NJ-NY Ferry Security Allegedly Focus on Books

sarahbellum writes: “An entry on BoingBoing has the first-person story (and some follow-ups) that security on the New York/New Jersey Ferry apparently tried to confiscate a copy of ‘Exalted: The Abyssals‘ for being ‘inappropriate.'” Look at how far we’ve come, but then again the ferry guards are following the FBI’s lead.

August 12, 2004 by John Uncategorized 10

dmossman says:

August 12, 2004 at 8:54 pm

Uhhh, no!
but then again the ferry guards are following the FBI’s lead.

The link in the above quote points to an article about the FBI and almanacs. All the FBI did was put out an advisory to watch for certain things that could be a tip off. They did not say “confiscate almanacs.” You do a disservice when you tie these things together.

The security guard at the ferry was clearly out of line. But it doesn’t sound like he was following a policy just making things up as he went. The person resisted, as they should have, and the security guard gave in. Sounds like cosmic balance is working pretty good today.

Reply
Fang-Face says:

August 12, 2004 at 9:22 pm

Oh, yes!

All the FBI did was put out an advisory to watch for certain things that could be a tip off.

They’ve done more that. They’ve interviewed a guy for reading the wrong kind of material. Although that was the result of a crank complaint, the agents who conducted the interview went beyond the bounds of reason.

Reply
GregS* says:

August 12, 2004 at 9:42 pm

oh lord
People, this story doesn’t even make sense. If you want me to call this person an outright liar I will. He’s a liar. That or he is skewing a conversation to his own purposes, which I suppose amounts to the same thing. The idea that we as people take just any blog post and give it legitamacy is ridiculous. And yes that applies to me and Jessamyn and Jack and anyone else. At least we’re up front about who we are and what our background is.

Reply
John says:

August 13, 2004 at 4:01 am

/ taps “Allegedly”
Yeah, I think the story is at least embellished a little. It reminds me of an Internet tale I read not long after 9/11 that, as expected, was never verified.

Reply
TMcCay says:

August 13, 2004 at 7:32 am

Not surprising really
I worked for a few years as an insurance investigator and security consultant. The most difficult aspect of my job was controlling my not so bright guards and their junior G-Man attitudes.

I have no difficulty believing this story, given the lack of education and training private guards usually have.

There are a lot of uneducated un-read people in America who actually think the ACLU is associated with terrorism. With numerous individual exceptions, Many security guards fit the above description.

So, the story may be BS but it is actually quite plausible.

Reply
Fang-Face says:

August 14, 2004 at 2:05 am

Re:oh lord

People, this story doesn’t even make sense.

There is an incident similar to this one that took place well before the towers came down. I have it chronicled at my web site.

Reply
Fang-Face says:

August 14, 2004 at 2:08 am

Re:oh lord

People, this story doesn’t even make sense.

There is an incident similar to this one that took place well before the towers came down. I have it chronicled at my web site. In general, most people are butt-heads, you know.

Reply
Fang-Face says:

August 14, 2004 at 2:12 am

Re:/ taps “Allegedly”

It reminds me of an Internet tale I read

Here’s a near precedent that lends the other story an aura of plausibility. Although I would dismiss the claims of a breech birth due to the stress of such an encounter as equal to the claim that John Merrick turned out the way he did because his mother was frightened by an elephant during pregnancy.

Nowhere is this game of Pin The Bomb Threat On The Muslim more obvious than
at the airport. A few years ago I flew out of Cairo with my husband and
discovered that F.W.A. (Flying While Arab) is no joke. We landed in Paris with a
crying baby and were ushered to the back of the line while the airline
attendants processed every other passenger. My husband was unconcerned; he was
used to the routine. But I was acutely aware of two things: 1) that the baby was
on her last diaper; and 2) that diaper was feeling heavy.

Our turn finally came a good three hours later, whereupon we spent another 45
minutes having our carry-on luggage examined and re-examined, answering the same
questions again and again, and waiting while security checked and re-checked
their computer database. All this over a graduate student from Egypt, married to
an American citizen, during a time when world politics were calm enough that
Bill Clinton’s main preoccupation was rubbing lipstick smudges off his fly.

–Laura Fokkena, 22 Nov 2002, and reprinted at Alternet.org

Reply
ka says:

August 16, 2004 at 2:16 am

Re:Not surprising really
I agree that the motives of the FBI IN GENERAL are to safeguard American citizens. I might even consider that Ashcroft’s motives are benign in principle. However, the level of scrutiny seems to be getting a bit out of hand. I think the last remark points out one of the most important reasons why we should be wary of allowing any and all forms of such scrutiny in the name of “safety.” The “choice” of targets of scrutiny and the quality and fairness of the monitoring of such targets in order to “safeguard us” from terrorists (or whatever particular threat is being used as a defense) is wholly dependent on human beings, both in terms of those who develop the policies and those who are responsible for enforcement. An excellent example of this is the ridiculous detaining and questioning of Ian McEwan at customs, when he came as an invited guest to give a talk in the U.S. (I think it was McEwan …)

Reply
ka says:

August 16, 2004 at 2:35 am

Re:Not surprising really
I’m sure most people read about the McEwan incident at the time, but here’s a link from the Intl. Herald Tribune that not only discusses many exs. of inappropriate detention at customs, but also the McEwan ex. http://www.iht.com/bin/print.php?file=528985.html.

“The 36-hour crisis – which would have resulted in his detention had it occurred on American instead of Canadian soil – was finally resolved with the help of diplomats, Congress members, journalists and lawyers.

“We don’t want to let you in, we don’t think you should come in,” McEwan recalls being told by an immigration official. “But you have powerful allies and we don’t like the publicity.” McEwan began his Seattle talk by wryly thanking the Department of Homeland Security “for protecting the American public from British novelists.”

Reply