What, you expect them to be wearing garland wreaths on their heads? Get real. There is no hidden meaning behind that, and I know what most gang and prison-related tattoos in Texas mean.
If you're a chickenhawk bureaucrat on a power trip, who are you likely to pick out as a target? A comic book artist? Or someone who does have actual ties to known and dangerous terrorist organizations? Let me repeat that, just in case you missed it : known and dangerous. Despite all the spoon-fed drivel that gets funnelled straight into your living room, courtesy of your brand-new digital TV, these guys are bureaucrats. They don't want to break a sweat, let alone get their asses shot off or some other form of retaliation. They're not heroes, except the extremely rare exception (think about it - you hear ten times as many stories about cops shooting unarmed civilians as you do an armed civilian shooting a cop...yet the cop is always painted as the "hero who died in the line of duty"; generally through their own stupidity, like not searching someone they just antagonized and arrested...now if the supposedly unbiased news puts those figures forth, what do you think the real numbers are?). They don't go out of their way or risk their lives to protect citizens. They don't do anything other than collect their check, do as little as possible, and then go home to fuck their middle-class fat-arsed wives and scream at their subnormal children. If they can skip out on doing their "duty" for a few hours by harassing some artist whom they had to have known has no affiliation or even a tenuous connection within an hour, you bet your bottom dollar they will be doing just that for as long as they can.
And a cavity search? Oh, I'd love to see those fuckers try that one of me. You ain't getting my clothes off unless you've already arrested me and have me full restraints (which makes it pretty hard to get someone's clothes off without cutting them off). Because I can and will fight, and there's only so many people that can gang up on one man, and that is not enough to get my clothes off me without beating me unconscious, which is pretty hard to do. Oh, sure, I'll get some kind of charge slapped on me. But you know what - it's not resisting arrest or assault if there's nothing to arrest you for!
You, as a society, have become sheep. And you have chosen wolves to protect you. Is it any wonder that the herd gets culled by their so-called guardians quite often? Here's Tom with the weather...
Re:Proof please. (Score:2, Insightful)
You mean all riots that occurred when London installed cameras everywhere? Oh wait...
Re:Proof please. (Score:2, Insightful)
AWWWSNAP!
(Hello. I'm an American. I'm wound up like a steel spring, ready to snap and give away all my freedoms. Oh wait, no, no I'm not. God I hate generalizations)
Re:He forgot the most important part (Score:4, Insightful)
No, the irony is that the steps the author took to make sure he got one of the more close inspections of his gear so that he could have this anecdote to publish while getting dupes like you to believe that this is something other than a publicity stunt... the irony is that despite the sophomoric transparency of the whole thing, you fell for it.
Re:Proof please. (Score:5, Insightful)
Hi. I'm not a historian, but I studied to be one.
Things like Guantanamo Bay, the Iraq War, this TSA bullshit and countless others simply do not happen in other countries.
You are wrong, mind-numbingly, disturbingly, incomprehensibly wrong. It's as though you just commented in all seriousness that the sun and the moon are the same thing. Not only are you wrong now, but you are wrong in the past and almost certainly the future. You are wrong on so throughly, so completely, that whenever I try to write a cohesive rebuttal my mind falls dizzyingly lurches into a dark chasm where the word "What?" echoes endlessly into the void.
The fact that you have been modded +5 insightful is a thought too painful to bear. I think I need to go lie down.
Re:it is sad.. (Score:4, Insightful)
While it is sad that he'd have been forced to go through the humiliation and embarassment of being questioned/searched/etc.. but honestly.. who in their right mind would carry something like a terror script through airport screening? Comic book, hell.. it could've been a movie script and he would've received the same response.
In short: He was asking for it. No.. he was begging.
While it is sad that she'd have been forced to go through the humiliation and embarassment of being raped/beaten/etc.. but honestly.. who in their right mind would wear something like a mini skirt to a frat party? Skirt, hell.. it could've been a tight blouse and she would've received the same response.
In short: She was asking for it. No.. she was begging.
Re:Proof please. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you are completely and utterly wrong. Just about every other country has this sort of thing happening, some are better than the US but some are worse.
The Brits has to fight an uphill battle when they tried to curtail freedoms. In America, the population was crying out for more oppression.
That is so incorrect as to be offensive. The Brits are notorious for rolling over and taking the most ludicrous government interference in their daily lives. Look at the absurd surveillance they've built up over there, or the DNA database, or the ID cards. The British are far more likely collectively to let their elected officials do whatever the hell they want.
In America, the population was crying out for more oppression.
Wrong. From the beginning a huge chunk of Americans have been fighting against civil rights abuses. You are insulting the millions of people who demonstrated against the last government, the hundreds of lawyers who have fought against the Guantanamo detentions unpaid as well as the Patriot Act, the people who were willingly thrown in jail (even some elected officials) during protests. You're forgetting the fact that the current American president was elected on a platform of restoring civil liberties.
But typical British smug superiority; maybe you should look around your own culture before you start pontificating, shouldn't be too hard considering all the cameras.
Hell, the UK is the only place I ever heard of where those wrongfully imprisoned are then forced to reimburse the government for the cost of their imprisonment.
Re:Proof please. (Score:3, Insightful)
Hahahahahaha -cough- hahahahahahaha!!!! Hee! ...
Oh, wait, you were serious?!
Re:Proof please. (Score:3, Insightful)
Unless, of course, we're talking about Paedophiles. Then, mob mentality is obviously the weapon of choice for any sane society, right? Twat.
Re:Proof please. (Score:3, Insightful)
You know, both Guantanamo and the Iraq War basically took place in other countries.
Re:Proof please. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:ignorance of your own rights (Score:5, Insightful)
Let me flesh out that scenario for you.
Next time, maybe a better approach would be (disclaimer, IANAL): "Am I being detained?"
TSA: Yes. Duh.
followed by "I'd like you to tell me what laws you are accusing me of breaking"
Conspiracy to commit murder, conspiracy to destroy buildings and property, conspiracy to commit jaywalking, conspiracy to....
"I won't make any statements until I have spoken to a lawyer"
TSA: Cool with us.
(long wait)
(optional: arrest on above charges, booking, transfer to jail)
(Lawyer arrives)
TSA: Okay, having conferred with your lawyer, we're dropping the charges. Have a nice day.
Lawyer (to dude): Okay, where do I send my bill?
----
Seriously, what would that have accomplished? Not that he accomplished anything anyway. The point is, justice and due process of law are slow and inconvenient.
No policy is likely to be changed as a result of this incident; law-abiding citizens are still going to be stopped in airports for carrying 'strange' books, scripts, magazines, etc. All this shows is that TSA agents can act in an arbitrary manner with repercussions.
Yup. We knew that already.
Re:So what's the story here? (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is with : They found a script. They read it.
As far as I know, no airplane has ever been destroyed by a script. Whatever was written on those pages falls under the "IT'S NONE OF YOUR% FUCKING BUSINESS" category. If you don't believe that, then you need to relearn what a "free society" is all about.
Re:Proof please. (Score:4, Insightful)
The ironic thing is the anti-American flavor of liberals like the GP can be just as Americentric as the neo-conservatives they hate.
Everyone should study some history and periodically keep in touch with world news so they can keep things in perspective.
Re:Proof please. (Score:5, Insightful)
Look at the absurd surveillance they've built up over there,
I hope you're not still basing this on the debunked article in a right-wing tabloid that counted traffic cameras and private security cameras on a major london street, divided this number by the length of the street, multiplied it by the total road length in the UK and published this as the total number of government security cameras in the UK. Getting news about the UK from publications like the Daily Mail is like getting news about the USA from Fox News. It may contain some facts, but it's so distorted to push an agenda that it's far from representative.
For the record, there are no government-controlled cameras anywhere near where I live. There are a few private ones in local shops that get a small view of the road outside. If you go out of town a bit, you will find traffic monitoring cameras on the motorway. If you go in to town, you will find some security cameras in the centre areas. If you walk around a typical American city, you will see security cameras in similar places.
or the DNA database
The one that doesn't exist, and which is currently massively over-budget and looking like it won't be completed? The one which now has been subject of extensive campaigning from civil rights groups and now has very few supporters in government?
or the ID cards
You mean the planned ID cards? The ID cards which were subject to extensive campaigning from groups like No2ID and have since been dropped as too expensive and not actually useful?
Re:Proof please. (Score:5, Insightful)
During both terms President Bush's ( a Republican ) Presidency, the Democrats loudly demanded that the PATRIOT Act be scaled back or repealed.
Re:Maybe, Maybe not... (Score:4, Insightful)
>>it's not resisting arrest or assault if there's nothing to arrest you for!
Oh ho ho, Get back to us when you try that trick! Every level of our judicial system has upheld nearly every "unreasonable" search. To most of our judges, there is no such thing as 'unreasonable search'. If someone wants to search you, that's their reason right there.
I don't like it, I don't agree with it, but I'd prefer a lawyer fight my legal battles for me rather than getting into a physical fight with taser-and-mace-armed thugs.
If you've ever been tazed or maced, raise your hand. OK, now keep them up if you want to try it again.
-b
Re:ignorance of your own rights (Score:5, Insightful)
He was detained by the TSA, not the police.
The worst the TSA will ever do to you is call the actual police. The second worst is attempt to confiscate your belongings. The third - and the one most innocent travelers are most wary of - is they'll prevent you from boarding your flight.
For people falling into that third scenario you aren't arguing just against being detained. You don't want to wait for a lawyer, and you don't want to escalate the issue to them calling the police over. You're trying to get through TSA screening as quickly as possible so you can make your flight.
I've flown on average once a month for the past six years, and have been detained in a back room half a dozen times myself. The first time it happened I treated it like a police encounter ("No sir, I'm not aware," "am I being detained, or am I free to go?" "I don't have anything to say without my lawyer present."). I ended up missing my flight, missing a job interview, wasting a few hours in a security checkpoint waiting room, and getting nothing back in return - even with my lawyer's involvement.
Since then I've just played nice. I'm more interested in getting to my destination than being a martyr. It's one of those "You'd be right, but you'd still lose" scenarios.
Re:Proof please. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Proof please. (Score:2, Insightful)
what does is say about *the united states* if I may correct...
unfortunately, this state of paranoia has spread abroad in many countries as well.
Getting a whole country paranoid is really quick, getting the paranoia out may take years...
Re:In fairness... (Score:5, Insightful)
With all due respect, but if a given piece of paper ALONE allows a person to blow up a plane, then you are way more screwed than you think.
There is NO document alone that could describe such a situation, and if you COULD find such a simple document that provided such a disproportionate ability (all by itself) of blowing up a plane.
Even if the document described how to build a bomb using items you're likely to find on-board the plane itself, I'd be very surprised if:
1) a would be terrorist couldn't simply memorize it (they aren't necessarily DUMB, just committed to a cause)
2) you couldn't just drop the document into a file on a netbook for ~$200 (it can even run linux, so he gets the most "bang for his buck").
Okay, now according to you, no one should be allowed to board a plane until the contents of every electronic device they carry is scrutinized to make sure it doesn't contain this mythical "How to blow up a plane in 5 easy steps" document.
If there is a piece of the plane THAT sensitive, it should be secured (see: Cockpit).
If there is an item that bringing onboard would be that dangerous, then the item should be banned/controlled (see: Explosives).
There is little that ANY document can do by itself.
Re:He forgot the most important part (Score:3, Insightful)
No, the irony is that the steps the author took to make sure he got one of the more close inspections of his gear so that he could have this anecdote to publish while getting dupes like you to believe that this is something other than a publicity stunt... the irony is that despite the sophomoric transparency of the whole thing, you fell for it.
To an extent, I agree with you. However, the problem remains that we live in a society where this kind of thing could happen. The bottom line is that TSA should not have had to read through his papers to ascertain that he was not a threat (nor should they have a right to). They very fact that there was a stunt to pull off is indicative of a problem with our society's acceptance of what rights authority has in our personal lives.
Re:Proof please. (Score:3, Insightful)
Apparently pointing out poor word choice in trolls counts as insightful.
Re:Proof please. (Score:3, Insightful)
Bear in mind that the Constitution ONLY applies to the US Government. The people running the security at airports are all contractors, outside corporations, and therefore not Government.
Wow, someone sure wasn't paying attention when the TSA was created by nationalizing the formerly private airport security screeners, and rapidly became far more of a pain in the ass than the old ones ever were.
This actually IS something of a police state... (Score:3, Insightful)
... when employees of the TSA are allowed to be so completely full of themselves and their imagined importance that abuses like this routinely happen. There's nothing more malicious and mean-spirited than the BOTTOM RUNG of an authoritarian regime (like the TSA): the people on that lowest rung act out that authoritarian schtick in the worst possible way with people who are, if not completely innocent, certainly not deserving of the abuse of power.
What exactly will be the consequences of this abuse of power for the TSA employees involved? You already know the answer, don't you? NOTHING. No consequences at all... unless it becomes a huge public scandal and scapegoats must be habeas-corpused. That's a key tenet of a police state: the authorities and enforcers are not held to the same standards of behavior as those they are tasked to judge. We see the same thing in the corporate world as well in many cases.
So yeah, this really is the early stages of a police state. What are we gonna DO about it? Hint: electing a smooth talker like Obama isn't doing something about it.
Re:ignorance of your own rights (Score:3, Insightful)
and frankly, suspicion of the crimes you listed simply because you're carrying some sort of manuscript is unlikely to be recognized reasonable
And that is where I think you are being naive.
You would have to prove that the TSA agent was deliberately trying to set you up, and not merely an idiotic bureaucrat. And that is an insanely difficult thing to prove (unless you happen to have a recording of him in the airport lounge joking about how he likes to screw with people for the fun of it. )
Re:Proof please. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Reichstag Fire Vs 9/11 (Score:4, Insightful)
Again though, context is everything. I'll agree they were murdered in the sense that they shouldn't have been there and that the Nazis showed a horrifying lack of regard for the prisoners, but the greatest actual cause of death for prisoners at Dachau was disease, neglect and mistreatment, not bullets or poison.
I think the greater point is that Guantanamo, like Dachau, is a place where you put people whom you'd like to disappear, and who have little or no recourse or rights. If these people are guilty of a crime, put them on trial in the full light of day. Don't just say that they're in Guantanamo because they're guilty and the proof that they're guilty is that they're in Guantanamo. If we're going to hold prisoners, wherever we do it we should be living up to our own standards, not shopping around for a piece of ground that's outside our boarders so we can say that our rules don't apply. That's an end-run around the ideals that we fight for, and it cheapens those ideals when we disregard them as inconvenient.
I'd rather not have the best things that can be said about a U.S. operation is that at least it's smaller and more sanitary than a Nazi concentration camp. We're better than that.