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.

 

TSA gropes young boy's testicles while he is strip searched in front of everyone

page: 32
173
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


Stop acting like the truth matters...

This is the age of Fox News.....

Objectivity and accuracy is so lame stream

clearly we as a nation have chosen BS over accuracy,
spin and sensaltionalism over objective journalism..

Emotions are important...not truth..

Facts, evidence and accuracy are so lame and old fashioned.

Clearly this TSA Agent is groping this boys genitals, even if the video doesn't show anything of the sort, the OP claims it and it sure does grab attention, so it must be true.!!

C'mon get with the program!!!




posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


Just remind me to not let you babysit for me.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by maybereal11
 


Haha, I know mate!



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


Just remind me to not let you babysit for me.


Are you trying to insinuate that you wouldn't allow me to babysit your child for fear I may "grope" him or her?

That's a pretty serious implication...



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 12:44 PM
link   
My bad
edit on 11/12/2010 by kcs7272 because: messed up



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by NeverApologize
 


First off they would be GROPING him not what you spelled. Secondly HE IS NOT BEING GROPED! Have you ever been groped by your lover? Evidently not if you think that this pst down that took less than a minute is groping.

I agree with Overnight. You people are freaking able to be brainwashed with one thought planted in your pea brains.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


Just remind me to not let you babysit for me.


Are you trying to insinuate that you wouldn't allow me to babysit your child for fear I may "grope" him or her?

That's a pretty serious implication...


No, I am insinuating that, in my estimation, your judgement for what may or may not be safe for my children is suspect.

Ask yourself this: if the action was performed behind a building in a park, would the screener have been arrested?



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by kcs7272
reply to post by NeverApologize
 


First off they would be GROPING him not what you spelled. Secondly HE IS NOT BEING GROPED! Have you ever been groped by your lover? Evidently not if you think that this pst down that took less than a minute is groping.

I agree with Overnight. You people are freaking able to be brainwashed with one thought planted in your pea brains.


Yes. One thought. Such as, "The terrorists want to blow you up".

Too bad it happens so infrequently. How many folks do you know, personally, that have died in a plane crash? Not many people do. The number of folks who know someone in America who has died in a terrorist attack, outside of NYC, is even slimmer.

IT makes total sense for me to have to get Gate Raped just so i can get on a puddle jumper to fly from Midland, TX to El Paso, TX, and avoid the worlds most boring 5 hour drive.
edit on 23-11-2010 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
No, I am insinuating that, in my estimation, your judgement for what may or may not be safe for my children is suspect.

Ask yourself this: if the action was performed behind a building in a park, would the screener have been arrested?


Okay so now my judgement on whats best for children is now flawed?

The facts have already been presented, it cannot be proven one way or another whether that child was "groped" or not and I'm pretty sure that if he was then his father would have done something about it.

There's a little bit of a difference between a stranger behind a building touching up a child for his own sexual pleasure and that of the actions of a TSA employee who is doing what he is paid to do in the interest of national security.

I don't need to post links/sources about children being used as weapons as other members have already posted these sources to prove this has happened in the past and thus could happen in the future.

Nothing about the little boy in the video suggests he's either uncomfortable or being violated, I just wish people would stop over dramatizing something to support their own opinions because quite frankly it's pathetic.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
No, I am insinuating that, in my estimation, your judgement for what may or may not be safe for my children is suspect.

Ask yourself this: if the action was performed behind a building in a park, would the screener have been arrested?


Okay so now my judgement on whats best for children is now flawed?


having received many, many hours of behavioral interviewing training, I see the validity in my logic.




The facts have already been presented, it cannot be proven one way or another whether that child was "groped" or not and I'm pretty sure that if he was then his father would have done something about it.


Yes, the facts have been presented. I would say that in the majority of peoples opinions in this thread, a "reasonable doubt" has been ascertained. The threshold for conviction has been met.



There's a little bit of a difference between a stranger behind a building touching up a child for his own sexual pleasure and that of the actions of a TSA employee who is doing what he is paid to do in the interest of national security.


There is. One major difference is if the stranger does it, the boy can seek justice by contacting the authorities. When the TSA does it, they ARE the authorities. Who do you contact?

Regardless, the "national security" banner is BS. I do not buy it. I see no need to maintain national security when we are not even under attack (and haven't been in a decade). A reasonable prudence? Sure. But not Gate Raping. There was a time when things like "privacy" and "rights" meant something in America.




I don't need to post links/sources about children being used as weapons as other members have already posted these sources to prove this has happened in the past and thus could happen in the future.


When was the last time this happened in America, on a domestic flight? How many of those kids had Anglo backgrounds and blond hair? It is a strawman. I like the way Krauthammer put it:



That riff is a crowd-pleaser because everyone knows that the entire apparatus of the security line is a national homage to political correctness. Nowhere do more people meekly acquiesce to more useless inconvenience and needless indignity for less purpose. Wizened seniors strain to untie their shoes; beltless salesmen struggle comically to hold up their pants; 3-year-olds scream while being searched insanely for explosives - when everyone, everyone, knows that none of these people is a threat to anyone.

The ultimate idiocy is the full-body screening of the pilot. The pilot doesn't need a bomb or box cutter to bring down a plane. All he has to do is drive it into the water, like the EgyptAir pilot who crashed his plane off Nantucket while intoning "I rely on God," killing all on board.

But we must not bring that up. We pretend that we go through this nonsense as a small price paid to ensure the safety of air travel. Rubbish. This has nothing to do with safety - 95 percent of these inspections, searches, shoe removals and pat-downs are ridiculously unnecessary. The only reason we continue to do this is that people are too cowed to even question the absurd taboo against profiling - when the profile of the airline attacker is narrow, concrete, uniquely definable and universally known. So instead of seeking out terrorists, we seek out tubes of gel in stroller pouches.





Nothing about the little boy in the video suggests he's either uncomfortable or being violated, I just wish people would stop over dramatizing something to support their own opinions because quite frankly it's pathetic.


What is pathetic is using this one child as a totem for the remainder of humanity. Do you know any children who have been molested? I do. The thought of subjecting them to what this little boy went through almost brings me to tears.

Like i said, there was a time when things like "privacy" and "rights" meant something in this nation. Now we are subjected to Gate Raping in full public view. So much so, we are seeing countless videos popping up on the internet.

You don't have to thank me for watching out for your rights, though. I would do it whether you appreciate it or not.
edit on 23-11-2010 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Originally posted by kcs7272
reply to post by NeverApologize
 


First off they would be GROPING him not what you spelled. Secondly HE IS NOT BEING GROPED! Have you ever been groped by your lover? Evidently not if you think that this pst down that took less than a minute is groping.

I agree with Overnight. You people are freaking able to be brainwashed with one thought planted in your pea brains.


Yes. One thought. Such as, "The terrorists want to blow you up".

Too bad it happens so infrequently. How many folks do you know, personally, that have died in a plane crash? Not many people do. The number of folks who know someone in America who has died in a terrorist attack, outside of NYC, is even slimmer.

IT makes total sense for me to have to get Gate Raped just so i can get on a puddle jumper to fly from Midland, TX to El Paso, TX, and avoid the worlds most boring 5 hour drive.
edit on 23-11-2010 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)


It's not just terrorism that we search people before they board a plane. And to think so would only show your ignorance.

Now, about this gate raping thing, do they really rape you? I mean, like, grab a hold of you, throw you on the floor, rip your clothes off and have their way with you? I seriously doubt that happens to you. Quit skewing things to be worse than they are.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 




having received many, many hours of behavioral interviewing training, I see the validity in my logic.


I see validity in my logic, through common sense...



Yes, the facts have been presented. I would say that in the majority of peoples opinions in this thread, a "reasonable doubt" has been ascertained. The threshold for conviction has been met.


Please define these so called "facts" for me; a video from several foot away with an obscure angle and linked into a thread entitled "TSA gropes young boys testicles while he is strip searched in front of everyone"

You miss the fact that the video doesn't show any TSA employee removing the shirt from the young boy and also miss the fact that there isn't any evidence of groping.



There is. One major difference is if the stranger does it, the boy can seek justice by contacting the authorities. When the TSA does it, they ARE the authorities. Who do you contact?


Wrong again. You failed to address my point that there is a difference between someone groping a child for their own sexual satisfaction and someone performing a search for reasons of national security.



Regardless, the "national security" banner is BS. I do not buy it. I see no need to maintain national security when we are not even under attack (and haven't been in a decade). A reasonable prudence? Sure. But not Gate Raping. There was a time when things like "privacy" and "rights" meant something in America.


So now, a search is the same as rape? Please....



Regardless, the "national security" banner is BS. I do not buy it. I see no need to maintain national security when we are not even under attack (and haven't been in a decade). A reasonable prudence? Sure. But not Gate Raping. There was a time when things like "privacy" and "rights" meant something in America.


Great! Maybe we should all consult you first if you we have concerns about a terrorist threat, seeing as you "do not buy it" Maybe your in the wrong profession!



What is pathetic is using this one child as a totem for the remainder of humanity. Do you know any children who have been molested? I do. The thought of subjecting them to what this little boy went through almost brings me to tears.


I would of thought that if that was the reality of the situation depicted in the video then the child himself would have maybe started crying? or maybe his Father would have stopped the "assault"?

Doesn't wash with me sorry, more over sensationalism and over dramatics.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron



Please define these so called "facts" for me; a video from several foot away with an obscure angle and linked into a thread entitled "TSA gropes young boys testicles while he is strip searched in front of everyone"


I think it was you who referenced the "facts". I was just piggy backing on what you were talking about. Do you now admit that you don't know what it is you are saying?




You miss the fact that the video doesn't show any TSA employee removing the shirt from the young boy and also miss the fact that there isn't any evidence of groping.


It looks like there was to me. If that TSA agent was not screening that kid, would his shirt have been off? Then i don't care WHO took it off. It was removed because of the TSA.





Wrong again. You failed to address my point that there is a difference between someone groping a child for their own sexual satisfaction and someone performing a search for reasons of national security.



What national security? Is there a precedence for 4 year old, blond haired boys smuggling explosives on aircraft? If you call that national security, no wonder liberty has been screwed over so badly in the last 10 years.




So now, a search is the same as rape? Please....


An unwanted party touching my body is rape.





Great! Maybe we should all consult you first if you we have concerns about a terrorist threat, seeing as you "do not buy it" Maybe your in the wrong profession!



I am a voter. I have an equal say. Ridicule it all you want.



I would of thought that if that was the reality of the situation depicted in the video then the child himself would have maybe started crying? or maybe his Father would have stopped the "assault"?

Doesn't wash with me sorry, more over sensationalism and over dramatics.


Then I hope you don't ever get to babysit my neice, either. You seem to believe that if you don't think it is traumatic for a child, then it must not be traumatic. Or that if it doesn't traumatize all kids, it is ok.

Try to touch her during a screening, she will pee herself, run off to a corner, cower down and suck her thumb. Have you ever seen a child react like that to a strangers touch? I have. When she first showed up, she couldn't believe we would actually allow her to have milk with her cereal. Not all kids are the same. That one childs reaction should not be used as the standard for what other children should have to tolerate.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 




I think it was you who referenced the "facts". I was just piggy backing on what you were talking about. Do you now admit that you don't know what it is you are saying?


Nope. The facts are that we are looking at a video shot from several foot away which cannot be conclusively used as evidence to ascertain whether anyone was "groped" or not. That is fact....



It looks like there was to me. If that TSA agent was not screening that kid, would his shirt have been off? Then i don't care WHO took it off. It was removed because of the TSA.


So by that token the Father of the child is as guilty as the TSA because he removed his childs shirt in an attempt to make a laborious process quicker?



What national security? Is there a precedence for 4 year old, blond haired boys smuggling explosives on aircraft? If you call that national security, no wonder liberty has been screwed over so badly in the last 10 years.


You failed once again with that comment to address my point, please tell me is there a difference in your opinion between a patdown search and a stranger touching a child for their own sexual satisfaction?



An unwanted party touching my body is rape.


No it isn't, I'm sure your intelligent enough to realise the difference so I won't bother posting quotes/links to back that up in a legal sense.



I am a voter. I have an equal say. Ridicule it all you want.


Touche. I can have an equal say aswell, doesn't mean you have to agree with me or like what I have to say, I'm entitled to my opinon just as you are yours.



Then I hope you don't ever get to babysit my neice, either. You seem to believe that if you don't think it is traumatic for a child, then it must not be traumatic. Or that if it doesn't traumatize all kids, it is ok.


Why are you making this personal? In some poor attempt to make your argument seem more valid?



Try to touch her during a screening, she will pee herself, run off to a corner, cower down and suck her thumb. Have you ever seen a child react like that to a strangers touch? I have. When she first showed up, she couldn't believe we would actually allow her to have milk with her cereal. Not all kids are the same. That one childs reaction should not be used as the standard for what other children should have to tolerate.


Then I genuinely feel sorry for the poor girl and I don't mean that in a sarcastic manner, I'm being honest. I know only too well what physical/mental abuse can do to an adult, never mind a child and I sympathize.

But to imply that children shouldn't be searched in case one of them may react in a negative manner due to their own personal problems/situation is like suggesting you shouldn't question an alcoholic about his drinking patterns as he may react violently.

You can't use a stereotypical assumption as part of your argument, it doesn't work. The little boy in the video seemed fine to me, so did his father and so did the TSA employee who gave him a friendly rub on the head, we aren't debating "what if?" scenarios, we are talking about the video in question as posted in the OP.


edit on 23/11/10 by Death_Kron because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Someone touching you is rape?

Here you go, so you can be educated.

Notice how rape needs sexual intercourse. It's actually kind of astounding you link a TSA search with rape. I didn't realize we were being raped at airports. Weird how they keep getting away with it, no videos, or anyone seeing any rape happening.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


Lets simplify...."Gate Rape" is a term used and in the Urban Dictionary. For anyone dense enough to not notice that i keep capitalizing it, or not get creative metaphor, i hope that clears it up. Concrete thinking will cause you lots of confusion when speaking with me...fair warning.

I am not making this personal. I doubt you would ever meet me in real life. If you are offended that I would not allow you to babysit my children, I am sorry. Your offense is not my concern.

I am telling you, this kid may not be bothered by this. But my neice would be. She was molested repeatedly by multiple people (male and female) until she was 5 years old. You may say "its no big deal", but I can only assume it is because you have not seen a context in which it would be a big deal. So i am trying to provide you this context.

If you can find 1 single instance of a child under 12 exacting a violent attack on an airline in a US domestic flight, I may actually undserstand where you are coming from. But there never has been one. Never will be one. There is no precedence.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gnarly
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Someone touching you is rape?

Here you go, so you can be educated.

Notice how rape needs sexual intercourse. It's actually kind of astounding you link a TSA search with rape. I didn't realize we were being raped at airports. Weird how they keep getting away with it, no videos, or anyone seeing any rape happening.


Really? Are people this dense? Metaphor? You know...sarcasm?

How about a link?

Urban Dictionary - Gate Rape



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


What offends me is that your particular opinion on this suggests you seem to somehow imply that I'm incapable of looking after children because I may attempt to sexually abuse them, I'm sorry but this implication is way out of order in my book as I'd happily make anyone who harmed children in any shape or form wish they were dead.

I have also already stated my apologies as to what your niece endured, I have never once mentioned it was "no big deal" I've also already stated I know what physical & mental abuse can do to a person, I don't think any child should have to suffer that and in your personal situation I can only once again tell you I'm sorry for what the poor little girl had to go through.

Maybe there hasn't been an instance where a child has been used to smuggle explosives or weapons onto a plane but that also doesn't mean it wouldn't/couldn't happen in the future, it's happening on a weekly basis in Afghan and other places around the world.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for protecting children as much as you are; maybe that's where you are getting your wires crossed? I don't like it implied that I want to see kids sexually or physically humiliated, but on the same token I also don't want to see people implying that pat downs are akin to sexual abuse because that isn't the case.

At the end of the day I presume your intelligent enough to understand where I'm coming from, you may not agree with me entirely but a pat down search isn't sexual abuse and someone touching you without consent isn't rape, believe me I'd be the first person to rip the throat out of anyone who intentionally hurt a child.
edit on 23/11/10 by Death_Kron because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


What offends me is that your particular opinion on this suggests you seem to somehow imply that I'm incapable of looking after children because I may attempt to sexually abuse them, I'm sorry but this implication is way out of order in my book as I'd happily make anyone who harmed children in any shape or form wish they were dead.


*sigh* I will clarify for you once more.. Please do not belabor already settled business. It makes this discussion more difficult than it needs to be.

I am implying not that you might molest children, but that if you were seeing a child being molested you might assume that nothing important was happening, and do nothing to stop it.






Maybe there hasn't been an instance where a child has been used to smuggle explosives or weapons onto a plane but that also doesn't mean it wouldn't/couldn't happen in the future, it's happening on a weekly basis in Afghan and other places around the world.


OK, find me an example of a child attempting to blow up a plane anywhere in the world, anytime in human history.

All sorts of far flung things MIGHT happen, but they don't. Risk Management does not have you going crazy eliminating all risk. Only reducing significant risk. Kids are no significant risk.




Don't get me wrong, I'm all for protecting children as much as you are; maybe that's where you are getting your wires crossed? I don't like it implied that I want to see kids sexually or physically humiliated, but on the same token I also don't want to see people implying that pat downs are akin to sexual abuse because that isn't the case.


In your opinion. Since you have not walked in those shoes, your opinion is only valid for others like yourself. Pain is what the victim says it is.




At the end of the day I presume your intelligent enough to understand where I'm coming from, you may not agree with me entirely but a pat down search isn't sexual abuse and someone touching you without consent isn't rape, believe me I'd be the first person to rip the throat out of anyone who intentionally hurt a child.
edit on 23/11/10 by Death_Kron because: (no reason given)


No, it isn't rape. It is sexual harassment.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 




I am implying not that you might molest children, but that if you were seeing a child being molested you might assume that nothing important was happening, and do nothing to stop it.


A pat down is not child molestation...



OK, find me an example of a child attempting to blow up a plane anywhere in the world, anytime in human history.


Well if it's never been tried then it's more likely to be attempted, no?



In your opinion. Since you have not walked in those shoes, your opinion is only valid for others like yourself. Pain is what the victim says it is.


A pat down is not sexual abuse, there is a clear cut difference between the two.



No, it isn't rape. It is sexual harassment.


Nope, a pat down is not sexual abuse.



new topics

top topics



 
173
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join