Slashdot Mirror
Comic Artist Detained For Script Containing 9/11 Type Scenarios
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.
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.
Never try to explain an authority the "irony of the situation". Chances are they will lack the intellect to understand.
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.
Step 1) Make graphic novel mentioning 9/11 /.
Step 2) Get detained by TSA, spread story over
Step 3) Profit!
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!
"I think you know what I'm talkin' about, Mr. President; We're gonna kill us a mummy!" - Bruce Campbell as Elvis Presley
Submitting to authority does not protect you from them.
When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.
That is bullshit. Why shouldn't he be allowed to carry his script with him into the airplane? Maybe he was going to a meeting about it or something. The TSA are nothing more than airport bullies, all part of the security theatre. They won't actually make you safer, they'll just make your lives a living hell, and worst of all, we let them. Your response is typical and just shows how passive the American people have become. We let these people take away our liberties, and we keep giving them more power, and eventually the USA will be a Police State. You're well on your way to helping make that happen.
This is just insulting how thinly veiled it is.
When doing something you have a perfect right to do is "asking for it" something is very wrong.
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.
It's too bad that the TSA can't protect us from summer blockbuster movies and not just graphic novels.
Personally I think they should stop Michael Bay from boarding any plane after seeing how disturbingly obsessed the man is with explosions.
My work here is dung.
From wikipedia:
Welcome to the era of Thought Crime.
Thinking about it is a crime.
Writing about it is a crime.
Drawing about it is a crime.
Last I check wasn't DOING a crime... well.. a crime?
Next thing you know Jessica Lansbury and company will be held and charged for all those terroristic threats and murder plans called "Murder She Wrote". They were so detailed! Lets not forget the Matlock, Columbo, Perry Mason, CSI, etc... All those murder plans!!! GET EM!!
"When is a man damned? When he is oblivious to it."
-=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
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.
"I cooperated politely and tried to explain to them the irony of the situation." Mr. Sable's ignorance or willful abdication of his 5th amendment rights caused him to perhaps waste a great opportunity to challenge TSA policies on search of personal belongings. Next time, maybe a better approach would be (disclaimer, IANAL): "Am I being detained?" followed by "I'd like you to tell me what laws you are accusing me of breaking," or "I won't make any statements until I have spoken to a lawyer," as the case may be. If Mr. Sable had actually been prosecuted simply for having exercised his 1st amendment rights, his case would have had a much more significant impact in our fear-prone society, causing perhaps some much needed "clarification" of what the federal government can/cannot do "for our own good" to "protect us from the evil terrorists." Perhaps even a re-evaluation of TSA policies, or at least application of punishment to over-zealous agents.
"The minute I saw the faces of the agents, I knew I was in trouble." You're not in trouble just because a government employee says so (or looks at you funny). We do have a bill of rights, you know.
From TFA: "In the end, I feel my privacy is a small price to pay for educating the government about the medium." No one of any importance was "educated." 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.
well yeah, because it's perfectly reasonable that a search for drugs, weapons, and explosives would include reading through business papers. seriously, did they think this guys journal pages were laced with ricin? just what would be the justification for needing to read through my notebook before letting me on a plane?
do not read this line twice.
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.
If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
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...
PC moderators can suck my White pierced, tattooed dick. If you think pride == hate, s/dick/Aryan meat mallet/g.
Jessica Fletcher was played by Angela Lansbury.
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.
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.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Economist Steven Levitt also had an interesting story of how he almost got arrested because he bought a last min one-way flight, and that he carried research paper on terrorist activities:
I almost got sent to Guantanamo
By Steven D. Levitt
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2005/07/14/i-almost-got-sent-to-guantanamo/
Well, if I recall correctly, Explosive Runes is only a second level spell...
If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
Would require TSA agents to be literate.
You're missing the train of thought the TSA employee went through.
1) The was information.
2) Information is Knowledge.
3) Knowledge is Power.
4) Power Corrupts.
5) Power is dangerous to a Plane in operation (it could blow up the fuel tank).
6) Corruption is dangerous to a Plane in operation (it could cause a wing to fall off or the fuselage to break apart).
7) Information is therefore dangerous to a Plane in operation since it is both Power and Corrupting.
QED This so called "Writer" was attempting to smuggle a WMD onto a plane and should be treated accordingly.
~
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
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.
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
Keep in mind that these are the same folks that tried to take away a Congressional Medal of Honor 'cause its sharp and pointy...
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
... he had not started to write (and therefore would have been carrying around) his new comic story about a trio of bumbling TSA agents that are always screwing up everything.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
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.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
The book was 'Debt of Honor' by Tom Clancy, in case anyone is interested. The event also factors heavily into the sequel, 'Executive Orders'.
I was once one of those people who had exceptionally broad rights to conduct searches. As a military officer, I could, in theory, have searched a whole barracks full of the personal effects of a whole company of enlisted soldiers for a single stolen item. But before they would have turned me loose to do that, even as a raw Lieutenant, the government made it very clear that there was paperwork that had to be kept on record, documenting the steps of the search AND what other steps were taken to solve the crime before command decided a search was necessary. They made it clear that I had to deliver a Miranda warning (and the military form of the Miranda actually explains more rights than the Civil form.). They made it clear that the decision to authorize a search was limited to command personnel and not staff officers/staff NCOs, and why.
If I was supposed to be searching for a stolen boom-box, I had to have a good description, and not search inside anything too small to hold that boom-box. Even if I thought I smelled dope (and I've been to a controlled burn and can claim legally to know what Pot smells like), I couldn't act on it (beyond mentioning the scent to the owner of that gear, as in "Smells like pot - I hope you wouldn't mess with that stuff. - You know it's illegal and they can throw you out of the Army if you do - oh well, I'm just here to look for a boom-box.).
If I could be held to that standard 20 years ago, when dealing with people who had agreed to give up some of their rights as a condition of enlistment, and to be bound by a special set of laws (The Uniform Code of Military Justice), I have to wonder why on Earth the US citizenry allows the present situation.
Who is John Cabal?
It's called the Constitution. Maybe you should read it some time.
Start with the 4th Amendment
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Visit the Arcade Restoration Workshop @ http://www.arcaderestoration.com
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.
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
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.
... 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.
That guy's name is Steve Bierfeldt, and he is suing TSA with the help of the ACLU. A synopsis from CNN (posted by Steve himself) can be found here.
Steve is in a much better position because he has the recording of the incident. This guy probably won't be able to get very far, if indeed this is more than a publicity stunt.
Your brain is not a computer.
The Reichstag fire occurred in a Germany that had seen years of continuous street battles, protests and political fracas between communist and fascist militias. Moreover, the Nazi's had preached for years about remaking Germany in a new fascist image. Top top it off, the crackdown following the fire was blunt and direct, and it would take the Nazi's years of gradual legislation to remould Germany completely.
By contrast, after September 11th, it took the US less than a month to invade another country. Within two months, the sweeping PATRIOT Act did more and lasting damage to US freedoms than any Reichstag decree. It took the Nazi's two months to open the Dachau concentration camp, but it only took the US 27 days to open Guantanamo.
The Reichstag fire took place in a time of political upheaval, economic depression, civil anarchy and with Germany utterly downtrodden after defeat in the first World War. September 11th took place in a climate of stable government, favorable economic climate, domestic calm and with the US in a historically unprecendented position of unipolar, worldwide supremacy. Yet the reaction of the US was faster, harsher and wider in scope than any of the early day Nazi crackdowns.
I stand by my point. Americans are tightly wound, and have and will embrace a mob mentality with a swiftness and zeal that is rarely, if ever, seen in other nations. Americans will of course be the first to deny this, but the irony is that their fervent belief in innate American freedom is exactly what has lead to their great complacency in the face of encroaching tyranny.
May the Maths Be with you!