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: 7
73
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Advantage
You all do realize that when you buy your ticket and enter the screening area you have agreed to the security measures.. dont you??



www.techdirt.com...

The "dont touch my junk" or Im suing you guy.. what was he told? The TSA supervisor told him, “By buying your ticket you gave up a lot of rights..."


“What he’s done, he’s violated federal law and federal regulations which states once you enter and start the process you have to complete it,” TSA’s San Diego security director told the Fox 5 News.


www.wired.com...





If youre going to argue how tough youre "gunna be when they come an grope yer junk" at the VERY LEAST know the law.. and what you have already agreed to by purchasing the ticket and entering the process.



IN other words.. BOYCOTT IT.. dont fly.. DONT agree to it.


That's bull**** as this poster I will quote (from your first link) said. When you get escorted out you no longer have to get through the procedures.

This is bull# because the guy insisting that the non-passenger must be screened or fined is basically implying that ignorance of the rule is no excuse for the non-passenger and therefore he must be fined if he leaves the security area without some agent copping a feel, but he allows the excuse that ignorance of the rule exempts the TSA agents, the local cop, and Mr. Silva from any penalty.

If they escorted him out, they exempted him from the rule, whether they knew there was one or not.


edit on 22-6-2011 by Jepic because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by xXxinfidelxXx

Originally posted by xXxinfidelxXx
reply to post by MConnalley
 


Are you serious? Like.......really serious? Typical manifesto of the sheep " oh it's what you make of it ya know!" I intend no offense....but really! Come on! Why are you even on ATS if you're okay with all of this? (serious question btw, not personal attack) I can honestly say that if some asshole tries to give me the "special pat down" before I get on a bus or a train, I'll bloody deck him. Probably wouldn't work out too well for me in the end but that is what my reaction would be. Yay for anger problems!!!!!!

edit on 22/6/2011 by xXxinfidelxXx because: (no reason given)

edit on 22/6/2011 by xXxinfidelxXx because: (no reason given)

 


I can see that your on ATS for this particular subject, but just in case you didn't notice sir, there are other subjects within this forum, I stand by my opinion. Thank you for your input. And yeah I believe it wouldn't end well for you. That will be your last bus ride and then you will ultimately need your own vehicle or need to carpool, walk or bike. Hot air balloon possibly strikes your fancy?
edit on 22-6-2011 by MConnalley because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Rhebefree
 


Thank you for defending me, and for doing so intelligently and rationally.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rhebefree

Originally posted by Jepic

Originally posted by Rhebefree

Originally posted by Jepic
A scene? Oh no! The game is simple. Let this be a lesson to all kids. If you consider something as going too far, get the game on.

Besides that would have been an excellent example and lesson from her towards her children. It would have taught them to have some respect for their bodies, not to take it and to basically not let yourself get f***** with...

And what she should have said if she was uncomfortable with her children watching a potential scene is to tell one of the agents to take them to that private room until they are finished with her pat-down.
edit on 22-6-2011 by Jepic because: (no reason given)


For crying out loud, have you not read the horror stories of foster care? Had she been arrested her children would have been immediatly put into a foster care home, I dont know if she has a partner but if so it would take him ages to get the children back, if she does not have a partner then it would be even harder for her to get them back. It doesnt matter what country you live in once the empire has a hold on your children they dont give them up easy, sometimes never at all.
The op was brave to the best of her ability, she refused to let the drone hide the assault and for that the op should be commended. Its her childless fellow travellers that should of stood up to the plate and been a good example to her children on what community and human love and compassion is about, but they did not and that is what should be bothering you!


Uhm hello! It's not up to other people to come to the rescue. It's up to you.
And off they go to foster care then...



It most certainly is up to other people to do something when they witness injustice!
When you see someone being abused, you go to their aid, you dont hold the "holier than thou attitude" that its their fault! My gads man have you no compassion?
If me and my child were being intimidated and assaulted by some pervert in front of heaps of people, I would hope that someone would have the compassion to atleast say something, instead people like you would avert their eyes and say "oh well, if she wont defend herself then I dont have to"
I bet your the kind of person who spits in the general direction of a woman being abused by her husband arent you?


If she is physically defenceless to fight back then damn straight I will step in. If she is physically able to defend herself and fight back then I will spit in their direction.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 09:31 PM
link   
The Nazi's were simply "doing their job"...

Odd that the female of the species can sustain great physical pain but not emotional pain and vice versa for the male or so it seems.

The last time I flew, 2008, my buddy was making jokes about OBL and bombs with security personel!
You would have to know my buddy to understand how someone can get away with it without enduring a high priority anal cavity search or something to that effect


What you were feeling is what humans should feel when they are herded like animals, their rights stripped away all for lies.. for their own safety.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jepic

Originally posted by Advantage
You all do realize that when you buy your ticket and enter the screening area you have agreed to the security measures.. dont you??



www.techdirt.com...

The "dont touch my junk" or Im suing you guy.. what was he told? The TSA supervisor told him, “By buying your ticket you gave up a lot of rights..."


“What he’s done, he’s violated federal law and federal regulations which states once you enter and start the process you have to complete it,” TSA’s San Diego security director told the Fox 5 News.


www.wired.com...





If youre going to argue how tough youre "gunna be when they come an grope yer junk" at the VERY LEAST know the law.. and what you have already agreed to by purchasing the ticket and entering the process.



IN other words.. BOYCOTT IT.. dont fly.. DONT agree to it.


That's bull**** as this poster I will quote (from your first link) said. When you get escorted out you no longer have to get through the procedures.

This is bull# because the guy insisting that the non-passenger must be screened or fined is basically implying that ignorance of the rule is no excuse for the non-passenger and therefore he must be fined if he leaves the security area without some agent copping a feel, but he allows the excuse that ignorance of the rule exempts the TSA agents, the local cop, and Mr. Silva from any penalty.

If they escorted him out, they exempted him from the rule, whether they knew there was one or not.


edit on 22-6-2011 by Jepic because: (no reason given)


So youre actually going to take the word of a commenter on a news story and not the federal law the person holding the ticket has agreed to? WOW... this just keeps getting better and better!
edit on 22-6-2011 by Advantage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Kryties
 


+10000
Anyone who sides with TSA needs to rethink their stance. No reason for this. Airplanes are very safe compared to the leading causes of death in the US. This TSA regime does not care to protect passengers. They follow orders the same way the Germans followed Hitler. Not sure why anyone would approve of this type of behavior from TSA.

On the other hand, What if the gov is actually trying to make us grow a spine and stand up for ourselves. As long as no one says stop they will continue on their path to destruction.

Spend your worthless paper to travel another way and this entire TSA regime will collapse.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by k21968
reply to post by christine76
 


I received a super duper pat down in Atlanta and low and behold TYE dIGGS was in the special area with me. I fell in love. It was worth it to me because well..he is a freaking hottie.

I dont mean to minimize what happened to you. I am sorry you had to go through that. I just wished you got to share a pat down with a hottie. It does make it better.


Thank you for the chuckle. You are the second poster that offered a little comic relief without being smirky, I appreciate that.. Great for you having the hot guy distraction! For me, Colin Farrell could possibly make ANY situation bearable..



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Advantage

Originally posted by Jepic

Originally posted by Advantage
You all do realize that when you buy your ticket and enter the screening area you have agreed to the security measures.. dont you??



www.techdirt.com...

The "dont touch my junk" or Im suing you guy.. what was he told? The TSA supervisor told him, “By buying your ticket you gave up a lot of rights..."


“What he’s done, he’s violated federal law and federal regulations which states once you enter and start the process you have to complete it,” TSA’s San Diego security director told the Fox 5 News.


www.wired.com...





If youre going to argue how tough youre "gunna be when they come an grope yer junk" at the VERY LEAST know the law.. and what you have already agreed to by purchasing the ticket and entering the process.



IN other words.. BOYCOTT IT.. dont fly.. DONT agree to it.


That's bull**** as this poster I will quote (from your first link) said. When you get escorted out you no longer have to get through the procedures.

This is bull# because the guy insisting that the non-passenger must be screened or fined is basically implying that ignorance of the rule is no excuse for the non-passenger and therefore he must be fined if he leaves the security area without some agent copping a feel, but he allows the excuse that ignorance of the rule exempts the TSA agents, the local cop, and Mr. Silva from any penalty.

If they escorted him out, they exempted him from the rule, whether they knew there was one or not.


edit on 22-6-2011 by Jepic because: (no reason given)


So youre actually going to take the word of a commenter on a news story and not the federal law the person holding the ticket has agreed to? WOW... this just keeps getting better and better!
edit on 22-6-2011 by Advantage because: (no reason given)


Yea I do take that piece of information from him/her as true. But have you read the story? Because if you did I'm gonna ask you: do you take the word of a man in slacks and a sportcoat? He was most certainly trying to intimidate him...
edit on 22-6-2011 by Jepic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 10:03 PM
link   
I got half way through your story and I cannot possibly read another line. My heart goes out to you.... But this is why we must boycott the airlines. Show big business who really runs this country of consumerism. Too bad half of America is living a fabricated dream. They are not aware of the waking nightmare.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by MConnalley
 


You can't really have a positive experience when you're being given a light version of a grope. Realistically, it's just not going to happen.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 10:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Jepic
 


reply to post by Jepic
 



No I take the word of the director of security and the federal law. Sorta trumps a commenter on a story. If youre going to break a law.. at least know what law youre intending to break and the consequences of doing so. Buy a ticket and enter the process.. you are giving what is called "IMPLIED CONSENT" and thats not even necessary anymore.. now since the 9th Circuit Courts ruling.. you dont even have to give implied consent because since 9-11 and this ruling.. its held under the umbrella of “highly regulated industry.” In other words... you are groped against your will and are obviously ignorant of the law. You have NO right to walk away. You may get away with it.. but it certainly isnt your RIGHT to anymore.

DOnt buy a ticket, dont support unconstitutional BS, and they dry up because the flow of precious money dries up. To fight somethig that you have no idea what you are actually fighting is beyond stupid. There is enough evidence, case reviews, and hard black and white info on the internet.. Im shocked no one grasps any of this and WHY it is unconstitutional. Not only is it NOT a viable method of security, its complete BS.

If you want to have ANY clue about what you are speaking about.. start here:

www.tsa.gov...
ecfr.gpoaccess.gov...:9.1.3.5.10&idno=49
fourthamendment.com...

Then go to here to understand exactly what rights are stripped from you with the now designated "highly regulated industry".


United States v. Aukai, 497 F.3d 955 (9th Cir. 2007)
United States v. Davis, 482 F.2d 893, 908 (9th Cir. 1973);
see also United States v. Hartwell, 436 F.3d 174, 178 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 127 S. Ct. 111 (2006);
Marquez, 410 F.3d at 616.


"Our case law, however, has erroneously suggested that the reasonableness of airport screening searches is dependent upon consent, either ongoing consent or irrevocable implied consent."




The Ninth Circuit held that airport searches no longer are dependent upon implied consent; they are now administrative searches because flying on an airplane in a post-9/11 world is now the same as a “highly regulated industry.” Any “implied consent,” thus, cannot be revoked once the passenger elects to enter the secure area. Such searches, however, are not limitless; they are limited by their justification: screening for terrorists. This search was reasonable under the circumstances.





Hopefully someone is getting the clue here....chewing up information and regurgitating it to those who refuse to research anything is interfering with my South Park on Netflix viewing pleasures...



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 10:23 PM
link   
I just wanted to mention during the year following the 911 event the Baltimore, MD Airport had army men with machine guns in the airport. One at the entrance to the security check point and two at the metal detectors and the conveyor belt area. It was very intimidating to see for sure. All kinds of crazy things were going on back then, they didn't really even want cars driving up to the Washington Dulles International airport. My Husband saw a guy being drug through the Germany Airport the day after Bush's ultimatum to Saddam. That guy didn't even have his shoes on, he was muslim looking. They put him on a plane to the States because they didn't want to deal with him. High security was on for the July forth holiday in 2009, getting back into the States from Ireland took twenty four hours and I missed connecting flights and had to sleep in the JFK airport. That was an unpleasant dirty experience. Dirty filthy airport. We all went through two or three security checks and they looked in every last persons purse and carry on luggage before boarding the plane. Really these loss of civil liberties for ten minutes are equivalent to a dentist cleaning. It is unpleasant but nessesary.
edit on 22-6-2011 by frugal because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 10:25 PM
link   
It is your fault for flying in the first place.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Advantage
reply to post by Jepic
 


reply to post by Jepic
 



No I take the word of the director of security and the federal law. Sorta trumps a commenter on a story. If youre going to break a law.. at least know what law youre intending to break and the consequences of doing so. Buy a ticket and enter the process.. you are giving what is called "IMPLIED CONSENT" and thats not even necessary anymore.. now since the 9th Circuit Courts ruling.. you dont even have to give implied consent because since 9-11 and this ruling.. its held under the umbrella of “highly regulated industry.” In other words... you are groped against your will and are obviously ignorant of the law. You have NO right to walk away. You may get away with it.. but it certainly isnt your RIGHT to anymore.

DOnt buy a ticket, dont support unconstitutional BS, and they dry up because the flow of precious money dries up. To fight somethig that you have no idea what you are actually fighting is beyond stupid. There is enough evidence, case reviews, and hard black and white info on the internet.. Im shocked no one grasps any of this and WHY it is unconstitutional. Not only is it NOT a viable method of security, its complete BS.

If you want to have ANY clue about what you are speaking about.. start here:

www.tsa.gov...
ecfr.gpoaccess.gov...:9.1.3.5.10&idno=49
fourthamendment.com...

Then go to here to understand exactly what rights are stripped from you with the now designated "highly regulated industry".


United States v. Aukai, 497 F.3d 955 (9th Cir. 2007)
United States v. Davis, 482 F.2d 893, 908 (9th Cir. 1973);
see also United States v. Hartwell, 436 F.3d 174, 178 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 127 S. Ct. 111 (2006);
Marquez, 410 F.3d at 616.


"Our case law, however, has erroneously suggested that the reasonableness of airport screening searches is dependent upon consent, either ongoing consent or irrevocable implied consent."




The Ninth Circuit held that airport searches no longer are dependent upon implied consent; they are now administrative searches because flying on an airplane in a post-9/11 world is now the same as a “highly regulated industry.” Any “implied consent,” thus, cannot be revoked once the passenger elects to enter the secure area. Such searches, however, are not limitless; they are limited by their justification: screening for terrorists. This search was reasonable under the circumstances.





Hopefully someone is getting the clue here....chewing up information and regurgitating it to those who refuse to research anything is interfering with my South Park on Netflix viewing pleasures...








Oh I've got the clue alright... Because all those fancy letters and numbers don't mean s*** to me. The story is simple. They either get a clue and stop putting those fancy organised letters and numbers that take away liberties into law, or they are f*****, because this isn't even about what's my right anymore. This is about what the people are ever so increasingly planning to have back. Liberty.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 10:37 PM
link   
Man why is it that so many people get ridiculously emo about a goddamn pat down. I got pat down by cops once and I was totally innocent. I didn't cause a big old scene and start crying because a male cop's hand glided over my penis. It's peoples' job and livelihood to do this. They are simply following the protocol of the law. To compare somebody who does a body search at an airport to Nazi's who would cook human beings alive is simply taking it too far. They are simply following the orders of their boss. Much the same way as a person working at Subway follows the order of their boss by making sandwiches to the customer's preference. If everybody who followed the orders of their boss was a Nazi, we'd all be Nazi's. Stop comparing the TSA to Adolf Hitler.

If you're going to fly on a plane, accept the fact that these systems are in place for everyone's safety. If something as mundane as preflight security can weigh on your mind so heavily for weeks leading up to it, you probably have bigger problems in your life.

What they need is some sort of a pat down lineup. By this I mean you look at all the people who might feel you up and you get to pick the person you like most. OP if Enrique Iglesias was the person patting you down would you have gotten so emotional about it?



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 10:45 PM
link   
Your going to start seeing this crap in train stations, malls, libraries - lots of public areas.

This is just the start of things to come - these airports are just a test run. If they are not stopped there, look out.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 10:48 PM
link   
flip flop.. flip flop.

Anyway...

OP Good thread. One day the kiddies will realize tough talk on the internet is silly and the erosion of our liberties and constitutional rights is happening NOW. It is interesting to see some so interested in liberty... bashing and attacking with vulgarities the victim of such things.



Now you know.. drive next time. For the time being you are not under threat of groping for driving across state lines. For now anyway. We have "motorist safety checks" here in nowhere town Southern Illinois. Nice way of saying a road block with "implied consent"... but we arent allowed to back away from the road block and not be checked. Turning from a road block is considered probable cause for the cops to chase you down and getcha. Reminiscent of "show me your papers". Yay, coming to a town near you.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 10:51 PM
link   
It is unfortunate that your bad experience and the experience of others with TSA, Law Enforcement and other State and Government authorities continues but it is a necessary process to fully alienate them from the people. Once this alienation and the lines have been clearly drawn and the resentment has boiled down to pure distrust and hatred, the breakdown of civilization that the orchestrators intend, will begin in earnest.
edit on 22-6-2011 by MajorKarma because: typos



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by christine76 I won't be flying again anytime soon...
I don't see the point of flying. Technology allows personal and business communication without travel. I'm in Oklahoma. We have loads of options for entertainment here and in surrounding states.

I feel your pain.
edit on 22-6-2011 by gentledissident because: empathy



new topics

top topics



 
73
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join