It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I'm sorry but I really cannot see how you can blame the parents for this, they did not take their child to the airport in order for him to be searched, they went to the airport to catch a flight,
The Right To Travel
As the Supreme Court notes in Saenz v Roe, 98-97 (1999), the Constitution does not contain the word "travel" in any context, let alone an explicit right to travel (except for members of Congress, who are guaranteed the right to travel to and from Congress). The presumed right to travel, however, is firmly established in U.S. law and precedent. In U.S. v Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Court noted, "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In fact, in Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), Justice Stewart noted in a concurring opinion that "it is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all." It is interesting to note that the Articles of Confederation had an explicit right to travel; it is now thought that the right is so fundamental that the Framers may have thought it unnecessary to include it in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.
Originally posted by Prince Of Darkness
Protecting our country from terrorists is meaningless if, in the process, we turn our country into something not worth protecting.
# Severe Condition (Red). A Severe Condition reflects a severe risk of terrorist attacks. Under most circumstances, the Protective Measures for a Severe Condition are not intended to be sustained for substantial periods of time. In addition to the Protective Measures in the previous Threat Conditions, Federal departments and agencies also should consider the following general measures in addition to the agency-specific Protective Measures that they will develop and implement:
1. Increasing or redirecting personnel to address critical emergency needs;
2. Assigning emergency response personnel and pre-positioning and mobilizing specially trained teams or resources;
3. Monitoring, redirecting, or constraining transportation systems; and
4. Closing public and government facilities.
Originally posted by ToneDeaf
scanners can reveal boob jobs, tampons and diaphragms ?
Lol, wonder what would happen if I wore one of those
T-shirts with the pilsburry doughboy on it that says
"poke me and die"
Originally posted by gift0fpr0phecy
reply to post by darrylss
This entire topic reminds me of Rorschach tests which use inkblots for a psychological evaluation.
Psychologist: "Tell me... what do you see here?"
ATSMember1: "A guy groping a child!"
ATSMember2: "A TSA agent molesting someone!"
ATSMember3: "A pedophile grabbing a childs junk in front of his father!"
ATSMember4: "Child porn!"
Psychologist: "Hhhmmmmm..... ooook then...."
Psychologist: "And what do you see here?"
ATSMembers: "TSA gropes young boy's testicles while he is strip searched in front of everyone."
Psychologist: "Hhhmmmmm..... alrighty then.... You just may have issues."
Originally posted by ParkerCramer
reply to post by SeenMyShare
you are arguing symantics right now, it would seem that both you and the previous poster agree that its the parents responsibility.
now i agree it is a parents responsibility to protect there children, but we are not witnessing this child being subjected to this by any individual, this is OUR GOVERNMENT. this changes the whole scenario.
that parent had the choice of cooperating, or refusing.
we all saw the outcome of cooperating, now if they refused they would of had to wait for local law enforcement, they would of been subjected to a 10,000 fine, and probably would of been detained by law enforcement, which would of put the child possibly in the position of being handed over to child protective services.
now, there is a third option, like any good parent, if you saw your child being molested, you would probably defend your child, now heres the slippery slope, those are government employees, that would be a federal offense.
let me ask you this, are you saying that you new, prior to seeing this video that the tsa was going to start strip searching our children in public, and you did not warn us???
you are using the parents should of known as your defense, so, why should they of known?? please tell us.