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.

 

I had an "enhanced" TSA pat-down, and I cried..

page: 12
73
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by christine76
 


You *knew* you were going to an airport. You *knew* there would be agents there doing searches. You know that a federal agency is running security there. You WILLINGLY went. No one stripped your rights honey, you walked right into it.


So, if the federal government decides that there is a risk out there that maybe terrorists will attack us. Thus, Congress decides to enact a law that says: FBI agents can come into your home whenever they'd like, without a warrant and search the entire premises for whatever they'd like. This law is announced to the WORLD. NOT one person in America doesn't know about it. You want to buy a house. So, you wilfully buy a house. Does that mean the FBI doesn't strip you of your rights when they come into your house? After all, you knew of the law, you knew the FBI was doing these searches, and you willingly bought a home.



this is nothing but a flag and star generating thread. Like claiming that the agent looked upset giving you a pat down. She has done that a hundred times to other dramatic mothers like you, she could care less.

As for your rights being trampled on, they are not. There are fourth amendment rights that protect you against unreasonable search and seizures, but they also give the government the the right to search if they are suspcious.


LOL. Yes they are. The Fourth Amendment guarantees the right to be free from unreasonable searches. As you pointed out, there are certain exceptions to this, such as the Terry stop and Frisk. However, for that to even come into play, the cop must determine that what you are doing at that moment is suspicious. Not only suspicious to them, but suspicious to a reasonable officer. THEN the cop must show that he acted reasonably in conducting the search. The search can't last too long, and it cannot exceed the scope of a search for weapons.THAT is what a COP is LIMITED to when they ACTUALLY suspect someone.

Even you note that the government can search based on suspicion. However, the scanners themselves don't discriminate against suspicion. Instead, EVERYONE has to go through them or be subject to an EXTENSIVE pat down. This is the equivalent of being under arrest and being searched, except for citizens. The last terrorist attack was a decade ago. While not that far removed, the rights of individuals in NOT being essentially stripped search far outweighs the governments interest in preventing a future terrorist attack.



You are given ample warning of these searches when you buy the ticket and get the information about your flight.



Ample warning means nothing as to constitutionality. Again, if Congress decides they are going to take away everyone's freedom of speech and they tell people 5 years ahead of time, that AMPLE warning means NOTHING.



The government also has a duty to not discriminate, which means you don't have to wear a burka to be considered a threat as a woman. And if you think terrorists wouldn't use children, you got another think coming, because soldiers from any war could tell you they do.


First of all, the use of children is speculation by you. I have not once heard of a single story about children being used as terrorist tools and I've talked to many people about their experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Also, even if they do, that still doesn't mean anything in regards to whether or not this conduct is constitutional.


You are not the only person getting on that plane, they have to ensure the safety of everyone getting on that plane. There would be no point to circumventing safety measures simply because you have a toddler with you. Your privacy rights of the fourth amendment are against the safety of everyone on that plane.


They also have to ensure the safety of people on public transportation. People using public highways. People in government buildings. People walking on city sidewalks. Should the police be allowed to stop anyone walking on the sidewalk and subject them to a security scan? Should they have checkpoints on the highway where they pull over all cars, have you get out and pat you down? Should you have to go through a security scanner before boarding a bus? Should you go through a pat down before you get on a train? Where are you drawing the line as unreasonable?


As for people saying that these agents have never caught a terrorist, they catch people every single day trying to circumvent the security. Trying to smuggle things on they shouldn't, are being hassled. And people constantly ignoring warnings.

So whose to say how many nutjobs they have kept from stabbing the guy next to him with a pen knife, or even accidently.


You're right. Because prior to these security checks people were stabbing each other left and right on the plane. And what is the purpose of these security check points? To prevent smuggling? If so that is pretty intrusive if you're trying to stop smugglers by giving millions of innocent people full body scans every day.


You have bought tickets to a private company. Yet when people walk into department stores, they don't balk at the security tags or the alarms at every instance because it is for product theft, and it is a private entity.


Yes, private stores are private entities. However, the TSA is not a private entity, nor are airports.



Airports are the only exception to the fourth amendment. The second you step into an airport, you are giving permission for a random search and seizure.

These laws have been in effect long before 911, for forty years now in fact. And they have held up all 40 years. So no, 911 was not an excuse to strip liberties at airports, the searches were always there for the same reasons. It just amped up the technology to do so.
When you choose to buy an airline ticket, you are consenting to any search in the secured area of the airport.


No, 9/11 was an excuse to take liberties away, however, they may have initially been justified. They took more precautions. However, that has now essentially gone into the equivalent of every person being stripped searched. Yes, they did amp up the technology, but by doing that they amped up the intrusiveness of the scanners. The government was doing a fine job of preventing terrorist attacks PRIOR to the full body scans. You see, it used to be that you would go through a metal detector and maybe a random pat down. Now, if you don't want to be strip searched you have to go through a pat down. You see the drastic increase there. One was just a preliminary search for weapons which has now changed into a full on strip search without 1 single incident of terrorism after 2001.


For future reference, once you place your items on the table to be screened, you no longer have the right to refuse the screening and search.

Freedom of Speech is also reduced in an airport. Which is why you can't say anything you want. Though maintained by the taxpayers, airports are not considered public property and therefore are not subject to the same rights.





Yeah, Airports are considered non-public forums. So they can restrict speech. However, that doesn't mean you lose all your rights. There are public policy reasons for removing speech from an airport. Just as there are for limited searches. However, the extent of these searches on a persons individual rights far exceeds any interest the government has in preventing a terrorist attack and smuggling. There were procedures in place before that resulted in the same effectiveness. I'm talking about the post-2001 procedures.
edit on 23-6-2011 by Ryanp5555 because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-6-2011 by Ryanp5555 because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-6-2011 by Ryanp5555 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Boo friggin' hoo

Getting a pat down at an airport should be the least of your damn worries, they're trying to keep crazy weapon bearing people OFF the airplanes.

Seriously you think this is a breach of your rights? Last I heard flying isn't a right, and there are new rules that come out all time, you don't like em? Don't fly then, no one is forcing you.

I on the other hand have been patted down, and I honestly couldn't care less, it didn't damage my ego in the least.

The people that make a big deal about this are those that WANT TO MAKE A BIG DEAL ABOUT IT FOR THE SAKE OF MAKING A BIG DEAL ABOUT IT. Simple as that.

It's not your RIGHT to fly, its a privilege you pay for, just like driving... people think "It's my right to drive" well sorry to burst that bubble... it's NOT your right to drive, it's a privilege given to you... You're a PUBLIC liability as soon as you step on the plane / get in the car to drive... If a cop can give you a breathalyzer while you drive, airport security should be able to test you for weapons you could harm passengers with.

If you simply told your kids "it's not a big deal, it tickles actually, you can fart while they do it and they have to keep doing it until their done, hahahaha" instead of being a #ing drama queen and crying like a god damn spoiled baby, maybe this wouldn't have been a "traumatic" experience for them. It's YOUR fault, no one elses, you #ing idiot.

GET INTO THE REAL WORLD, there are people that want nothing more then to kill you and your family simply for being in a free country, with rights and privileges... and you go a cry about this... THIS?

Grow the # up and act like an adult.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Ryanp5555
 


How can I sue the TSA? Is my account enough? I don't have pictures. Of course, I suppose there are security cameras at the airport that may have recorded the incident. I am not entirely against the idea of a lawsuit..



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by christine76
reply to post by Ryanp5555
 


How can I sue the TSA? Is my account enough? I don't have pictures. Of course, I suppose there are security cameras at the airport that may have recorded the incident. I am not entirely against the idea of a lawsuit..


Are you serious? Do you actually think you merit a lawsuit after acting suspicious enough to get a full body check?

Maybe if you hadn't created a scene and cried like a baby, they wouldn't have gone as far with the search, but damn woman... crying and acting like that is damn suspicious if you ask me.

I would have ordered a full body check on you also.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 10:46 AM
link   
What about dogs in the airport? Other countries use them. They are cheaper than the scanners, they can detect all sorts of things, and to be honest I'd rather face a dog sniffing me up and down than some government agents hands all over me.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by christine76
 


If you were interested in it, I'd go talk to an attorney. However, there is already tons of lawsuits out there that were filed relatively recently. What will basically happen, and is basically happening, is that they are suing to enjoin the TSA from using these scanners. Personally, I would just let the other lawsuits work themselves out. Ralph Nader is one party suing, so is Jessie Ventura, so are other attorneys. They probably will see it through to the end. However, if you want to sue, the only advice I can give you is to find an attorney and sit down with them during a free consultation.
edit on 23-6-2011 by Ryanp5555 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by christine76
 

I would like to ask one simple question, and it is not rhetorical. I would like an answer to the question of, how on earth did you ever give birth to those two boys? that must have been the most humiliating thing to have endured, with all those people touching you and looking at your naked lady parts. I guess that gynecologist probably only go to school to look at naked women too? As has been stated over and over in this thread, it is not a right to fly. Flying with a commercial air line is a choice, and privilege. If you do not like the steps one must take to board the craft, then you have the choice of not flying. I await my answer.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by christine76
 


No you can not sue them. you submitted to the test!!!!! what is it with people who step in poop and then get angry at the dog?????? whatch where you are going, you do not have a right to fly, show me any part of the constitution that says you do. and since you CHOSE to get on that plane you CHOSE to be searched. like thousands of others!!!!!!



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by christine76

Originally posted by Fatgoblin

Originally posted by gentledissident
BTW, why would you doubt you'd be attracted to Christine?


Apart from the melodrama and paranoia maybe I would be attracted to her. Hey Christine, got any pics?





Here you go, me on vacation. I tried to make it smaller, but oh well...





Where do I sign up to become a TSA agent?



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by JibbyJedi

Where does this end? Home searches and video monitoring, or basically the worst parts of China coming to the USA & UK.


I have traveled in China and believe me it is nothing like here. I was there just after the SARS epidemic to bring my daughter home. The big security thing in their airports? It was a heat monitor scanning for elevated body temps in travelers walking by it. If you tripped it you were taken to see a nurse for a further medical check. But there were no intrusive checks like the TSA is doing.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by sacecowboy
reply to post by christine76
 

I would like to ask one simple question, and it is not rhetorical. I would like an answer to the question of, how on earth did you ever give birth to those two boys? that must have been the most humiliating thing to have endured, with all those people touching you and looking at your naked lady parts. I guess that gynecologist probably only go to school to look at naked women too? As has been stated over and over in this thread, it is not a right to fly. Flying with a commercial air line is a choice, and privilege. If you do not like the steps one must take to board the craft, then you have the choice of not flying. I await my answer.


I don't see where the connection is to compare my experience with the TSA and giving birth. Giving birth was not humiliating. I saw my Dr. regularly for nine months leading up to the event. We had an ongoing relationship, um partnership, agreement, to look after the health of myself and my unborn baby.
I won't fly again. And I will be looking into what difference I can make as a citizen and voter.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 11:53 AM
link   
No offense, but it seems like they just gave you a basic pat down for alerting when you went though a metal detector. From what I understood from what you wrote its not like they were blatantly grabbing or groping you up. You weren't forced to undress for a strip search or submit to any uh.. orifice exams so I'd consider myself lucky. I've been patted down numerous times at security checkpoints and I'd hardly consider the guard brushing against my junk to be something to be distressed about. Most of the time the guard looks kind of embarrassed afterward anyway lol.

At the end of the day these people only have as much power over you as you give them. If you don't like them then don't give them your money, time, or presence. Hit 'em where it hurts, in the pocketbook.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 11:59 AM
link   
Please don't hate me but these pat downs to me are nothing to worry about my former step brother worked at the airport and had to perform these pat downs and they hate it as much as you do, but they have to because its their job. Don't blame them blame the people who hijacked the planes in 9/11 (Inside or not, that's a different topic).


Also I have had multiple pat downs (Piercings and braces have set off the metal detector as have my glasses). I have an extreme phobia of physical contact, and never once have I cried nor have I felt ashamed or humiliated they were kind about it and stated that it was protocol. I would rather be safe than sorry.

We all have jobs and we all have to do what we are told to do at that job or risk being dismissed some of these people have no choice but to work at the airport (In my step brothers case he took it as a temp job but couldn't get hired anywhere else, as had many of his co-workers).



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by christine76
 


You have got to be kidding, Its your own damn fault. You made alot of wrong decisions and now your blaming someone else for it? Next time try acting like a mature adult and not sobbing worse than your 2 year old. I understand that you may have found it a bit nerve racking but you blew a fairly standard pat down into something else entirely, While i do not agree with the T.S.A or giving up freedoms for security you took this experience way to far and i tend to agree that you should seek some psychiatric help.

You could have just accepted the "Enhanced Search" and been on your merry way in 30 seconds, You could have reassured your 2 year old that everything was fine and to wait with his brother, but instead you got distraught and obviously made your children distraught too.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Esotericizm
 


It would not have been over in 30 seconds. That was clear once she told me that if one of my kids came in contact with me then they too would have hands sliding on their body.
I was not hysterically sobbing. Did you read the whole op? They were silent tears, that would indicate no sobbing.
It was a stripping of my freedom's as an American citizen. The attitude of so many like you is another rude awakening. You act like you are so high and mighty, and I am so weak, but you don't know me.
There is a pattern showing a lack of reading comprehension skills judging by the posts that are being made.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Fatgoblin
 


Aw, shucks, thanks!



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by christine76
 


I've read every post in this topic and not once in your op does it mention that they were "Silent Tears". Matter of fact you make it sound like you were in hysterics. I also dont understand what your getting at. If you had of either asked your 9 year old to look after your 21 month old or reassured them both that it was okay, then i bet it would have been over a whole lot quicker. I dont think im any better than you or anyone else on this forum, but i do know that you handled the situation wrongly and now your after attention. You were told what was going to happen if you came in contact with another person but you let it happen anyway (granted it was a small child and ill give you some leeway there), I honestly think you handled it badly and i really would suggest some valium or xannax next time you think about travelling.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esotericizm
reply to post by christine76
 


I've read every post in this topic and not once in your op does it mention that they were "Silent Tears". Matter of fact you make it sound like you were in hysterics. I also dont understand what your getting at. If you had of either asked your 9 year old to look after your 21 month old or reassured them both that it was okay, then i bet it would have been over a whole lot quicker. I dont think im any better than you or anyone else on this forum, but i do know that you handled the situation wrongly and now your after attention. You were told what was going to happen if you came in contact with another person but you let it happen anyway (granted it was a small child and ill give you some leeway there), I honestly think you handled it badly and i really would suggest some valium or xannax next time you think about travelling.


She made it quite clear that hers were silent tears and that she was not displaying any hysterics. She didn't resist the pat down. She allowed it and had them do it in full view view of the other travelers which, I think, was the wise thing to do. She was respectful of the TSA employee who patted her down. When it was over, she continued on her way. She felt violated and humiliated by the experience. What's your problem with that?

I take it you'd bend over with excited anticipation and cheerfully take a body cavity check if directed to do so by the friendly TSA, with no sense of being violated or humiliated by the experience. But that's you, not her. Would you insist it be done in a private room? When you pass the examination and are returned to the boarding line, everyone feels safer knowing that you passed the cavity search. Makes it all seem reasonable, doesn't it?

We're not at that exteme yet, at least I havn't heard of it, but getting closer.
edit on 6/23/2011 by dubiousone because: Fix spelling. Substituted "body cavity" in place of more explicit term.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by christine76
 


Sorry for not empathizing...i just don't understand why you are so upset over getting searched ...if it was a male doing the "groping" then I would understand, his intentions could be wrong..but you stated it was a female...you are making it seem like they are getting pleasure from doing the searches..it is merely protocol..you know drugs and weapons can be concealed anywhere and this "RUBBING" ensures that nothing gets missed..lighten up, it makes your flight a hell of a lot safer...are they supposed to just look at you and realize you are not a threat? Whats the big deal?..yes this happens everywhere, in fact just last weekend i got patted down before entering a club...definitely overreacting



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ryanp5555

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by christine76
 



The government also has a duty to not discriminate, which means you don't have to wear a burka to be considered a threat as a woman. And if you think terrorists wouldn't use children, you got another think coming, because soldiers from any war could tell you they do.


First of all, the use of children is speculation by you. I have not once heard of a single story about children being used as terrorist tools and I've talked to many people about their experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan.


In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Palestinian militant groups have recruited minors to attack Israeli targets, both military and civilian, especially during the Second Intifada. In some cases these attacks have been suicidal in nature. This deliberate involvement of children in armed conflict has been condemned by international organisations and certain Palestinian groups.

source:
en.wikipedia.org...

2nd article;
KAMPALA, Uganda -(Dow Jones)- Somalia's al Qaeda-inspired al
Shabab militants have in recent weeks resorted to abducting
children to serve as fighters and suicide bombers, an African
Union military spokesman said Thursday.

Major Barigye Ba-Hoku, a spokesman for the union's peacekeeping
mission in Somalia, said al Shabab militants were "desperate"
after a failed offensive during the Islamic holy month of
Ramadan. During the fighting in August and September, AU-backed
government forces regained control of many key positions, he
said.

"To compensate for their current weakness and lack of support
from the local communities, whom they have brutalized, the
militants have resorted to abducting and brainwashing children to
serve as fighters and suicide bombers. This is against all
civilized norms and international conventions," Ba-Hoku said in a
statement.

grendelreport.posterous.com...


edit on 23-6-2011 by works4dhs because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-6-2011 by works4dhs because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-6-2011 by works4dhs because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
73
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join