It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Anger over girls' strip searches

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Extralien
 


This is disgusting. Little girls should be treated like little girls not criminals, and thier mom was supposedly only ILL, not under investigation for child abuse. Don't these freaks have anything better to do than dehumanize and oversexualize our children?

It's no surprise, though, been going on for a while. I remember near my hometown they had the infamous "thong check" at a local high school dance.




posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by donkeyshow
This is disgusting. Don't these freaks have anything better to do than dehumanize and oversexualize our children?


Interesting argument. However, it might carry more weight with me if you had chosen a different moniker, Donkeyshow.

Or don't you know? Please see here.

Just an observation....



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by starviego

Originally posted by malcr
The negative report modifies "stripped of their belongings" to become "strip searched".

Why don't you quote the whole sentence? "Stripped of their belongings and clothes..."


No kidding... I'm always surprised at the number of ATS posters who like to outright deny the truth. Just because some sugar coated article exists doesn't change the facts of the event.

"Oh cmon, they have a great vacation after all the stripping of clothes and personal interrogation, being taken from their mother and put in an orphanage."

Yea... sounds like they had an awesome time.



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by NewWorldOver
 


Sadly, about 28% to 33% of people have some degree of Authoritarian Personality Disorder. They will support or deny any abuse of authority, no matter how outrageous or obvious.

Not only do they not have the psychological capacity to question authority figures, but they are enraged and bewildered by those who do.


[edit on 1/25/08 by xmotex]



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 05:04 PM
link   
People here are making such a fuss about strip searches, almost as if they were gang raped and sold into prostitution .

Do you people know how many people across the world are strip searched every single day at airports? Even state dignitaries sometimes are strip searched accidentally ! Strip searches are the best means of thorough examination and scrutiny of an individual, this neither an abuse nor some kind of molestation. In fact refusal to undergo a strip search leads to arrest in many cases. People should be happy that these girls were not 'probed' .



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 06:49 PM
link   
Does this count as an international incident? i mean if they had concerns shouldn't it be done through the Embassey?

Pretty scary behaviour..



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by IAF101
 


So, if this happened to two teenage American girls in London, you;d be cool with that?

We wouldn't here cries of Police State (seeing as that is the prevailing belief you guys have of the UK)?

You'd just chalk it down to experience, right?



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Were they abused and suicidal???

Not until after the state decided to "help" them.

[edit on 25-1-2008 by Fuzzyone]



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 09:04 PM
link   
This is the WORST written article Ive ever seen from the BBC....

Time to dig for other sources folks cause the BBC article is so poorly written and lacking of almost any basic factual data that until someone comes up with a better source we should remain skeptical.

First-New York is a pretty big state so WHERE were they on holiday to begin with? Harlem is the only reference weve been left to go by. Just because the mother ended up in a hospital in Harlem we are supposed to figure out exactly where these events took place for ourselves?

Second-Timeline, what timeline? In what order did said events happen?

Third-The article says that the girls were forced to shower in front of strangers. Which strangers? The child service workers or the other kids in the orphanage? Both?

I fully understand that there are evil ppl that unfortunately end up "protecting" children. But for now Im going to give them the benefit of the doubt. The only things that I can gather are:

Something or somethings could be anything but it must have been pretty severe whatever it was to make the CPS(ChildProtectiveServices is what Im used to calling them)officers have such a knee-jerk reaction.

Lastly, until I can find an in depth professionally written account of the affair then the only thing Ill cast judgement on is that the BBC owes an apology to its readership for what seems to be a shock story to grab ppls attention thats so poorly put together it almost seems made up five minuites before the media cycle or press whichever you want to call it and for now just seems to be an effort to meet content load.

Sigh...Ill start with the Washington Post. The reason I had so much respect for the BBC is that I was always under the impression that they did more research and were a bit better at getting the facts right.



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 09:42 PM
link   
It is sad that any time you find yourself in trouble, you are immediately treated like a criminal. This should not be the standard way people are treated, especially not children.

Then again, CPS could not just leave the girls at their hotel. What if they had gotten the bright idea of wondering around, and gotten themselves killed.

Taking their clothes and other possessions makes sense, it keeps them from being robbed, and prevented them from being put into a situation where they had to protect their belongings from other kids in the institution.

The reality is that there probably wasn't anyplace else for them to go, and they were placed in the best situation possible. Nobody in this country wants to help people down on their luck these days, so this is what we have to risk.



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 09:49 PM
link   
whats wrong with you guys bombing iraq using depleted uranium and white phospherus on iraq children protects your freedom.

shooting 8 yr old boys on youtube protects your freedom.

strip searching 10 yr old girls protects your freedom.

havent you heard of exploding bubble gum i dont trust them.

didnt u see mission impossable.

beware of bubble gum.Bazooka joe is dangerous.


Ps take your Thermasol mercury is good for you.

Bombing iraq innocent children and mosks protects your freedom.

dont argue love the NWO



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 10:07 PM
link   
Vhat are you people so up in a unt tizzy about? Zis takingk of zee children vas for zier own good. You dont realize zhat zis children could have been infected vith some sort of disease. And since zee mother vas sick unt zee hospital, ve had zee chance to show zee reast of Amerika zhat vee have zee ability to care for everyone, even zee children of foreigners.


Zhat is all, you can go now as soon as you show me your papers.

[edit on 25-1-2008 by DisabledVet]



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


If it were two American girls, it wouldnt have been such a fuss. A strip search is just a thorough examination. You wouldnt find a lot of Americans calling it a "police state" or the other wild conclusions most of the misguided people here have stated.

The UK is a police state, no doubt about it, but a strip search while processing girls through the child services system is not a qualification of a police state. A grid of CCTV cameras across the nation monitoring citizens however, definitely qualifies it.



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 11:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Strapping Young Lad
First-New York is a pretty big state so WHERE were they on holiday to begin with? Harlem is the only reference weve been left to go by. Just because the mother ended up in a hospital in Harlem we are supposed to figure out exactly where these events took place for ourselves?

They were holidaying in the city of New York. Harlem is a borough of the city of new york. What I cant figure out is why in world did they go to the hospital in Harlem when they are living in Queens ? Also I suspect the mother made a fuss about her daughters and that is why the hospital called child services. Otherwise they wouldnt have bothered.



posted on Jan, 26 2008 @ 12:35 AM
link   
reply to post by IAF101
 


And there we go with the absurd and completely incorrect assumption about the UK, CCTV and this "Police State" crap.

Burma is a police state.

China is a Police State

Belarus is a Police State.

There is no "grid" of CCTV monitoring citizens. 95% of CCTV in the UK is privately owned by businesses and citizens to protect property and record images in case of crime. No one monitors it, no one is sitting there following your movements, it's hardly George Orwell.

I wish people would stop spouting this crap. It's ironic, because most people will cite the commonly known "fact" that Londoners are caught 300 times a day on CCTV, but that figure comes from the very same report which states exactly what I said in the above paragraph. Nice cherry picking of data to suit your own ends. I bet most people haven't even read that report and just regurgitate what they "heard" as "fact".



posted on Jan, 26 2008 @ 10:25 AM
link   
Heath Ledger apparently had pneumonia at the time of his death in NYC last week (which may or may not have been a contributing factor to his demise.)

Google "Heath Ledger Pneumonia" for related links.

#

This woman, and her daughters, walked around NYC for hours, infecting a lot of people with her case of pneumonia.

Could there be a connection? Is it possible that this woman, by walking around NYC for hours in DISREGARD TO PUBLIC SAFETY, actually KILLED one of our beloved movie stars?

Or is that too inflammatory a speculation at this point?


One thing is a fact: pneumonia appears to the 3rd largest cause of death for New Yorkers in 2006. See here.

EDIT: Of course this premise is unlikely, but given the other rabble-rousing and reckless speculation associated with this thread, and general vitriol of some of the posters, I thought I would throw this in the mix, just to show that anyone can distort reality with partial facts. Why succumb to brashness and hatred based upon pure speculation?

I know that we are better than that!

[edit on 26-1-2008 by Buck Division]



posted on Jan, 26 2008 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Buck Division
 


I'm having trouble understanding why you are railing against this woman for walking around with pneumonia. First, it is highly unlikely for someone to get pneumonia from another person. They can spread the myriad germs that can lead to pneumonia, but not necessarily the condition itself.

Moreover, how many people do you think are walking around in NY at this very moment without healthcare and also have these same germs? It likely numbers in the hundreds if not thousands everyday...always.



EDIT:

I see you edited your post.

[edit on 26-1-2008 by loam]



posted on Jan, 26 2008 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by loam
 

Yeah, I was being sarcastic. After I read the post, I realized I was being too subtle, and went back to edit my post. Thanks for picking up on this, Loam.

If I am making any point here, it is that there are somethings worse than putting kids in protective custody for the night, such as dying a painful drowning death from pneumonia. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. But at least there is some "good intentions" within this story.

Also, I was trying to say that it is easy to twist facts with partial information. That seems an appropriate thought for this site.

Appreciate the comment, Loam!



posted on Jan, 26 2008 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


The fact that over 20% of the worlds CCTV's are in the UK or the fact that the British Homeland Security office spends 78% of its budget on CCTV's or the fact that there is one camera for every 14 people in the UK or the fact that apart from CCTV's there is also an extensive database of personal information coupled with behavior recognition software coupled with facial recognition technology can all hardly be discounted as nothing less than total state sponsored pervasive domestic intelligence gathering. Like the STASI in East Germany the MI5 in Britian and the homeland security office are determined in the total and absolute submission of the populace and use this "grid" of CCTV's to check for 'bad' behavior. The claim that "nobody" is watching is yet again another fairy tale that nobody believes because every news paper has been shown the surveillance bunkers manned and staffed 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.

I just typed in CCTV britian and was inundated with articles, the first one being Police state



posted on Jan, 26 2008 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Anybody who thinks a strip search is 'nothing' has never been forced to undergo such a humiliating procedure. But it's not about safety--it's about the State saying to you: "I own your ass."



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join