Comments on: ALA in the Airport?

By: Joneser

Joneser — Wed, 17 Nov 2010 16:48:13 +0000

I thought that SafeLibraries would be APPLAUDING any and all screening techniques. If we oppose them, then the terrorists win! Freedom grope!

By: Craig

Craig — Tue, 16 Nov 2010 23:52:41 +0000

Ugh. This kind of argument just makes me want to stop renewing my ALA membership. There are other organizations a person can join in order to protest the TSA screenings. ALA is already spreading itself too thin by trying to cover so many extra-library issues. Please, SafeLibraries just join another organization and fight the good fight there. There’s no prohibition on joining two, unrelated associations at the same time.

By: Jon

Jon — Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:20:32 +0000

I’m thinking about asking the ALA to protest the recent spread of mortgage documentation fraud committed by big banks. The ensuing lawsuits are clogging the foreclosure process, thereby contributing to the stagnation of our economy — which indirectly leads to librarians having a tougher time finding employment.

Absurd, sure — but, after all, that’s an issue that’s way less tangential to librarians’ well-being and professional mission than the TSA scanners are.

By: Skipbear

Skipbear — Mon, 15 Nov 2010 20:08:33 +0000

This is why nobody I know pays ALA dues whose not comped by thier employeers. I think the next issue to take up banning toys in high fat Happy Meals unless it comes in a Baker and Taylor cat bag.

By: Bruce Campbell

Bruce Campbell — Mon, 15 Nov 2010 19:32:06 +0000

Surreal stuff. I had my junk scanned back in May at the ATL airport. It was awkward, but more so for the person looking at me naked.

By: notattending

notattending — Mon, 15 Nov 2010 19:28:37 +0000

Also, how did this get from a discussion about whether ALA should be involved with political issues outside of libraries and evolve into tinfoil hat/libral/soros/conspiracy whargarrbl, safelibraries?

By: Spekkio

Spekkio — Mon, 15 Nov 2010 19:19:03 +0000

This stuff is unbelievable. As I’ve said before (and it appears that the AL agrees) – this is what the ACLU is for.

Incidentally, George Soros is not the devil. You may not like his politics, but that doesn’t make him “anti-American.”

By: SafeLibraries

SafeLibraries — Mon, 15 Nov 2010 14:56:55 +0000

AL, I will be writing a followup on this. It seems the ALA Council consensus was not to get involved. Then the OIF rode to the rescue to say, not in so many words, the ALA is already involved, it will continue to be involved, and the ALA Council can take a flying leap.

Worse, it appears the $350,000 grant from George Soros to the ALA for “privacy” is a direct catalyst for the OIF’s involvement. It is possible the ALA has been bought by George Soros as another means to work his anti-American mischief, and the ALA Council is powerless to stop it.

ALA Council, you know the ALA should not be involved, but the OIF told you it is, and the involvement is deep. Are you going to sit back and do nothing? Will members continue to support a George Soros front group?

Those are the issues I will be examining in my next post on this issue.