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.

 

A lesson in Patriot Act Abuse

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 12:17 PM
link   
We have all heard how the Patriot Act is only there to protect us from terrorism. Then we hear about how the government has begun to use it against it's own citizens for drug investigations. Now I come across this article and it really hit home just how wide reaching and out of control it really is.

I have never been in any situation where I feel I could be accused of anything even close to terrorism. I don't walk in any circles that have anything to do with the drug culture. This being said, I have to admit that although I have read stories about how abusive the Patriot Act can be on our rights, I never really considered it affecting me personally. Then I read this story.

www.latimes.com...

"Tamera Jo Freeman lost custody of her children after an incident on a Frontier Airlines flight. "A woman spanking her child is not as great a threat to aviation as members of Al Qaeda with box cutters," says one expert."

This woman lost custody of her children after being charged under provisions of the Patriot Act for getting into an argument with a flight attendant! Yes, maybe she was disorderly but come on! What did this lady's behavior have to do with terrorism?

This story is an eye opener for me. It really makes me wonder what other ingenious uses can be found for the act. It has prompted me to contact my Senator's office to voice my opinion for the first time ever! I hope this story motivates others to do the same!




posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by slicobacon
 




Hopefully the Obamaman will end this treatment by repealing the Patriot Act.
However, don't think that will happen.

I have flown only once since 9-11, and have no plans on doing it again.
The best way to fight this is to stay off of commercial flights.
Boycott the airlines.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by pyrytyes
 


Ok - here's the other part of my concern - I work for an airline and I know just how unfriendly flight attendants can become. Don't get me wrong, most of them are wonderful - and our airline has the best in the industry hands down (this should tell you who I work for) BUT I can understand howtheir attitude can escalate problems and confrontations aboard an aircraft. Yes, they have a demanding job at times, but come on - is everyone who they get ticked off at a terrorist?



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 12:55 PM
link   
from the check in desk to the baggage claim, it seems that everyone i meet is a jumped up, lazy, jobsworth a**hole. it doesn't surprise me that they try to use any random legislation against the paying passenger.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 12:58 PM
link   
No matter how well intended laws are meant to be, you will always find an individual prosecutor or politician attempting to overreach with such law. In many of these circumstances, common sense doesn't exist.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 01:08 PM
link   
I read other articles about this, one is active on this board, and that article said that witnesses said she was beating her kids, who were trying to hide underneath the seats to get away from her. It also said that it wasn't tomatoe juice, but a bloody mary and that she threw it at the attendant. She was also drunk and very abusive toward the attendant.


Either this article isn't telling the complete story or the other one is making up things. Which one are you willing to believe?



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
No matter how well intended laws are meant to be, you will always find an individual prosecutor or politician attempting to overreach with such law. In many of these circumstances, common sense doesn't exist.


This may be a true statement, but it really doesn't relate to the Patriot Act. I mean, the Patriot Act was put into place with the specific goal of stripping the Bill of Rights from us.

So it's no wonder we see draconian application.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by jd140
 


If you read both articles, I'm sure the truth lies somewhere in the middle. I can't defend this woman one bit and I'm not attempting to BUT - she was punished using the Patriot Act which was passed to help with the war on terror! This is not about her abuse, but the governments. Even the worst behavior betrayed does not in my opinion fall under the guise of terrorism!



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by slicobacon
 




I over-reacted, sorry. That from me.
Perhaps it could have been just as easy for either of the parties involved here.

I bet the mother was really perturbed at wearing her Bloody Mary, and striking her kids, another over-reaction? No, I know I would be pissed if someone spilled my Bloody Mary...good alcohol gone to waste!

The attendant probably should have gotten a towel for the lady, and another drink. Kids will be kids, and we need to discipline them on occasion. That part of it is no concern of mine, nor should it have been for the attendant. On of those- "that's life" moments. Saying that the attendant over-reacted, and the interference may have escalated the situation.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by jd140
I read other articles about this, one is active on this board, and that article said that witnesses said she was beating her kids, who were trying to hide underneath the seats to get away from her. It also said that it wasn't tomatoe juice, but a bloody mary and that she threw it at the attendant. She was also drunk and very abusive toward the attendant.


Either this article isn't telling the complete story or the other one is making up things. Which one are you willing to believe?


Personally, I'm not willing to blindly believe either version of the story. Of course each is written biasedly to convey a certain story and outcome. I'm fairly certain the incident was somewhere in between.

What I am sure of is that, regardless of which version you believe, or if it was somewhere in the middle, this woman did not violate the patriot act and should not have had the children removed from her custody based on one incident on an airplane. No matter how you slice it, what happened wasn't right.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Layla
 


Using the Patriot Act is a little harsh, but if she was beating her kids as bad as the other article said then her kids should be taken away from her. I'm all for spanking your kids, but some witnesses said she was hitting their shoulders, back and legs. That constitute abuse and removal of her children is warrented.

or

Just like most things we read about, both of them are lying and the truth will not get published. After all, both make fantastic headlines, who needs the whole truth.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by jd140
reply to post by Layla
 


Using the Patriot Act is a little harsh, but if she was beating her kids as bad as the other article said then her kids should be taken away from her. I'm all for spanking your kids, but some witnesses said she was hitting their shoulders, back and legs. That constitute abuse and removal of her children is warrented.

or

Just like most things we read about, both of them are lying and the truth will not get published. After all, both make fantastic headlines, who needs the whole truth.


You think so? Without so much as an investigation? I'd disagree. If witnesses say that's what happened, then perhaps that is ground for opening a CPS case and keeping a watch on mom, but just taking her kids away? No way, not without any prior evidence of abuse. Sorry. That opens up all kinds of doors for the government. Suppose an anonymous tip was plaed against you for striking your child and they just walked in and took your kids without a further looking into the matter?

I've been on a plane or two in my life and I can imagine the scenario. The kid spills the drink, after already having been told to settle down. Drink flus, kids panic, cause they know they're in trouble and they try to hide...under the seat, maybe run from the aisle. In a space the size of an airplane aisle, a small struggle to settle her kids down and get them back in their seats could appear far worse. The surrounding audience would have views obstructed by the seats, and other people trying to get a sneak peak. It's not as if this was happening in a large open space, there's barely even room to move in an airplane aisle.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Layla
 



Wasn't there, don't know.

That is why I said if they were being beaten as bad as the EYE witnesses said then taking them was the right thing. Also considering those same witnesses said that she was drunk.

You are right, airplanes are cramped. So an eye witness should have a front row seat to all the festivites.

Again, I don't know, I wasn't there.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Yes airplanes are cramped. Child abuse happens. But should this honestly be covered by the Patriot Act? Criminal charges fine. But if you read the article, she didn't lose her kids for child abuse, she was prosecuted under the Patriot Act which was passed to fight terrorism.

You don't have to be there to know she probably is not a good mother and all that BUT is she a terrorist?



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by slicobacon
Yes airplanes are cramped. Child abuse happens. But should this honestly be covered by the Patriot Act? Criminal charges fine. But if you read the article, she didn't lose her kids for child abuse, she was prosecuted under the Patriot Act which was passed to fight terrorism.

You don't have to be there to know she probably is not a good mother and all that BUT is she a terrorist?


Already said that using the patriot act against her was wrong.

Why do I need to repeat that?



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 11:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by pyrytyes
reply to post by slicobacon
 




Hopefully the Obamaman will end this treatment by repealing the Patriot Act.
However, don't think that will happen.

I have flown only once since 9-11, and have no plans on doing it again.
The best way to fight this is to stay off of commercial flights.
Boycott the airlines.



Why do people keep looking to government to change itself? I don't look to a murderer to stop killing, I don't turn to religious leaders to stop pandering their religion, I don't turn to police to police the criminals in their own rank and file, I turn to the Governed to Govern themselves, yet, they repeatedly look to their Government to clean up the Laws that govern them. This Country is in dire need of a Civil War if only to root out the Governed who cannot Govern their Governors. I don't blame Government for the messes We get into, even if it seems like it's their fault, it's not, it's usually the fault of the Morons being Governed.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by slicobacon
Yes airplanes are cramped. Child abuse happens. But should this honestly be covered by the Patriot Act? Criminal charges fine. But if you read the article, she didn't lose her kids for child abuse, she was prosecuted under the Patriot Act which was passed to fight terrorism.

You don't have to be there to know she probably is not a good mother and all that BUT is she a terrorist?


Spanking Your Child is not child abuse. Permanantly and/ or severely physically or emotionally scarring them for life or causing death is. If you give them a whelt and it goes away, it's neither permanant or severe. If the whelt is accompanied by a broken rib or a damaged organ, it is. God, people can be so ignorant. Spanking is not abuse, pouring hot water is. If you don't know the difference-- don't raise a child or discipline one. To think spanking is unnecessary, I give you today's children as proof of your ignorance and adultifying those who should not be adultified. If you want to be your child's friend, let them dress as they please, and then they get raped, don't whine about how the rapist should have made the distinction in age you could or would not. I was argued that whipping children is child abuse, now, these same people who argued me have it hanging up and framed in writing, a statement from Social Services, not only saying as much, but also, authorizing it.

The flight attendant was out of her jurisdiction and I would have sued her for a felony Parental and Custodial Interferance resulting in the commission of a Crime.

Government is more dysfunctial and less efficient than they are painted to be. These arrestees under the Patriot Act for actions which are already illegal under existing laws-- except for spanking your child(ren) which is actually legal despite ignorance of so called experts and parents who live in fantasyland-- the Patriot Act does not apply as it's application is beyond and outside of the scope of it's stated intent. These folks are political prisoners and there lawyers are morons who don't deserve to practice Law.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 11:49 PM
link   
There is no doubt in my mind that this case is an abuse of the Patriot Act, which, quite bluntly, is an abuse of the Constitution. However, here is a different story of what actually happened, just for the record:

www.rockymountainnews.com...


It is impossible to feel sorry for Tamera Jo Freeman. No, you have to reserve that for her kids, a 2-year-old boy and 4-year-old girl, who for much of the past week have been living with strangers while their mom has sat in jail. By now you have probably heard the story of how the 38-year-old woman single-handedly turned a San Francisco-to-Denver flight on Monday into a cussing, beating, finger-pointing episode of The Jerry Springer Show. That it was even allowed to happen still stuns me. Let us say you are in, oh, the supermarket. You see a woman, clearly drunk, simply smacking the bejeezus out of her 2-year-old boy and 4-year-old daughter. What do you do? In Tamera Jo Freeman's case, witnesses who later came forward told of the woman beating her kids even before they got on the plane. She had been drinking in the airport. And when the youngest of her kids bucked at going with her into the bathroom of the San Francisco airport, she slapped him and dropped him on his head. What would you have done? On the plane now, the woman, it is alleged, immediately sets in on the kids again, alternately cursing and slapping at them and then neglecting them. They were interfering with her ability to watch a movie. It gets worse. The toddlers knock over yet another drink their mother had been working on. She starts hammering away at the kids with an open hand. The kids start wailing. No one does anything. Yet many, it turns out, had either seen or definitely heard the beatings, witnessed the kids spending most of the flight cowering, scared and crying. Flight attendant Amy Fleming finally tries to intervene. "Mind your own business," Tamera Jo Freeman allegedly spits, before demanding another drink. Fleming refuses. The woman then curses Amy Fleming and, amazingly, witnesses said, flings a drink at her. No one does anything. Here's a part I really don't get. Tamera Jo Fleming allegedly leaves her seat and corners the flight attendant, screaming at her. Not too long ago, such an act would have gotten you beaten up and handcuffed, or worse. Two years ago, a half-dozen or so passengers tackled and beat a 37-year-old man who rushed a flight attendant on Southwest Airlines Flight 2161 from Philadelphia to West Palm Beach, Fla., after she asked him to stop bothering others. Only last month, an off-duty sheriff's deputy had to wrestle and beat a man who went nuts and tried to open a door of a US Airways plane as it began its descent. Amy Fleming had to ask a corrections officer who happened to be on the plane to sit next to Tamera Jo Fleming, you know, just in case. She also retrieved the plane's duct tape and stood next to the woman in case they had to strap her down. Tamera Jo Freeman appeared in federal court Friday and was ordered held until Thursday. She is charged with assaulting her children and interfering with a flight crew, according to federal court documents. The Federal Aviation Administration, in its latest report on the subject, says there have been only 33 reported instances of air rage between Jan. 1 and June 7. This compares with the 131 reported cases last year, light-years behind the 299 reported in 2001. "We have no idea of the reason behind this trend," said Victoria Day, a spokeswoman for the Air Transport Association, an airline industry group, and none too willing to discuss the subject. It could be post-9/11 hangover, the knowledge that fellow passengers will not now sit idly by when a flight crew comes under attack, says Diana Fairechild, an authority on air travel, health and safety who runs flyana.com, a Web site for those taking to the air. She has read of Tamera Jo Freeman's case, and takes a different view: The woman, she says, may be a victim in all of this. "This happens because people are herded in long lines onto planes, are treated like cargo in seats smaller than those on subways, with no food, no liquids and little, badly contaminated air," she said. Well, she did apparently have liquids. "It sounds to me," Diana Fairechild said, "like she just flipped. Every day, all over the country, ordinary people are cracking. I feel sorry for her. She's in trouble." The reason no one intervened is likely because no one viewed her as a terrorist, she said. With a man, the outcome probably would have been different. "For her, it was a good thing," Diana Fairechild said. I still say nine out of 10 people would have held her down for the cops had Tamera Jo Freeman done the same thing to her kids on, say, the 16th Street Mall. We owe it not to her, but to the children. "We can't know for certain," Diana Fairechild said, "what was actually going on in that space, at that exact moment. Most people have a sense of when to get involved. She was just a berserk passenger." It is still a shame.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by slicobacon
 


The only thing that bothers me about the Patriot Act is that it is geared towards monitoring people who are generally, law biding citizens.

My life was threatened last night while attending classes at the community college. The young man shouted, for many to hear, "I'm going to beat you to death! I'm going to kill you!" He is a practiced less-than-pro MMA fighter who is ripped and anxious to square off with anyone who will stand toe to toe with him. He even squared off with an off-duty police officer taking the same class. I was scared.

In this case, I would call this man a terrorist as he was creating a sense of terror in me and other students. However, that's not the way the law looks at it.

As far as the lady on the plane goes, I saw the TV report and would figure that the only one on the plane who could possibly feel afraid was the child, but then again, the child had reason to be afraid. Discipline can be a real bitch. Spanking/disciplining ones own child isn't against any law nor is it a prohibited activity on jets and the only reason the law is giving her such a difficult time is because our society frowns on any types of physical punishments towards our children. The other people on the plane weren't scared of her. They were appalled with her response to her child's continuous miss behaving. However, the Patriot Act could be loosely applied if the discipline caused a reasonable disruption to the normal flight operations on board. For this matter, an unruly drunk could face similar charges.

Four years before 9/11, I was traveling on a flight from Phoenix to LA and checked a hand gun into baggage without declaring it, as I had done before, years earlier, without needing to declare it. My luggage was lost and when I told them my gun was in it they then told me I should've declared it. They told me I broke the law but airlines don't post signs so how could I know of the change. When they found my luggage, it was turned over first to airport security, who did a background check on the gun and me; second to the LAPD who also did background checks; third, the FAA who did background checks; then FHPD who did background checks, FAA again who did more background checks and then it was finally returned to me 8 months later, minus any ammunitions. This was an inanimate object which flew in the baggage compartment.

Just imagine how long it may take for the lady to get her child back.



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join