While I am certainly in favor of loosening, if not eliminating, the new
restrictions, I think we have to make a much better pitch than this if we are
going to have any chance of success. First, it is necessary to recognize that
we are not really talking about freedom, per se, but privilege. Our access to
the CBBT was not a freedom available to the general public, but rather a
special privilege available only to a relatively few letter holders.
Second, we birders persist on looking at this from the perspective of birders,
rather than security. While true birders are of little threat to the facility,
how difficult is it to pretend to be a birder? There is thus an interest in
regulating our access. Moreover, as one can readily see from revieing the
current regulations, a big aim of the rules is to force us to bird in groups --
I think both to decrease the security and to ease the monitoring burden on the
CBBT forces.
Third, while people complain that they believe that there are not restrictions
on other groups that pose more threat, such as motorists using the CBBT, I am
not sure that equality is really the issue. Leaving one hole unplugged doesn't
mean you shouldn't plug others, though it may in some cases raise questions of
motive. Also, one must remember that any plan must balance utility and
security. The function of the CBBT is to move traffic, so any plan must
balance security against its effect on that function. Supporting birdwatching
is not really its function, so that bears very little weight in the balance, so
it takes little security benefit to outweigh allowing a special privilege to
birders.
Getting back to freedom, we need to recognize that freedom to go places has
never been absolute. People cannot just wander onto military bases or lots of
other places to bird, or do other things, unless special arrangements have been
made. While I would share the opinion that some of what is going on is
overreaction, I think it is better policy and politics to accept the legitimacy
of the concern and try to work with the security concerns to try to get the
most advantageous position we can. After all, I don't think the general public
would much care that a relatively small group of people was deprived of special
access because the CBBT thought that security would be enhanced.
Eric Jeffrey
Falls Church, VA
-----Original Message-----
From: jfox <jjfoxfox@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: va-bird@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <va-bird@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 01:23:15 -0500
Subject: [va-bird] CBBT
Well, we've had half a year under the new rules, and I'm sure that most people
are as disappointed and discouraged as I am. I understand that they are going
to review the situation this month so we should at least talk about it.
Several drafts of this email, over the months, have been pretty crappy but time
is running out so here goes.
First, the inscrutable "security" issue smells way too much like "Father Knows
Best" to me. Father is sometimes marginally functional, speaking allegorically,
and still playing his role. When he won't even talk to you is when he's most
worrisome.
Second, freedom in the abstact is meaningless. The only freedoms that exist are
those that can be excercised. And freedom is what has made America the special
country that it is. I can only hope that the CBBT administration will come to
see that letting us freely bird the islands is something worth fighting for,
that keeping this small freedom alive makes this country greater and makes us
better than the people who attacked us.
Surely the minor nuisance of checking letters and IDs is too small a burden on
the CBBT police force that we forsake our heritage of freedom. Please, please,
please, reconsider these rules. We're a small group, but nobody loves the CBBT
more than us!!!
John Fox
Arlington
--Using Opera's !@%$#%@ e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ ;
You are subscribed to VA-BIRD. To post to this mailing list, simply send email
to va-bird@xxxxxxxxxxxxx. To unsubscribe, send email to
va-bird-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field.
