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.

 

Cancer Surviving Flight Attendant Forced To Remove Prosthetic Breast During Pat-Down

page: 10
41
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 05:50 AM
link   
I have been giving quite a bit of thought to this subject as I truly believe that security is not the ultimate agenda in these types of searches.

As a citizen of the UK, growing up in the 1970's and 1980's where terrorist attacks by the IRA were commonplace, and not limited to military targets, I cast my mind back to how the public reacted to these events and the type of security measures that were put in place to prevent attacks. Whilst I can remember visiting London in the late 70's as a 9/10 year old and being subjected to very long, slow moving queues, as security staff carried out bag searches, these were done in a sympathetic and sensible way. I remember as we got closer to the front of the queue, getting my shoulder bag ready, and was waved through by the guard, who smiled and said "Oh I think you'll be okay" though they did search my mum's bag. Similarly, they waved through a couple of Japanese tourists - well I suppose it was extremely unlikely that they were Irish terrorists! So whilst every attack was greeted by the public with horror and anger and yes, Irish citizens were more likely to be singled out, the total fear and paranoia created post 9/11 by the "War on Terror" just didn't exist back then, even though there have been far many more attacks on the UK by Republican terrorists than by any Islamic terror group. Here's a list of terror attacks on the UK, sorry it is a wiki one, but gives a general idea:

Terror Attacks UK

Furthermore research from the Economic Social Research Council ESRC Suspect Communities shows the differences of the perceived threat by communities from the Irish community as a whole to Muslims


One of the most significant differences we note from our Mapping Analysis
is the tendency of the press to downplay the representation of the Irish as a whole as a threat, especially when compared with the tendency to magnify and extend the perceived threat posed by Muslims to entire communities. We found that Muslims were homogenized as a cultural and religious Other outside Britishness. Whereas, the Irish/IRA tend to be homogenized as a threat to British institutions and the British State.


and also notes that Catholicism was rarely referred to in relation to bombing campaigns whereas Islam is


While political actors rarely if ever made speeches explicitly relating to Catholicism when addressing the IRA bombing campaign in Britain, since the 1990s there were frequent and open mentions of Islam and Muslims under New Labour. This shows both an attempt to extend the parameters of what was problematized within New Labour’s ‘project’ of social cohesion, and a shift in public perceptions of terrorism. The IRA had come to be understood and fought as a domestic problem, whereas so-called Islamist terrorism came to be framed ontologically as an attack on globally shared liberal values and on British society.


Security measures taken during the height of the IRA's bombing campaign in the UK focussed mainly in the centre of London and emulated Belfast's "Ring of Steel" protecting the main political and financial sectors but this study by Coaffee in 2004 showed that the notion of downplaying security measures was a vital element in keeping a balance between vigilant, yet calm in order to reduce the "Siege Mentality" effect that in fact gives the terrorists a "Propaganda Gift" in terms of realising their objectives of control through fear (Sorry can't copy anything from this pdf!)

With the introduction of greater security measures following the 7/7 attacks on London by Islamic terrorists, it is notable that the suggested measures will do nothing to prevent the type of attacks that London has experienced in the past, and as such it is important to really question why this is being done and if in fact measures that curtail the liberty of citizens are playing into the hands of terrorists as noted in this article in the Telegraph Balancing Liberty with Counter Terrorism

Therefore, I really do question the validity to remove a prothestic breast from a long-standing airline employee in the name of security and the assumption that we "all have the potential to be terrorists" It is incorrect and it is very possibly counter productive as the terrorist has in fact won - we are prisoners of our own fear and of our Governments and this type of routine assault is totally unacceptable.




posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 07:12 AM
link   
Bladder Cancer Patient Humiliated by TSA Pat-Down
More Hope and Change from those who voted for obama

A retired special education teacher on his way to a wedding in Orlando, Fla., said he was left humiliated, crying and covered with his own urine after an enhanced pat-down by TSA officers recently at Detroit Metropolitan Airport.

[quote="Mike_W"]

This is more of Obama’s degradation of the U.S.A.
A little post election stick-it-to-middle-class-America revenge.

TSA was started under the Bush administration. Invasive screening was introduced under the supervision of far-left Democrat, Janet Napolitano, who was appointed by obama (alias Saebarkah Abdullah Hussein obama). obama claims no responsibility for the TSA actions, even though Janet Napolitano works directly for him.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 07:35 AM
link   
Question for subject matter experts of this, the Above Top Secret website.

Do TSA screeners have the medical credentials to examine patients? Should they be required to be board-certified to examine patients?

If so, then why hasn't the argument been brought before a federal judge?

I realize the above could be construed as an implied justification for the invasive screening, and that's certainly not the intent, given that the pre-November policy met the standards; instead, the above query is intended (in part) to reveal the farce in the new implementation of the invasive screenings.
edit on 21/11/10 by Adonsa because: Fixed gramatical error in line 2



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 08:07 AM
link   
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 


And today I read this: www.msnbc.msn.com...

This has to stop!!! OMG! I can't imagine the humiliation.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 02:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 



YOU are the fearful one. You fear your liberties are being taken away because you think you have a right to board someone else's aircraft freely


OK genius the aircraft are privately owned by the airline so the federal government is violating their right to be secure in their property. Do you really think the Airlines would choose to put people through this nonsense if they had a choice since they are near bankrupts because of it?... Sigh!

Yea we really need security at the airports while millions come across our southern border yearly unchecked... Sigh!


I am not the one fearing my liberties are being taken away, because they aren't.


Sigh again!.. No one is more enslaved then he who thinks he is free when he is not. There is not much you can do in this country anymore without permission from and being extorted by some government agency.

But hey stupid is as stupid does...


How is the federal government violating the 4th for an airline? C'mon, genius, let's hear it. Do you really think any airline would relax on their security? They are already "bankrupts" as you say, so one mistake would most likely take out their company.

Also, try having a complete lock down on our borders, every single bit of it. Let's see how you manage the whole operation. Let's see how many people you will have to deploy, and how much money you will be wasting in the mean time. There's so much open land, anyone can literally walk in, and we don't only have that problem, but almost every single other country has it, ever if it's an island!

And that quote you provided, my dad loves. I laugh, though, cause I know he is enslaved by money. It's funny how you say you can't do anything in this country anymore without permission. Really, cause I've never, ever had to ask permission for almost everything I do every single day of my life. I do not fear the government is trying to take our rights by putting security in airports. I bet if they really wanted to take our rights, they would actually invade our houses, truly violating the 4th. But of course, you live in fear, and are blinded by it.



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Gnarly
 





And that quote you provided, my dad loves. I laugh, though, cause I know he is enslaved by money. It's funny how you say you can't do anything in this country anymore without permission. Really, cause I've never, ever had to ask permission for almost everything I do every single day of my life. I do not fear the government is trying to take our rights by putting security in airports. I bet if they really wanted to take our rights, they would actually invade our houses, truly violating the 4th. But of course, you live in fear, and are blinded by it.


LOL how many licenses and permits did you have to have to do all those things you think you do without permission... Got in your car to do do something without permission oops had to get permission just to drive the car and permission for the car to be on the road in the way of license and registration and that is just two of many. And you think I am blind... As I said stupid is as stupid does.



new topics

top topics
 
41
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join