FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Welcome to Police-State America, Weary Traveler

My wife Joyce and I came home last week from a three-week trip to Manila in the Philippines, and to Hong Kong and Beijing in China.

Even though Philippines President Rodrigo Dutarte has an ongoing program of murdering drug dealers on the streets, and China has a penchant for locking up critics of the regime — even Nobel Laureates — and beating up and arresting journalists, there was only one place on that jaunt where I personally felt like I was entering a police state at the immigration checkpoint: the USA.

At the Manila airport, the woman checking our passports was polite and friendly… and unarmed. She examined our passports matching the photos to our faces, stamped them, asked how long we were staying and returned them to us, wishing us a good stay.

In Hong Kong the process was typically swift and efficient, even when the officer, also unarmed, asked about Joyce’s work visa, which had an eight-day expiration (she was performing a harpsichord concert for a fee at the government radio station RTHK).

At the Beijing International Airport, where we were entering a full-blown police state, there were fingerprints and photos taken by an immigration officer who was professional, but friendly enough… and unarmed.

But when we got home and back to US immigration after landing at Newark , the scene was altogether different. Every immigration agent had a sidearm as well as a taser on her or his belt. Signs everywhere said phone, cellphone and computer use while in the interminable lines was barred, and hostile-sounding loudmouthed immigration officers were quick to scold anyone who violated that rule by trying to call some relative or friend waiting in the greeting area or to snap a pic of someone with them in line.

If nothing else there is an enormous amount of waste going on in at US border crossings. The INS, a division of Homeland Security, doesn’t need a person trained in policing and weapons tactics to check someone’s travel documents. All they need is what most countries have at their entry points: a bunch of polite people skilled at scrutinizing travel documents, and then a few people doing guard duty who maybe should be armed, at least with non-lethal weapons (the notion of officers firing their revolvers in a crowded immigration hall is, let’s agree, pretty horrifying!).

Guns really don’t belong in an airport immigration area at all (in fact, tellingly, when you see them being worn by passport control personnel, it’s usually in a police state). I mean, really, think about it. If there is one place that you shouldn’t have to worry about someone pulling out a weapon, gun or knife or anything scarier than a nail-clipper, it would be an immigration hall full of people who have already gone through at least one airport security check and who haven’t even had a chance yet to get to their checked baggage where they might perhaps have stowed a weapon. We folks in the line waiting to get cleared for entry back into the US– or if we’re in the foreigner line, into the US for the first time — are surely the most certifiably unarmed bunch of people you’ll ever find outside of a Quaker meetinghouse So why all the INS goons with guns at their side scrutinizing our passports to see where we’ve been and asking what we’re doing in the US?

It’s really got to be an intimidation thing.

I was actually waiting to see if they would demand to see my cell phone and my computer. An increasing number of Americans are reporting that border officers have been doing that, downloading access to all their information and contacts. This invasive practice started happening during the paranoid post-9/11 Bush/Cheney administration, when it was mostly happening to people with Muslim-sounding last names, but it has been getting worse over the years, and has gotten dramatically more common, reportedly, since the election of President Trump, who has really amped up the anti-immigrant activities of the INS, and the general militarization of the border.

The chances that these draconian practices — the militarizing of passport checkers and the trasing of First Amendment rights to privacy of information — will prevent some future terrorist attack, which is after all the supposed justification for all this police-state activity at the border — including the introduction of finger-printing and facial-recognition software–is next to zero. After all, a potential terrorist certainly knows it is happening, and would be unlikely to risk either trying to commit a terror act in the waiting line, or trying to get into the US with incriminating information on a cell phone or computer.

In fact, given the security screenings that passengers have to go through before getting on a flight to the US, I’m willing to bet that there hasn’t been a single violent attack attempted in an immigration line involving a weapon in the historical memory of the Department of Homeland Security’s existence.

The irony of all this is that if someone did want to commit mayhem at an airport, the easiest way to do it these days would not be to attempt something in the line waiting to have one’s passport checked, but to wait until later, out at the baggage claim area, since there’s usually nobody around wearing a weapon as people wait for their bags to appear from their plane, and it’s not illegal to ship weapons in your checked baggage. (Granted that bags are routinely X-xrayed and checked for possible explosives before they’re loaded on a plane, but there’s nothing illegal about shipping your pistol, rifle or AR-15 in your checked baggage. A terrorist could thus just collect his bag, zip it open, whip out his gun and than spray the waiting passengers with bullets before any security guards could arrive to stop him.

If Homeland Security were genuinely concerned about public safety, they’d transfer those armed INS agents to serve as security guards in the baggage claim area, and leave intelligent, trained and — what the hell — polite and welcoming passport checkers to handle the paperwork end.

Meanwhile, I don’t know what the deal is with banning cell-phone use in the waiting line while having one’s travel documents checked. You can use your phone after the seatbelt light goes off on landing, while you’re still in the plane, and everyone’s on their phone walking to the passport line. What’s so special about the immigration lobby that cellphones and computers have to be banned?

It is clearly just another act of intimidation — something the INS goons can use to order people around.

I guess it makes a certain amount of sense. If you’re going to be entering, or in the case of us citizens, re-entering the United States, maybe it’s important to be reminded that you are entering a police state, so you’ll remember that, for example, if you’re stopped by a cop after you pick up your parked car and are driving home, you need to be ultra polite and obedient lest you be yanked from your vehicle and body-slammed on the pavement for asking too many questions, or for being too slow to show your license.

It’s just your government telling you, “Welcome home. Now behave yourself…or else.”

More articles by:

Dave Lindorff is a founding member of ThisCantBeHappening!, an online newspaper collective, and is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press).

Weekend Edition
August 17, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Daniel Wolff
The Aretha Dialogue
Nick Pemberton
Donald Trump and the Rise of Patriotism 
Joseph Natoli
First Amendment Rights and the Court of Popular Opinion
Andrew Levine
Midterms 2018: What’s There to Hope For?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Running Out of Fools
Ajamu Baraka
Opposing Bipartisan Warmongering is Defending Human Rights of the Poor and Working Class
Paul Street
Corporate Media: the Enemy of the People
David Macaray
Trump and the Sex Tape
CJ Hopkins
Where Have All the Nazis Gone?
Daniel Falcone
The Future of NATO: an Interview With Richard Falk
Robert Hunziker
Hothouse Earth
Cesar Chelala
The Historic Responsibility of the Catholic Church
Ron Jacobs
The Barbarism of US Immigration Policy
Kenneth Surin
In Shanghai
William Camacaro - Frederick B. Mills
The Military Option Against Venezuela in the “Year of the Americas”
Nancy Kurshan
The Whole World Was Watching: Chicago ’68, Revisited
Robert Fantina
Yemeni and Palestinian Children
Alexandra Isfahani-Hammond
Orcas and Other-Than-Human Grief
Shoshana Fine – Thomas Lindemann
Migrants Deaths: European Democracies and the Right to Not Protect?
Paul Edwards
Totally Irrusianal
Thomas Knapp
Murphy’s Law: Big Tech Must Serve as Censorship Subcontractors
Mark Ashwill
More Demons Unleashed After Fulbright University Vietnam Official Drops Rhetorical Bombshells
Ralph Nader
Going Fundamental Eludes Congressional Progressives
Hans-Armin Ohlmann
My Longest Day: How World War II Ended for My Family
Matthew Funke
The Nordic Countries Aren’t Socialist
Daniel Warner
Tiger Woods, Donald Trump and Crime and Punishment
Dave Lindorff
Mainstream Media Hypocrisy on Display
Jeff Cohen
Democrats Gather in Chicago: Elite Party or Party of the People?
Victor Grossman
Stand Up With New Hope in Germany?
Christopher Brauchli
A Family Affair
Jill Richardson
Profiting From Poison
Patrick Bobilin
Moving the Margins
Alison Barros
Dear White American
Celia Bottger
If Ireland Can Reject Fossil Fuels, Your Town Can Too
Ian Scott Horst
Less Voting, More Revolution
Peter Certo
Trump Snubbed McCain, Then the Media Snubbed the Rest of Us
Dan Ritzman
Drilling ANWR: One of Our Last Links to the Wild World is in Danger
Brandon Do
The World and Palestine, Palestine and the World
Negin Owliaei
Toys R Us May be Gone, But Its Workers’ Struggle Continues
Chris Wright
An Updated and Improved Marxism
Daryan Rezazad
Iran and the Doomsday Machine
Patrick Bond
Africa’s Pioneering Marxist Political Economist, Samir Amin (1931-2018)
Louis Proyect
Memoir From the Underground
Binoy Kampmark
Meaningless Titles and Liveable Cities: Melbourne Loses to Vienna
Andrew Stewart
Blackkklansman: Spike Lee Delivers a Masterpiece
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail