Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

I No Longer Understand My Country
Lew Rockwell.com ^ | Nov. 1, 2002 | Jeff Snyder

Posted on 11/1/2002, 10:08:15 PM by Liberty Ship

I No Longer Understand My Country

by Jeff Snyder

On October 30, Eliane Yvonne Marcele Aguillaume, 56, of Paris, was arrested in the Evansville, Indiana, Regional Airport on charges of disorderly conduct at an airport, public indecency and resisting law enforcement after she stripped to the waist in response to a security screener’s attempt to search her with a wand. Mme. Aguillaume had visited southwest Indiana to attend her nephew’s wedding, and was on her way home. According to the AP news report of this incident:

"During a routine security screening, authorities say Aguillaume kept reaching inside her sweater forcing guards to search her again."

"Aguillaume then became upset and allegedly removed her sweater, shirt and bra. Police said Aguillaume tried to pull away as an officer attempted to handcuff her. She later dropped to the ground and refused to get up."

The language used is telling. Note, first, that Mme. Aguillaume has ceased to merit politeness or respect: no Mme., she has simply become Aguillaume. Yes, let’s forget that she is a 56 year old woman for surely that has nothing to do with anything.

Even more revealing, though, is the statement, "authorities say Aguillaume kept reaching inside her sweater forcing guards to search her again" – as if she had some strange, involuntary twitch or was, OMG, trying to hide something. If we imagine that Mme. Aguillaume has a shred of self-respect, it is easy to explain this mysterious twitch of hers: she was not comfortable with the fact that the screener was trying to rub or wave a wand over her breasts, so she kept reaching inside her sweater to cover and protect them. Understandably, this behavior would be inexplicable to the security screeners, overly conditioned from screening thousands who, being Americans, have no self-respect and stand there spread-eagled, dutifully submitting to the search and possibly thanking the screeners afterward for keeping them safe.

Becoming angry or exasperated, and being French, Mme. Aguillaume offered an alternative means of proving her airworthiness by disrobing, mere nudity being a natural and inoffensive condition, while submitting to probing wands is sick and demeaning. Unfortunately, the statutes and regulations do no permit this alternative proof. Given the nation’s paramount concern for safety and security, one wonders why it isn't a patriotic duty to strip at the terminal entrance and proceed to the airplane seat buck-naked. But no, our bureaucratic protectors insist that we continue to pretend and adhere to the illusion that there are standards of decency that must be respected, and keep our clothes on, all the while they are committing the most egregious violations of personal respect.

It is ever thus with the state. It commits an intolerable affront to a person’s dignity and self-respect, and then makes it a criminal offense when the person actually cannot tolerate it. It is evident that Mme. Aguillaume did nothing wrong other than to take offense at indefensible behavior. The AP article does not describe any pandemonium that ensued upon Mme. Aguillaume’s "disorderly conduct;" it is evident that the essence of her "crime" is simply that she did not behave as law enforcement expected or wanted her to behave, there being no real danger in it to anyone.

The law banning disorderly conduct at an airport was passed by the Indiana legislature after the September 11 attack. If convicted on that charge, Mme. Aguillaume could be sentenced to three years. The AP reports that Mme. Aguillaume "burst into tears . . . when a judge explained the possible penalties through an interpreter."

This is what it has come to in America: three years for a 56 year old woman stripping to the waist in protest of indefensible behavior. The arrest and laying of formal charges against this woman have outraged and disgusted me more than words can say. I no longer understand my country. I no longer know or understand its people.

Gripped and mastered by fear in the wake of September 11, the FAA institutes comprehensive, demeaning, and arbitrary searches and seizures. Gripped and mastered by fear in the wake of September 11 and an even greater desire to avoid possible financial liability for a failure to protect its passengers, the airlines give up all legal and financial responsibility for airport security to the federal government, and an entire new, unaccountable federal workforce is created for this purpose. Gripped and mastered by fear in the wake of September 11, the Indiana legislature creates a hitherto unknown crime, the essence of which is not complying with security screeners’ standards of expected conduct in response to their illegal and demeaning searches and seizures: "disorderly conduct in an airport."

Did we actually believe that we, personally, were "at war with terror," we might contemplate the words of Japan’s great swordsman, Miyamoto Musashi, who said, "The way of the warrior is the resolute acceptance of death" – for truly to be a warrior requires a certain degree of spiritual mastery over self and uncertain existence. Were we actually a Christian nation, we might contemplate the statement, made by the highest authority and therefore presumably true, that he who would save his life will lose it.

Where are the men in this country who actually understand that we all die, who have matured under consideration of their own mortality and are not mastered by it, who understand that what matters is how we live not how long, and who understand that to abandon and trample down standards of honorable and right conduct and the principles this nation was founded upon in a vain quest to insure that one will die peacefully in one’s bed of old, old age is craven and despicable?

Where are the men in this country who perceive that the elaborate security measures at the nation’s airports cannot accomplish more than to shift the burden of death to some other Americans at some other time and place, and who understand that this lifeboat philosophy – don’t take me, take some other American – is both unchristian and conduct unbecoming a man?

Where are the men in this country who adhere to the standards of conduct of a gentleman? It’s handcuffs for Mme. Aguillaume! Oh, yes, nothing personal, it’s "routine" and the "procedure" – meaning that we have ceased to take personal responsibility for deciding moment to moment on the rectitude of our own behavior and simply do what others have laid down for us to do.

No, all standards of right conduct, honor, self-respect, dignity, and personal liberty reflected in the antiquated and unsafe notions embodied in the 4th Amendment are readily abandoned and replaced with reams of new statutes, regulations, and procedures, to be adhered to with minute, insect-like mindlessness and precision. Thus do we control our psychic terror and uncertainty – behavior in form and substance no different than the elaborate rituals and incantations developed by primitive man to propitiate angry and unseen gods, and having no greater ability to protect us or control reality.

If the security screeners are become mad with power, brooking no affront to their procedures and authority, however, it is not they who are at fault but we who permit them to behave this way. Where are the calls and e-mails to Evansville deputy prosecutor Dawnya Taylor expressing outrage that Mme. Aguillaume was arrested and is being prosecuted?

Where are the men and women who refuse to be subjected to this outrageous treatment? You want to search me with a wand and rummage through my personal effects? I guess I’m not flying. You want me to take off my shoes? You want my nail clipper? I guess I’m not flying. You want to pat down my wife or daughter? I guess we’re not flying. Let the airplanes cease flying for want of passengers!

No! We will not pretend that what you are doing is noble, valiant, or good but assure you that it is depraved and worthy of utmost contempt. You want safety above all? If that is your highest value, here, we will give it to you, and ground the nation’s airplanes, and when you are lying on your deathbed may you thank God that you have lived a long, long time.

Not here, apparently. Here it’s handcuffs and three years for Mme. Aguillaume. America was some other country, long ago.

November 1, 2002

Jeff Snyder [send him mail] is an attorney who works in Manhattan. He is the author of Nation of Cowards – Essays on the Ethics of Gun Control, which examines the American character as revealed by the gun control debate.

Copyright © 2002 LewRockwell.com


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: airportpolicestate; tss
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-31 next last
Further information on Dawnya Taylor:

Dawnya G. Taylor, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney 1990 B.F.A. Theatre Performance, University of Evansville 1994 Juris Doctor, Indiana University School of Law at Bloomington Admitted to practice: 1995, Vanderburgh County Deputy since 2001

Vanderburgh County receives federal grant to fight gun crimes The United States Department of Justice has awarded a $240,000 grant to the Vanderburgh County Prosecutor's Office to aid in the prosecution of crimes involving the possession or use of firearms.

The three-year grant has helped fund two new positions for deputy prosecutors to concentrate on prosecuting the illegal possession of firearms and violent offenses perpetrated by the use of firearms. Deputy Prosecutors Dawnya Taylor and Kurt Schnepper have been assigned to those positions.

Some of the goals of the gun prosecutors are:

To seek stricter penalties for those convicted of gun offenses To reduce the number of illegally possessed firearms in our community To keep firearms out of the hands of convicted felons To educate the public on gun safety The grant is for calendar years 2002, 2003, and 2004.

http://www.vanderburghprosecutor.org/wps-html/OfficeNews/

Share your thoughts:

http://www.vanderburghprosecutor.org/wps-html/ContactUs/

1 posted on 11/1/2002, 10:08:15 PM by Liberty Ship
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Liberty Ship
So the assertion is

1. This woman is so shy, that she cannot tolerate being 'wand-ed' by security
2. This woman is not shy about being seen naked, as she strips in an airport.

Sorry, doesn't make sense. Striping naked in an airport is out of bounds, even in France. This woman decided that security laws applied to everyone else, except her; and acted accordingly. If she is allowed to opt-out of security, so is Abdulah and his buddy Mohammed. Air travel is not a right, the airlines are private companies, and the issue of security is a serious one. If I have to submit to security, everyone does. No exceptions.

Granted, some of the wisdom shown by airport personnel in their choice of 'random' searches is poor; but as the Israeli's have discovered, terrorists know no morality. How many children have been loaded with bomb belts? How many women? Given the crowds, the security people are doing the best they can, with limited funds, powers and overly high expectations.

2 posted on 11/1/2002, 10:21:41 PM by Hodar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hodar
Simple solution. Don't fly like I & others have chosen. Makes for an extra day or so but I do have an alternative. BTW, this women is an idiot.
3 posted on 11/1/2002, 10:27:34 PM by Digger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Ship
I know it is little consolation but Numbhead Norm Mineta had a big party yesterday as the San Jose International Airport was officilally renamed after him.. What a joke. Mineta/San Jose Int'l Airport

Hello America---Aren;t we proud of how America rewards incompetence and bungling of even simple matters these days?

Anne , could you do a column on this? We really can do better as a nation , I just know we can. Blame it on the bra, but don't throw the lady in jail. Geesh!

Another boob job that was not an uplifting experience, brought to you by the boobs at the TSA. Thanks Norm!
4 posted on 11/1/2002, 10:28:41 PM by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Ship
Yeah, yeah, the woman is an idiot, she deserves a punishment, that, as we will all see, will be more severe than the punishment received by a double murderer football hero and actor O.J. Simpson. Hurray for the world's greatest criminal justice system!
5 posted on 11/1/2002, 10:31:49 PM by Revolting cat!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hodar
So the assertion is 1. This woman is so shy, that she cannot tolerate being 'wand-ed' by security 2. This woman is not shy about being seen naked, as she strips in an airport. Sorry, doesn't make sense.

Synder's essay "A Nation of Cowards" is without a doubt the best, to-the-point, well-reasoned argument for not just the right, but the duty, to personally fight back against crime and be ready, willing, and able to defend yourself and others.

But that was written in 1993, and in the past few years I've been shocked to see the quality of Mr. Synder's essays devolve into real wingnut head-scratchers. In all seriousness, I think he needs help.

6 posted on 11/1/2002, 10:34:48 PM by Dan Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dan Day
Unfortunately, you can say the same for most of the rest of the rockies.
7 posted on 11/1/2002, 10:51:42 PM by stop_fascism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Ship
one wonders why it isn't a patriotic duty to strip at the terminal entrance and proceed to the airplane seat buck-naked.

Look around. Think. Realize how much you don't want to see this. Although, it would save the airlines a bunch of money, as everyone would lose their appetites and they wouldn't have to serve food anymore.

8 posted on 11/1/2002, 10:55:24 PM by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RonF
Just yur luck, ya'd end up flying coast to coast sitting next to Helen Thomas. ;-)
9 posted on 11/1/2002, 11:16:36 PM by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Ship
This is perhaps the most ludicrous article ever posted at FR. Does this dunderpate of a writer think that "wanding" was created post 9/11? I guess he's never seen "Spinal Tap" Lol...
10 posted on 11/1/2002, 11:21:58 PM by Senator Pardek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan Day
Snyder is great. That Public Interest article was WONDERFUL. Best is the stat from ATF that 90some Percent of guns used in crime are not obtained by legal means.
11 posted on 11/1/2002, 11:30:40 PM by Scholastic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: rightwing2
ping
12 posted on 11/1/2002, 11:35:54 PM by Scholastic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Hodar
"1. This woman is so shy, that she cannot tolerate being 'wand-ed' by security"

It is not a matter of being shy, she was not shy, or she would not have been speaking to the security people. It is a matter of feeling violated!

"2. This woman is not shy about being seen naked, as she strips in an airport."

What you have done here is set up a straw man and knocked him down. You have asserted your own false interpretation of the authors argument, and then used it to supposedly refute the authors position. It is a small trick that most freepers will see right through.

She removed her clothes probably out of frustration, and anger at the repeated violation of being probed by what was most likely a rude and un-professional security screening. Surely you can admit there was a breakdown here.

You assert that "the security people are doing the best they can." Well it is the job of the security person to deal with un-cooperative passengers while maintaining a level of professional conduct tahat would certainly provide ways to not aggravate the situation. Clearly this situation was aggravated. So your worker was not giving us their best.

Giving their best would mean that the 40th request to put your hands down would be as polite and docile as the 1st. Before that point the 3rd should include a simple empathetic explanation as to why you are making the request.

It is not our duty to "put up" with this un-professional conduct. We are stakeholders. We are paying for the system, and that alone gives us the right to offer criticisms.

I will not fly anywhere I can drive in 20 hours until they correct this. Cuts out about 5 trips a year by the way and saves the airlines from having to spend $1,500 of mine a year.

Airlines need to realize they have a duty to protect the comfort and dignity of their passengers. If federal persons are going to be in charge of security. Then as a system of balance I propose each airline should supply a person to watch the security personnel, and report and intervene when there are breakdowns in procedures, and professionalism. Fill in a void and provide a mediator and voice for the consumer.

Currently a passenger protesting mere rudness or even poor performance on the part of security is treated as a criminal.

"Given the crowds, the security people are doing the best they can, with limited funds, powers and overly high expectations."

Once again I assert this is just plain false. I implore you to sit in the airport of your choice for a day, and come back and tell me these people are putting their best foot forward. I would argue quite the opposite is true. An attitude of "don't go above what is required" is prevalent. They are impudent, and antagonistic. They encourage each other with an "us versus them" retoric and behavior. No original, independant or creative thinking is seen or encourage. Simple problem solving (such as how to open a bag or whether or not a straw hat is threat) often becomes a showstopping moment of indecisiveness.

It is un-american.

sorry for using your post as a launching pad for a rant. :)

13 posted on 11/1/2002, 11:50:29 PM by jrawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Just yur luck, ya'd end up flying coast to coast sitting next to Helen Thomas. ;-)

Would she be naked?!...now that's rough!

14 posted on 11/1/2002, 11:51:05 PM by danmar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Ship
The gubmint cannot and will not protect the citizenas against street crimes, burglaries, vandalism, red light runners, not to mention terrorist attacks, but it'll do everything in its power to protect us against French women taking off their blouses at airports. Great! And with time, most of us get so used to the abuse, think it perfectly natural, that we will defend it, as shown above, especially if the "criminal" turns out to be a French national! Sorry, that article's author is right!
15 posted on 11/1/2002, 11:56:57 PM by Revolting cat!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Ship
I wonder if may be there was a communication problem.

Did she understand what she was supposed to do? Did she understand she why she wasn't supposed to put her hands inside her sweater?

After all, she had to have the penalties explained to her by an interpter.
16 posted on 11/2/2002, 12:04:17 AM by chaosagent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jrawk
Interesting how you assume her innocents while at the same time assuming she was provoked to take her clothes off by being "probed"…

Who needs facts or trials…

Talk about "un-American"…
17 posted on 11/2/2002, 5:20:59 AM by DB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DB
The issues, and my reason for posting, are much larger than the actions of this "Lady Godiva of the Concourse," who is clearly a little nuts, or there was a MAJOR communication problem.

The issues are that of INTENT and PROPORTION as they apply to criminal law, and how in the face of a terrorist attack these key notions are being slowly eroded by the government with the tacit consent of the People in almost all aspects of our lives. The sheep-like reaction to terrorism is one instance. Zero-tolerance in the schools is another.

We are being conditioned to seeing people led away in handcuffs for making a joke while we praise the cretins with the truncheons for protecting us even as their actions provide no protection at all.

This is an indicator of a dictatorship.

(Remember in the beginning of "Ben Hur" when his mother and sister accidently knocked the tile off the roof resulting in the govenor falling off his horse. They both ended up in a leper colony and Hur ended up in the galleys as a result. There was no INTENT.)

The key part of the article by Snyder is not the discrete issue of the French woman. It is the concerns that her case, as ridiculous as it is, raises. Think of people like the French woman as the canaries in the social coal mine. The toxins which effected her are toxic to us all. The nature of her make-up caused her to fall first.
18 posted on 11/2/2002, 1:15:05 PM by Liberty Ship
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Ship
If I remember correctly the "governor" died from falling from his horse.

Not that justified the action they took...

I basically agree with much of what you say with some exceptions... Zero tolerance is for stupid people that are incapable of making intelligent choices and therefore don't have to take any responsibility and make the hard choices.

In of itself being wanded by a metal detector prior to boarding a commercial airplane these days is not too much to ask. I don't believe this French woman is going to see any prison time. What she did was over the top even if provoked. It isn't worthy of more than a day in jail regardless of what happened in my opinion. We'll see what actually happens which is what is important.

How far one goes for "security" is a tough question.

I do know that if (more like when) a nuke goes off in a major American city all this stuff we worry about now is going to seem like fluff around the edges.
19 posted on 11/2/2002, 2:01:58 PM by DB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Hodar
1. This woman is so shy, that she cannot tolerate being 'wand-ed' by security
2. This woman is not shy about being seen naked, as she strips in an airport.

No, it makes perfect sense. Who are you and why are you touching me like that? Stop it! she must have thought. Each time she reflexively moved an arm to shield herself she triggered a repetition of the offending act, until finally she snaps in frustration: Okay, you wanna see what I'm hiding, she must have thought, disrobing, you want to take all of my dignity? Here! Here's what I'm hiding! Pigs.

It makes perfect sense, and these 'random' searches--rather than targeted, profiled searches--are really starting to p!ss me off too.

20 posted on 11/2/2002, 2:08:58 PM by Petronski
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-31 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson