While our surveillance state is ruthlessly efficient at monitoring citizens and their money, it is prone to peculiar and baffling lapses that result in disasters. In response to these disasters, the state often further extends its power to surveil and control the citizens.
I remember the time I flew through from Amsterdam to San Francisco in December 2009 and was subjected to a surprisingly aggressive interrogation about who I am and why I was traveling. I figured the Dutch had received intelligence that a bad guy was going to try to board a plane in Amsterdam and fly to the States. A couple of days later, I saw the news that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab had succeeded in boarding a plane in Amsterdam wearing “explosive underwear” for a flight to Detroit. On board, he detonated his explosive device, which caused a fire that was rapidly extinguished.
Unlike me, Abdulmutallab had purchased a one-way ticket, had no checked baggage, and was the subject of several desperate attempts from his father (in Nigeria) to warn authorities of his son’s intentions. Immediately I contrasted the extraordinary rigor of my own interaction with Dutch airport authorities with the extraordinary laxity of their handling of Abdulmutallab.
Check out my conversation with broadcaster Grant Stinchfield about feigned incompetence or ruthless bungling in the recent assassination attempt of Donald Trump.
Share this post