Who knew that Vance Gilbert was a security risk? A recent flight from Boston bound for Washington was aborted when an alarmed passenger spotted folksinger Vance Gilbert reading a book about aircraft that had lots of photos of cockpits. The plane returned to the terminal, Gilbert was taken from the plane, questioned by police and the Transportation Safety Administration, returned to the craft, and allowed to proceed to the Nation’s Capitol, a place where black men such as he were once bought and sold. Apparently, D.C. policymakers still haven’t figured out what to do with people of color.
If you believe a Boston Globe op-ed on this, the incident was regrettable, but understandable. To whatever Globe writer penned this unsigned piece I reply, your logic is flawed, your attempt at taking a middle position is insensitive, and your assertion that all panicked travelers must be taken seriously is brick-headed thick. The Globe admits that Gilbert was “wronged,” but points out that we can’t, on one hand, tell passengers to be on the lookout for suspicious people and, on the other, ignore their tips. Yes we can. We must investigate reasonable concerns, but to surrender to pure panic means that--to pull a 9/11 phrase--the terrorists have won. It’s smackdown time on the Globe’s logic.
Was Vance Gilbert racially profiled? Of this there can be no doubt. The Globe op-ed actually used this phrase: “Gilbert is African-American but can pass for Middle Eastern.” My God! Did someone actually write this? Was that person oblivious to what the term “pass” means in the black community? That sort of language is as offensive as if the writer had come out and said, “All colored people look alike to me.”
Let’s go a bit further. This plane was taxiing down a runway when it reversed course. This means that Mr. Gilbert had (supposedly) already been screened when he bought his ticket, and again when he passed through security. If he was suspicious or dangerous, shouldn’t the TSA have flagged and snagged him before he boarded? The incident is more than regrettable; it exposes what many of us have been saying all along: airport security isn’t real; it’s merely an illusion designed to prop up the airline industry. That same industry, by the way, has balked at the expense of taking measures that would actually increase security, such as x-raying every single bag that goes into the hold and requiring every passenger to submit to a full body scan before boarding. (Note to the overly modest: Stay home if you don’t want TSA personnel to see a scan of your body.) And, if you think that anyone is really doing background checks on ticket purchasers, you’re naïve. There are some names in a computer database that automatically trigger alerts, but no one is checking each name. That would take a lot more TSA personnel, which Congress won’t authorize because, my goodness, they might join a labor union.
Nonetheless, couldn’t the crew have checked out Gilbert without humiliating him in front of the entire plane? I’ve only met Gilbert a few times, but I can tell you what everyone says about him--that he’s seen as one of the gentlest souls in the music business. He’s witty, talented and, above all, kind. Vance Gilbert represents the sort of security risk that one might associate with a monarch butterfly. He was on a plane filled with computers and in constant contact with the flight tower. How hard is it to send a message to the tower the essence of which would have been: “We have a passenger in seat 28G. Can you run a quick check on him?” Even a Google search would have revealed a profile the likes of: Gilbert, Vance, folksinger, benign.
If anyone out there knows Vance, tell him that Rob Weir of the Valley Advocate couldn’t be sadder or more outraged that this happened to him. Peace, bro.
I am honored to (apparently) be the first person to comment on this exquisitely and quite skillfully written article on the horrible injustice that Vance Gilbert suffered at the hands of the State Police, Transportation Administration, and United Airlines.
ReplyDeleteIt so happens that I am know Vance - inasmuch as his many fans know him - except for the fact that I have also attended a few of the workshops he gave - a few years back - at a local folk music festival in New Jersey. I also had several distinct opportunities to chat with him one-to-one - either between scheduled activites or after some of his magnificent performances.
I completely share Phoenix and Lars's hysterical-but-right-on sentiment that "Vance Gilbert represents the sort of security risk that one might associate with a monarch butterfly".
The complete lack of both level-headed judgement and adult-level discretion on the part of the aforementioned entities involved that lead to this incident - in addition to the Boston Globe's rude, off-hand "dismissal" of it - are all unfathomably reprehensible.
Mr. Gilbert deserves every ounce of favorable consideration towards an official, documented and, yes ... "public" apology from all three guilty entities which - as the article mentions - he would magnanimously accept. If these entities have any interest at all in the public's perception of them, they would all do well to "get out in front of this" and state how grievously mistaken they were for the humiliation they put Vance through. The world would then see that these institutions have actually earned the trust that they assume the public is willing to give them.
Oops! I obviously overlooked a misspelling in my comments, above - leaving the phrase "I am know" in the post instead of the corrrect, "I know" - underscoring that "To err is human" - something that the aforementioned "entities" should admit, themselves.
ReplyDelete