It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Seattle-Area Restaurant Refuses To Serve TSA Agents

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 04:23 PM
People are well within their rights to deny service to someone in their place of business. If for instance, I made an establishment that ended up attracting left-leaning clientele, such as liberal college students, then I would start serving them as my main source of business. Very reasonable correct? Wouldn't undermine yourself would you?

Well one day, some very arrogant construction workers and/or cops decide to start coming in, and each time they do, my clientele starts leaving. All the college students who feel threatened or uncomfortable etc, i.e. my main source of income. (There was a story about this floating on ATS, a rather liberal, hippy-like cafe, that a couple of cops kept stirring up.)

In order to save my business and avoid having virtually no customers, I would continually ask these people to leave, and/or suggest all cops and other people who have no business being there (invite themselves in just to be arrogant, for instance) just to keep my business running.

These aren't corporations, or large businesses, they are small and private establishments. In order to survive, you need to find your niche, and fast, and start catering to that. Otherwise you'll lose it just as fast.

I'm not going to get philosophical or ethical about it, and start pondering why people separate themselves as such, because I have no solutions for that. However, I do know if I invested my life (and future) savings into a very expensive business, then I would do whatever necessary to survive. Obviously very immoral practices are omitted, like the previous mentioned protected classes; race, sex, etc. This is where government should never have any authority in telling private business owners how to run their own business. It's why you'll never find a creepy lone-man in "Chuck E. Cheeses" (joking aside), because some people will see that and feel that their expected environment is ruined, therefore, business loses business and it's a lose-lose.

Now, I don't know about this restaurant, or the true reasons the owners decided to do this, but I'm just putting all that out there. It's very possible they could be losing business when TSA workers starting entering into the environment. Maybe it's personal or political reasons.. It truly doesn't matter. The owners want to establish their own environment and people need to respect that.
edit on 23-2-2011 by SyphonX because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 04:47 PM
I admit I havent read all of the posts here, but enough to see that there seems to be as much support as not for this restaurant owner's decision to ban TSA agents.

First off, there seems to have been a major oversight in why this is an AGREEABLE idea.
I have seen notes about the agents being bits of a larger whole and citizens just doing their jobs and how they were there before the draconian search policy. Yea, I agree with all of that and I still agree with the business owner.

Here's why. Look whats going on in Madison, WI right now. Look who is fighting for a system. Its a lot of people fighting on behalf of a few. How in the world could that possibly equate to this one restaurant policy across the country?

Easy, when you do enough damage to the pieces, the machine falls apart. Ok, so right now there is this one restaurant that affects about a dozen of the thousands of agents in the US air transportation system. That is for now insignificant at best. But Niagra Falls started with an insignificant drop of water. So, lets bump this up and see what might happen.

Lets pretend more restaurants, more shops, more hotels, more palors...all slowly began to make being a TSA agent the least desirable position in the US. People are still going to do the job. Heck, fast food and plumbing would have died out long ago if bad job conditions burned down an industry.
So, now these agents have a choice. They can quit and go find something else to do or they can start standing up against the very machine that is causing the problem. Everything gives and the jesters at DHS would have to at some point listen. Perhaps there would be a modification at least that would leave passengers with a bit more of their dignity in tact when choosing to fly commercial airlines.

Flipping this coin over, lets say this fades and no one else in their right mind thinks this is a good idea and the movement dies with this one shop owner. Agents everywhere laughingly refer to that bunch in Sea Tac and it becomes the backhanded joke of the industry.
Now, there are already wheels spinning about that want to see the TSA take over bus stations and train stations. Adding these barbaric search tactics on all of our public travelways would be a nightmare. Could you imagine having to go through this process no matter what form of commercial travel you used? Could you imagine how much foreign travel money would be lost in the US because of this?

So, I see this one business policy as a positive step only in the aspect that it strikes back at the very machine that is slowly grinding away at every last remaining freedom that you and I as legal, taxpaying American citizens have left.

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 04:49 PM

Originally posted by ickyuck
Has anyone here been treated differntly just because of the job they have??? Do you know what it feels like?

I worked as a security officer, and was often on patrol with the police. I've run into my share of people who treated me like dirt just because of my uniform, just because I was enforcing rules they didn't want to follow. Hey, I didn't make up the rules. I needed a job. To have an establishment refuse my patronage just because of my uniform,my job, would strike me pretty hard. I mean, its discrimination, absolute.

Yes, I have. These are all me:

Yeah, I've been treated "differently" based solely upon my job or uniform of the moment. I STILL support their right to refuse service to TSA. Some things are right, some are wrong, and what the TSA is morphing into is DAMNED wrong.

About a year and a half after TSA got it's start, somehow or another a file on me got into their hands. After already background checking me, they tried to get me to come to work for them as some sort of Regional Supervisor, and offered pretty fair coin for that. I refused. I didn't think it was right then, and I don't think it's getting any "righter" as it goes along.

It's not merely the uniform worn, it's the ACTIONS that uniform represents that are the issue. I won't put on a uniform that has the wrong actions behind it. If they do, that's on them, but don't expect folks to bow and scrape when they know you're in the wrong. The uniform is an indicator of what actions can be expected, an identifier, friend or foe.

I don't blame the guy - I won't rub elbows with them, either. If they don't like it, they can carry their own grub, or, better yet, put on a different uniform.

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 05:00 PM

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
I 100 percent support the rights of private business to serve the clientele they see fit.

Personally I find the actions of the place small minded petty and indicative of regressive thinking.

OK, I admit... You just confused me.... Which is it? Are you for or against what this restaurant is doing?

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 05:02 PM
reply to post by boondock-saint

It's also being talked about here in Ohio now

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 05:04 PM
reply to post by umokay

Sorry Boondock, meant they are talking about banning people's ability to strike here like in Wisconsin

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 05:19 PM
holy crap I like it! I live right there, guess Im gonna go on the search.

Now if only all resturaunts around the nation started doing this, I would pee myself lol.

(back to serious mode) good for them, doing what they can to send a message legally.

please please other establishments follow this trend, and possibly expand it???

Fed. Reserve police possibly and others?

I like where this is going.

str flag. for sure.

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 05:22 PM
Ah the Rand Paul philosophy. A business has a right to deny anyone and has a right to discriminate. Fun, isn't it?

Even though it's bad business and unprofessional in every form imaginable, the place has a right to deny anyone because they do airport security

Oh sanity, where'd you go?

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 05:28 PM
The land of the free. THe business has a right to refuse service. WHether or not it's a gimmick (which I doubt imho) to increase sales, so what, rake 99.9% of the other businesses over the coals for using gimmicks and tricks lol. Oh the TSA people are hungry? Shucks try bringing a sandwich to work. But if you can afford to eat out all the time.... *shrug* go elsewhere.
Land of the free. I see this issue as, bleh, turn the page to the next meaningless story that half the internet is reading.

Personally I would give the restaurant some of my business if it werent so far from where I live. Even suggest that TSA members must undergo a pat down by Quagmire before sitting down. And maybe ask for ID, just in case.
edit on 23-2-2011 by dl2one because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 05:38 PM

Originally posted by works4dhs

the restaurant owner is free to be an ass.
he is free to use his business to punish working-class men and women trying to keep him safe.
he is free to use his business to punish the very people who are trying to protect his right to be such an ass.
freedom is a wonderful thing. so are tolerance and compassion. hate is not a wonderful thing.

Neither TSA nor DHS are doing ANYTHING to keep me safe or "protect my rights". As a matter of fact, they are doing quite the opposite in reference to rights. They're trying to stamp them out just as quickly and efficiently as they can.

I'm old enough to recall when Americans actually HAD some rights. America was a different place back then. You could almost smell the freedom.

That was before TSA, DHS, and the "Patriot" Acts.

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 05:42 PM
reply to post by DimensionalDetective

It's his resturant i say good!

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 05:47 PM

Originally posted by nenothtu
Neither TSA nor DHS are doing ANYTHING to keep me safe or "protect my rights". As a matter of fact, they are doing quite the opposite in reference to rights. They're trying to stamp them out just as quickly and efficiently as they can.

I'm old enough to recall when Americans actually HAD some rights. America was a different place back then. You could almost smell the freedom.

That was before TSA, DHS, and the "Patriot" Acts.

On that note... just how "SAFE" are they making it?

Originally posted by drink2forget
I'd rather be felt up (even as an airline employee) then risk having someone endanger my safety on an aircraft.

So you really think they do their job to keep you safe? REALLY?

Was the shoe bomber caught by security? NO he was tackled by passengers who saw him try to light it ON THE PLANE

Was the pantie bomber caught by security? NO he was turned in by his father

Do they dare search Muslim women? NO it would be a grave insult and cause a political fuss so they go right on through. Don't believe me? Just put on the viel and a little eye makeup and voila! Getting past security... no big deal

Killer Escapes UK in Muslim Niqab Disguise; Not the First Time (Hezbos Used Method to Escape U.S.)

Gaping Holes in Airline Security: Loaded Gun Slips Past TSA Screeners

Last fall, as he had done hundreds of times, Iranian-American businessman Farid Seif passed through security at a Houston airport and boarded an international flight.

He didn't realize he had forgotten to remove the loaded snub nose "baby" Glock pistol from his computer bag. But TSA officers never noticed as his bag glided along the belt and was x-rayed. When he got to his hotel after the three-hour flight, he was shocked to discover the gun traveled unnoticed from Houston.

According to this report from ABC the government did a test and 100% of the guns and bomb parts went through. The study was so bad that they classified it.

Oh yeah they are doing a FINE job catching the real bad guys while they strip search your kids and touch them where we try to teach them no one should.

I too am old enough to remember what freedom was like, when the cop on the beat was the one your trusted when you needed help.

edit on 23-2-2011 by zorgon because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 05:51 PM

Originally posted by marinesniper0351
reply to post by hawaii50th

Right step against the wrong people...turn away their mgmt in Washington, that is the right place to do this...not against local TSA agents. This will anger them and depress them more with regard to their job and may hate the passengers which will make things worse...

Again go after the higher ups...turn them away....

I don't think the restaurant is in Washington.
If they're already depressed with their job and getting more depressed on a count of not being served at a restaurant, than maybe it's time to go on sick leave under stress and while their at it look for a decent job that won't put others under stress and treating them with indignity.

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 05:54 PM

Seattle-Area Restaurant Refuses To Serve TSA Agents

I bet there are still a few backwoods tribes out there in Brazil or some lost island that would love to serve them.

Andrew Zimmern might even enjoy a taste.

Bad joke, but sumwun had to say it

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 06:00 PM

Originally posted by DZAG Wright
Some of you sound like fools...

WTH is boycotting the actual TSA workers going to do about the searches? As if they really made the call. The job some of you complainers work at could demand YOU begin doing searches tomorrow. If that happened would you suddenly cease being decent people? No, you're just doing what your job demanded you do.

Do you think the agents actually enjoy patting down everyone? For every "decent" looking person there is a stink or ugly or obese person. Not like they're only patting down beauty contestants.

I say the government should give the people exactly what they want. Cease all the security measures they've instituted and let the American people have exactly what it asks for. Then soon as a plane is hijacked into a football stadium the families of the victims will be crying that "the government didn't do enough to protect us".

Here we go again, with the calling down, where's the ATS cops when you need them

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 06:00 PM
reply to post by DimensionalDetective

This is quite brave, TSA = DHS = Police State
The DHS only has to say suspicious activity and his Internet is tapped, phone tapped and could do anything
to make life miserable for the Owner, all under the 'guise of the Patriot Act.

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 06:01 PM
reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe

honest, gainful employment

Take out the first two words and you have yourself a truthful statement! What's honest and gainful about molesting your contemporaries for no good reason? For humiliating them without compunction in front of crowds?

Even in dire economic times, a person must act with integrity and decency, and should refuse to take upon themselves a role that will lead to a need to abuse their fellow citizens. Though of course the TSA goons will be first to be installed in key positions within the NWO citizenry-enforcement squadrons.

edit on 23-2-2011 by FlyInTheOintment because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 06:13 PM
reply to post by nenothtu

You clean up nice, alot different looking after taking a weed wacker to your face.
I believe if the name of that establishment was to get out across the nation, and the message theyre trying to deliver was to be made well known, I'd bet they'd be receiving envelopes of a few dollars here and there just to show support,
I know I'd send some with a note inside.

To address the 'just a job, need a job' point of view,
that's a pretty weak excuse to sell your values and ethics, because sooner or later, you end up a prisoner to your own madness.

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 06:13 PM
reply to post by DimensionalDetective

Yes, its perfectly legal just sends bad messages to ur customers and lose business i think its funny they didnt serve them

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 06:15 PM
Maybe I try this again. I wrote Christopher Elliot a comment on his article? blog? Anyways, of course he is moderating and it did not get published. He claims he is having this huge struggle about releasing the identity of KC McLawson because of her great wish to remain anonymous about talking about her boss refusing to serve TSA. This article so far is THE ONLY PROOF that there really is a restaurant out there refusing to serve TSA. If the restaurant is so public about refusing to serve TSA than why can't we know what restaurant it is?

I call disinformation until there is an actual restaurant doing such things. Until that happens, y'all are doing exactly what the article intended to do.

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in