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.

 

Napolitano says TSA inappropriately touching a 6-year-old was completely professional

page: 3
22
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by bozzchem

Originally posted by daikaiju
Ok I have this to ask, I see so many people outraged at this thing but other than posting on this board, what have you done to stop this nonsense?

I know it is awesome to vent but we here at ATS need to start doing something, contact your local congress rep and give him/her an earful, get your friends to do the same, it is time to stand up for the sake of the children at least.


Unfortunately, my grandmother passed this weekend.

I am currently corresponding with my family members in FL regarding the wishes she had concerning her burial.

I have made it clear to my family that I may not make the funeral if I am required to walk through a scanner or be searched just so I can board a plane.

I have had conversations with them and many are condemning me for my mindset but I have made it clear to them that I will not be subjected to unconstitutional searches merely to fly down and attend. I believe my grandmother will understand and will smile down on me and agree that my decision is the right one.

Should I be deterred from my flight, it could well make the news and I'll post to relate my experience with the TSA.

I trust I have answered your question.
edit on 25-4-2011 by bozzchem because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-4-2011 by bozzchem because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-4-2011 by bozzchem because: (no reason given)



First off, I am sorry for your loss.

Second,BRAVO!!! I admire your stand, I would make sure you video the event (hopefully it will not happen) andif it does, make one hell of a stink!!

Good luck




posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by UcDat

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow
I will say this...that if citizens denied such procedures and stood their ground with lethal force, this would stop IMMEDIATELY. Sadly, people will put up with terrible indignity, as history shows, long before the straw break.


sorry man i thought about digging you a new one but really what would that do but possibly feed into your crazy...
if i said that it would only play into their hand and escalate thing would you listen? what if i told you the only way to stop it is to get involved. Would ya? Seriously no guns no violence nothing but a few minutes of your time...
pm me if you care if not keep praying someone else saves you soon


You say that while being dragged down the same hill we all are...you can ask nicely and see how that goes for you. It worked well getting us out of the wars for profit and control, prohibition (war on minorities and poor), compulsory education (indoctrination), and the patriot act, right? That has gone swell has it not?


I get the feeling that you would have denounced the revolutionary war as well...and I am the crazy one...
edit on 25-4-2011 by SmokeandShadow because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-4-2011 by SmokeandShadow because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 



I know but we have to try, at least who knows, if enough make a stand maybe something good may come of it.

Then again they may round us up and God knows what after that.



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 03:19 PM
link   
napalitano is a sick woman

and i say its time she goes and gets groped by the tsa

a 6 year old child for crying out loud any child is nothing but pedophilia.

the support of these actions are the steps taken growing closer and closer to that word

oh what was it now? TYRANNY. DESPOTISM!

this is what we get when we elect idiots to washington and those idiots in turn appoint more idiots.


when will we americans ever really drain the swamp of washington dc when america?

when?



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded

Originally posted by Maslo
I agree with that guy, it was a professionaly done search, and not sexual in any way. Anyone that sees any sexual or pedophile behaviour in that video should have his head checked in the first place.


I do think that this policy may not be effective compared to bothering of the passengers it inflicts, tough, that indeed may be up to debate.


So I take it infringing on a persons rights isnt a big deal to you. To be secure in their persons, papers and effects has no bearing in your logic either?

Do you enjoy the ongoing molestation of your rights?


What rights? I am not aware of there being any right against such searches at public airports. If you want to be secure in persons, use transportation without such searches, nobody is forcing you to fly with public planes.

Anyway, my main point is the absurdity of pedophile and sexual themes in simple search. I dont even agree with this policy, but it would be cool to keep it just to piss off overprotective parents that see pedophiles everywhere and believe that this gives them the right to endanger the lifes of everyone onboard just so that their child is not "inappropiatelly touched"..

edit on 25/4/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 





What rights? I am not aware of there being any right against such searches at public airports.



Really? Certainly you can t be that naive?

[4th Amendment ]

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Please tell me you don't think it just suggests privacy in the confines of your home.

Take note within the text:



The right of the people to be secure in their persons


Per the law, any items on your persons are deemed private property, and require warrants for searches and seizures, further:



papers, and effects,


That would suggest driver licenses and passports to be protected as well.

An issued warrant per the 4th Amendment must identify what place is to be searched and the items in which to be searched and seized.

A little effort on your part to actually understand the Constitution, much less understand the the rights and liberties being effected in your daily life, right beneath your very nose would do you loads of good.

But that appears to much to ask huh? A basic understanding of the Constitution, that refutes the very things you wish to decry.

www.usconstitution.net...
edit on 25-4-2011 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


There is no reason for unwarranted searches of any kind. The whole "war on terror" is fabricated bs to strengthen the military industrial complex so they can make more dollars off the gullible and slowely indoctrinate people to a police state.

If someone wishes to blow up an airplane they would pay the ground crews several thousand and do it professionaly. Stuff like this has happened in the past when someone wanted to collect life insurance on their rich spouse. You do not smuggle explosives on your body because everyone knows they will find it on you one way or another.

There should be reasonable cause to pat down someone in the first place and I won't even talk about the cancer causing screening machines. The audacity of our government to pass the patriot act on an inside 9-11 job is pure evil and the TSA is an extension of that evil. People put up with all this nonsense because they still think the government wants to protect them or they know the truth and simply don't feel like going up against the private government!



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


Oh, please. Are you aware of the basic fact that by trying to board such plane you give consent to search? Here, educate yourself:

en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

There is no right to travel on plane other than your own without being searched, period. If you dont want to be searched, use airports that do not have such policy, or other means of transport. If the airport wanted to, they could establish policy requiring you to stand on your head and sing Kumbaya in order to board the plane. So much for the nonexistent 4th amendment issues..


To repeat, I do not even agree with this policy, I just want to attack faulty arguments against it, such as constitutional issues or sexual molestation etc.
edit on 25/4/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)

edit on 25/4/11 by Maslo because: added a thing



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow

Originally posted by UcDat

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow
I will say this...that if citizens denied such procedures and stood their ground with lethal force, this would stop IMMEDIATELY. Sadly, people will put up with terrible indignity, as history shows, long before the straw break.


sorry man i thought about digging you a new one but really what would that do but possibly feed into your crazy...
if i said that it would only play into their hand and escalate thing would you listen? what if i told you the only way to stop it is to get involved. Would ya? Seriously no guns no violence nothing but a few minutes of your time...
pm me if you care if not keep praying someone else saves you soon


You say that while being dragged down the same hill we all are...you can ask nicely and see how that goes for you. It worked well getting us out of the wars for profit and control, prohibition (war on minorities and poor), compulsory education (indoctrination), and the patriot act, right? That has gone swell has it not?


I get the feeling that you would have denounced the revolutionary war as well...and I am the crazy one...
edit on 25-4-2011 by SmokeandShadow because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-4-2011 by SmokeandShadow because: (no reason given)


and you would've been the guy hiding in the pork barrel whle your brothers fought and died only to emerge smelling like bacaon and claiming you helped


I kid but seriously you read my comment and came back with that. Guess I was right the last thing you want is to do something... well other than yelling charge em at us from your barrel.



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Have people lost their minds? That is rhetorical...i know the answer.

Who cares if someone wants to smuggle drugs. Is it our business what adults do in their own home? They are not victimizing anyone. And for anyone to say that it is appropriate to put your hand in the pants of a little girls to keep some coke off the streets...you cannot rationalize such evils to easily. Evaluate your souls, as the ends do not justify the means.

This little girl, however...she IS a victim. Even if she didn't realize it then, her upset father has surely explained it to her. There is no excuse to put your hands inside any childs clothes while doing a "pat down". There is no excuse to do a pat down on a person who is flying. Life is about risks...and the TSA is among the most stupid acts of risk aversion I have ever seen. No plane was blown up in the 10 years preceding the new rules...so what was the impetus?

"They are trying to change our way of life". Indeed. Too bad the terrorists that I see are wearing ties and suits, not robes and towels on their head.

I don't mind living among the stupid. But there is a line that has been crossed. Just reading this thread tells me that there are far, far too many docile morons who would embrace tyranny. Especially when that tyranny focuses on groups of people they don't like (muslims, pot smokers, etc).
edit on 25-4-2011 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by UcDat

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow

Originally posted by UcDat

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow
I will say this...that if citizens denied such procedures and stood their ground with lethal force, this would stop IMMEDIATELY. Sadly, people will put up with terrible indignity, as history shows, long before the straw break.


sorry man i thought about digging you a new one but really what would that do but possibly feed into your crazy...
if i said that it would only play into their hand and escalate thing would you listen? what if i told you the only way to stop it is to get involved. Would ya? Seriously no guns no violence nothing but a few minutes of your time...
pm me if you care if not keep praying someone else saves you soon


You say that while being dragged down the same hill we all are...you can ask nicely and see how that goes for you. It worked well getting us out of the wars for profit and control, prohibition (war on minorities and poor), compulsory education (indoctrination), and the patriot act, right? That has gone swell has it not?


I get the feeling that you would have denounced the revolutionary war as well...and I am the crazy one...
edit on 25-4-2011 by SmokeandShadow because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-4-2011 by SmokeandShadow because: (no reason given)


and you would've been the guy hiding in the pork barrel whle your brothers fought and died only to emerge smelling like bacaon and claiming you helped


I kid but seriously you read my comment and came back with that. Guess I was right the last thing you want is to do something... well other than yelling charge em at us from your barrel.


I think you have a lot of audacity assuming that I don't do anything. You don't know me, you don't know how I live and you certainly don't know where my time and money is spent (prohibition is my point of interest). In some sense, I should rescind my statement that peaceful means do nothing...they do, but only when a threshold is for "violence" clearly set. Like Derrick Jensen has said (and I am paraphrasing) "we need to differentiate between violence and abuse, to recognize that violence does not describe only one thing". The idea of citizens drawing a line in the sand is far from crazy. If the word "armed resistance" brings to mind a bunch of Christians playing soldier in the woods or lone nuts blowing up children's hospitals, then we probably don't have much to talk about...
edit on 25-4-2011 by SmokeandShadow because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   
It is more likely that you will win the lottery than be in a terrorist attack on an airplane.

Much more likely.



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


What are you going to say once they require "consent" searches for everything you say, do, use?

What are you going to say about a verichip implant for identification purposes?

America is not israel were a bus gets blown up once a month or so, it is rather peaceful and innocent still. Why must the government use "war on terror" to make money of the gullible and expose us to cancer for no good reason?




posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow

I think you have a lot of audacity assuming that I don't do anything. You don't know me, you don't know how I live and you certainly don't know where my time and money is spent (prohibition is my point of interest). In some sense, I should rescind my statement that peaceful means do nothing...they do, but only when a threshold is for "violence" clearly set. Like Derrick Jensen has said (and I am paraphrasing) "we need to differentiate between violence and abuse, to recognize that violence does not describe only one thing". The idea of citizens drawing a line in the sand is far from crazy. If the word "armed resistance" brings to mind a bunch of Christians playing soldier in the woods or lone nuts blowing up children's hospitals, then we probably don't have much to talk about...
edit on 25-4-2011 by SmokeandShadow because: (no reason given)


Yep it was pretty presumptuous of me. Just trying to shock you into seeing another path. Look armed conflict has its place and it might come to that. But a real movement to call out politicians and to wake up people is what you need. TPTB have everyone divided and most dont even know who has them bent over the table...
You do so you want to fight great but how are you going to effect change? Lets say you go all gunz blazing on the TSA what do you think will happen? Ill tell you just like with the cops all you'll see is an escalation of force on their part. However if you do it the right way no one need to die or go to jail and you can make a real change without giving them any reason to take away more rights.


edit on 25-4-2011 by UcDat because: typo



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 




I think you need to re-read your own sources!





If a party gives consent to a search, a warrant is not required, even if the party is unaware of their right to refuse to cooperate


First off, in order for any such unwarranted search, one would have to have probable cause. So with that, are you suggesting that all peoples who travel by air are now deemed criminals under the clause of suspicion? Wouldn't that contradict the very foundation of the 4th Amendment?





There are exceptions and complications to the rule, including the scope of the consent given, whether the consent is voluntarily given, and whether an individual has the right to consent to a search of another's property.


Knowing the law, you would learn that at no time does a search, of any sort, suggest consent has been given. If there is no probable cause, then any act of searching would be deemed illegal.

For any TSA agent to suggest that they have probable cause is absurd.


The search and seizure provisions of the Fourth Amendment are all about privacy. To honor this freedom, the Fourth Amendment protects against "unreasonable" searches and seizures by state or federal law enforcement authorities.


The flip side is that the Fourth Amendment does permit searches and seizures that are considered reasonable. In practice, this means that the police may override your privacy concerns and conduct a search of you, your home, barn, car, boat, office, personal or business documents, bank account records, trash barrel, or whatever, if:

* the police have probable cause to believe they can find evidence that you committed a crime, and a judge issues a search warrant, or

( as noted above )

* the particular circumstances justify the search without a warrant first being issued.

Now the courts use a two part test.



(fashioned by the U.S. Supreme Court) to determine whether, at the time of the search, a defendant had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the place or things searched:


* Did the person actually expect some degree of privacy?

The above is self explanatory. I think your wife or girlfriend EXPECTS privacy of her persons when getting groped much less in the scanner machine.

* Is the person's expectation objectively reasonable -- that is, one that society is willing to recognize?

Example, If i spy on your significant other, is that an invasion of privacy? Yes, it would be, therefore, under the law, I would be held accountable for my actions.

Just the same, TSA agents groping a little girl should also be held to the same standards as the rest of us.

With that said, your argument though commendable lacks a fundamental understanding of the 4th Amendment, in conjunction with the probable cause clause. I suggest reading more than just wikipedia, you might learn something.



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by MIDNIGHTSUN
 


Napolitano states it was within protocols however if the protocols incorporate inappropiate methodologies then it is no different than any stranger in a city park touching a 6 year old within that same manner.




posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow
I will say this...that if citizens denied such procedures and stood their ground with lethal force, this would stop IMMEDIATELY. Sadly, people will put up with terrible indignity, as history shows, long before the straw break.


While I could certainly walk in with my .45ACP tucked and attempt to get through the TSA gauntlet...my guess is there would be no winner should I attempt to do so. I understand your angst and feel it 1000 times as much as yourself. Obviously I would have both the US and my State Constitutions backing me but neither seem to be seen as relevant.

I will put up with a certain amount of indignity at the hands of these control freak demons but will snap like a twig should one even attempt to touch my little girl. I have no need for a firearm when dealing with these submorons. Then again, maybe I should have never trained in martial arts.
edit on 25-4-2011 by bozzchem because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by bozzchem
 


While you may be correct in that at that moment there would be no "winner", liberty is something that must be guarded jealously. The fields of freedom must, on occasion, be watered with the blood of patriots.

Throughout history we can find lessons of such. Our own founding fathers, while great, did not originate the idea of freedom. Almost all of what America is was founded on the conglomerated model of our human forebears. Rome gave us a congress, the Iriquois gave us "democracy" (although it was borrowed heavily from the Greeks as well). But Sparta teaches us that if we are to remain free, we must be willing to live, fight, and die free.

I would rather die on my feet than spend the rest of my life on my knees. I say this as possibly the most risk averse person you will ever talk to.
edit on 25-4-2011 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by DarylHamblett
 


Seriously? Do people still believe in Al Qaeda?

You know that is total BS right? US made? CIA Controlled? Bin Laden worked for the US against the Soviets in the Eighties? the Muhjadeen? Al Qaeda was just made up as a name of an "Evil Entity" to scare us into war?

Are you sure you are at the correct web site you intended?
edit on 25-4-2011 by sdocpublishing because: Left the "s" off of Soviets and added "in the Eighties" to a sentence.



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Humint1
 


Star for the awesome photo.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join