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 asks 95 years old woman, in wheelchair, battling leukemia to remove adult diaper

page: 10
102
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dhimmie
I recall the shoe bomber but I can't imagine the 95 year old about to die in a wheelchair due to leukemia hidden bombs in a diaper (we call them nappies in UK) bomber.


And don't think for a second haji hasn't had the same thought


The issue is TSA is not being solution.




posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


Flight 93 is a good example of a group of people, not a individual, taking down terrorists; let’s not forget they all died although that was inevitable. I am talking about a incident were by passengers are being kept hostage for say a list of demands.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321



HOW LONG BEFORE YOU GET ANGRY AMERICA AND BEAT THE HELL OUT OF THESE SCUM?


My question is, if this is such a big issue and concern, then why do people keep flying knowing that there is a possibility that something like this might happen?

IMO, if people quit flying, the airliners and their lobbyist would fight to change how TSA treats its customers.



People have to fly. In many cases this is their only choice.
There needs to be a large enough outcry that boils down to a mass statement producing the same kind of understanding one accepts when they get on a terrifying amusement park ride or swim without a lifeguard.
We accept lessened security measures and agree to fly at our own risk.

Anyone that doesn't sign the waiver can stay off the planes or another option might be to start their own "we probe, pat down and irradiate them" airlines. Call it Safetyfirst Air or something and see what the turnout is.
I think the majority will accept reasonable risk to avoid what amounts to an intimate sexual encounter forced upon us just to get across the country.
edit on 26-6-2011 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Immortalgemini527
 


Well, no I wouldn't trust him with my child, because I'm selfish remember?
I don't know about you but I think this thread shot off topic like a V2 rocket.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


Dont u see, americans are security, Police state, whats that thing called when everyone has to be somekind of law enforcer or military? I think it happened in soviet russia.

Well this will never end.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


Your scenario is dynamic, and there is no presumption of a mere hostage taking, wherein a list of demands must be met.
I have been trained in Executive protection and part of that training consisted of what to do in the event you are on a plane being hijacked.

You know what they told me?
Don't do anything!
Be quite, don't look them in the eye, essentially be invisible and try to maintain a level of safety for your client. Very dynamic. So in this situation I agree with you.
edit on 26-6-2011 by snowen20 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


To say this administration and our government employees holds Americans in deep contempt would be an understatement. I do believe the terrorists like us more and this government does.

I read that the airlines did lose money due to TSA abuse of Americans last year. The same articles had TSA promising new technology that is just as invasive of privacy but not as sexually abusive and degrading as the current police state joy ride.

I think boycotting them is working. Another period of even more loss in profits, will collapse this Nazi scheme if the media refused to ratchet up the pressure on Obammy's hateful pervert people.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:22 PM
link   
Why have I a career Soldier been deployed three times, why did previous generations of soldiers fight there particular war? Why if all your gonna do with what we have provided for you is complain about every little thing? maybe if you took the time you spent on here and other blogs doing something more constructive with your time ( mending your community, physically protesting what you write about) maybe there wouldnt be half as much to complain about anymore. Every last one of you have lost touch with what matter. If you dont like the TSA visit (dont write Your Congress man) If you wanna know about aliens Get the education that will provide you with access, so on and so forth. Stop Talking and Do something about everything your upset about. Your all what we call Blog BadA**'s nothing more.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by jfj123
 


Flight 93 is a good example of a group of people, not a individual, taking down terrorists; let’s not forget they all died although that was inevitable. I am talking about a incident were by passengers are being kept hostage for say a list of demands.

So?
Most hostage situations end badly.
Make up whatever situation you want but the reality is that if YOU won't fight for your freedom, you are a coward. If you won't fight for your families freedom, you are a coward.

Your hostage scenario ASSUMES that the hostages know with 100% certainty that they will be released if demands are met. And how exactly does your hostage situation work in with the thread topic anyway?



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by snowen20


Don't do anything! Be quite, don't look them in the eye, essentially be invisible and try to maintain a level of safety for your client. Very dynamic. So in this situation I agree with you.


Being the gray man, it is the most important thing you can do just sit quiet and passively observe in the hope that if you are lucky enough to be released you can provide valuable intelligence to the security forces or in the event of a raid on the aircraft you can be prepared.

Turning into Rambo and attempting to disarm one of the terrorists is going to get you killed at best or get everyone on the plane killed at worse.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:25 PM
link   
Had I been present for this, I would not be able to type this because I would still be in jail for what I would have done. All BS aside, my line in the sand is drawn and this would have breeched what I consider tolerable. I would not bear witness to an act like this without violence, enough is enough.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


I can think of a few plane hijackings were the hostages got out, they don’t all end badly. But an armature john McLane wana be is guaranteed to get everybody killed.

I think some people on this thread have been watching to many movies.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


Spoken like someone fearful of getting hurt.

Nothing could be done?

Something can ALWAYS be done by an alert person who's not afraid of being hurt or inflicting hurt.

ANYONE can be killed in less than 5 seconds if you know what you're doing, so something can always be done.

Even if everyone on the plane dies, it is still worth fighting back...that's the part sunshine patriots can't seem to understand, sometimes you have to give your life, and the lives of others, in the name of freedom. True freedom costs, occasionally very heavily. The loss of one planeload of people is still better than passively accepting a steady erosion of rights in the name of "safety", which is an illusion anyway, providing all know that the loss came because the people fought back. To die defending yourselves sends a clear message to those who would intimidate that it won't happen, they'll just die in failure. Their goal is to intimidate, fight back and they fail.

Societally, it is far better to lose ten aircraft than to give in once.
edit on 26-6-2011 by apacheman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin

Originally posted by snowen20


Don't do anything! Be quite, don't look them in the eye, essentially be invisible and try to maintain a level of safety for your client. Very dynamic. So in this situation I agree with you.


Being the gray man, it is the most important thing you can do just sit quiet and passively observe in the hope that if you are lucky enough to be released you can provide valuable intelligence to the security forces or in the event of a raid on the aircraft you can be prepared.

Turning into Rambo and attempting to disarm one of the terrorists is going to get you killed at best or get everyone on the plane killed at worse.

The reality is that nobody on your imaginary aircraft will believe any hostage taker. They will rightfully assume they are terrorists who will ultimately kill everyone on board. That being said, they will take action as they have done before.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by jfj123
 


I can think of a few plane hijackings were the hostages got out, they don’t all end badly. But an armature john McLane wana be is guaranteed to get everybody killed.

I think some people on this thread have been watching to many movies.


You miss the point entirely.
Nobody from 9/11/2011 on assumes a hostage situation on a plane. They will always assume the worst and act accordingly.
Also, subduing the shoe bomber didn't get everyone killed, did it? Just the opposite!
GROW A PAIR.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:30 PM
link   
You guy's/girls are arguing way too much.


Even with TSA we are not safe, How do you think drugs and weapons get smuggled into jail.. In peoples Rectum. What's stopping someone from opting out of the C-Ray and getting the enhanced pat down when people know TSA wont be checking your anal orifice
edit on 26-6-2011 by SelfSustainedLoner because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:32 PM
link   

People have to fly. In many cases this is their only choice.
There needs to be a large enough outcry that boils down to a mass statement producing the same kind of understanding one accepts when they get on a terrifying amusement park ride or swim without a lifeguard.
We accept lessened security measures and agree to fly at our own risk.

Anyone that doesn't sign the waiver can stay off the planes or another option might be to start their own "we probe, pat down and irradiate them" airlines. Call it Safetyfirst Air or something and see what the turnout is.
I think the majority will accept reasonable risk to avoid what amounts to an intimate sexual encounter forced upon us just to get across the country.
edit on 26-6-2011 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)


This proposal makes so much sense that it is embarrassing. I must however add this imperative:
Pilots of these airlines MUST be armed, and must have an unbreachable cockpit door.

The reasoning, of course, is that the planes themselves will never become targeted weapons
that cause harm in a directed way.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


You are correct in assuming that I was talking about an even wherein immediate threat of death was expected.
But as far as a simple hijacking (if it can be called simple.) is concerned we are in 100% agreement.

Thats why I was telling apacheman, about the window of commitment, in which you have to decide to act. Obviously if you are not in immediate threat of death then attempting to secure yourself, or another person may in all likelihood end in death. Even as a protective specialist you can not fly with a weapon of any kind other than hand to hand, which may or may not work, and fighting against a box cutter is a nightmare scenario. I taught disarmament tactics for years. I still am not confident that I could disarm someone like that without sustaining life threatening wounds.
Lets not incite these guys to anger before we know what they want. At least air marshals can carry a side arm with LV slugs.
Sucks to be us huh?

Agreed.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
Um.....let's see....oh yea the underwear bomber. There was also the guy with a bomb in his shoe but yea I guess they would never use a grandma's diaper, especially if they know it would never be checked.

C'mon get serious. Anything not checked will be the next path used by someone who want's to blow up an airplane.



Get serious ?
It was those two CIA operations that got you the body scanners and more extreme pat-downs.

Problem is,...The American public fell for these two false-flag terrorist threats and now this is the outcome.

People in the US need to stand up against this but i don`t think they will.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:33 PM
link   
peaceful protests and demonstrations do not work in a government that blatantly ignores it's people and steps on their rights.

the only way to regain our freedom is through violent upheaval of the people. Year after year we have tried peaceful means and "writing to our congressmen" etc and it's all ignored and just doesn't work.

When the people rise up with sword in hand and hang those responsible in city squares or courthouse lawns as a whole then there will be change.

As for finding cops and military that would join such a revolution if one would happen we'd have the support of the Oath Keepers: oathkeepers.net...

oath keepers one of many militias but this one is cops, military, government workers who pledge to protect our constitution and would help fight with the people in case of a revolution instead of against us



new topics

top topics



 
102
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join