Police charge mother who stopped TSA from fondling her daughter

page: 8
51
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 12:57 PM
link   
I feel for the mother and daughter who endured being sexually assaulted, have you considered taking the case to international court?, please accept my condolences. Ive been quietly watching and reading threads regarding america's TSA from the almost as mad UK, but after reading this, it made my blood boil, why? apart from the real "obvious why" it seems americans are just sitting back allowing this to happen, allowing the authorities to continually increase and violate american people's freedom and rights bound by the U.S's infamous constitution.

The american government is using similar techniques to dupe you into believing there proposals are in the name national security just as a insane cult leader brainwashes it's followers, Therefore your submitting by false proxy.

What makes my blood boil, is how far are americans going to allow this to continue and increase in intensity before you stand up for your human rights, stand up against so-called national security that breach the american constitution, your rights as an american citizen?

What i cannot believe, is just a few are against whats happening recently and it's only this few that are almost silently speaking up about how they feel their rights are infringed upon via a popular website, my most visited website, but most likely this site amoung others, in the eyes of the authority will carry no weight to your voice.

I find it amazing, truely amazing how america has changed since i was a child, you don't hear that phrase "the american dream" anymore either.

From the outside looking in, i'm observing a nation that is abhoared and alienated by it's goverment, but i can't hear you shouting, i can't hear the voices of thousands protesters, young and old marching the streets of washington, new york, etc... If you want change, a complete change, then it's you, the american people, that must stand and fight against the odds in vast numbers (5 million +), to be heard, to be respected in opinion in mass.

Here's how to get started: don't fly, boycott the industry, drive to destinations for at least 12-18 months, the air industry would be crippled, airlines facing administration, empty airports, empty aircraft, only flights carrying non-citizens would be operating until the profit margins cripples that availibility too, not to mention the TSA would have very few people to pat down or scan, millions of dollars spent in near redundent scanning machines. I know there would be suffering, social upheaval, job losses and such, but if you want change, and i mean true change, kick em where it hurts most, think inteligently and peacefully and your wish will come true.

i hope for my first ever reply, my thoughts aren't too strong, if they are im sorry, but im an honest person. But it sickens me, not just the american TSA but many things that for instance the EU are oppressing us with, no-one is speaking up, no-one is protesting, no-one is fighting for their rights on either side of the pond, why?




posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by TXRabbit
 


That is exactly what I am saying- please read the contracts I posted or Google "Contract of Carriage" and Airline where you will see that spelled out in black and white.

reply to post by jed001
 


Standing up would be not flying in the first place.

Agreeing to the terms of a contract and then committing assault after that contract is enforced is stupidity.

reply to post by hapablab
 


They DO have the right because you give CONSENT when you purchase the ticket. Period. Full Stop.


Originally posted by technologicalsingularity
Here's how to get started: don't fly, boycott the industry, drive to destinations for at least 12-18 months, the air industry would be crippled, airlines facing administration, empty airports, empty aircraft, only flights carrying non-citizens would be operating until the profit margins cripples that availibility too, not to mention the TSA would have very few people to pat down or scan, millions of dollars spent in near redundent scanning machines. I know there would be suffering, social upheaval, job losses and such, but if you want change, and i mean true change, kick em where it hurts most, think inteligently and peacefully and your wish will come true.


THANK YOU!

At least someone gets it.


The bottom line is you are consenting to a search of your person and your baggage if you purchase passage on someone else's aircraft. You are entering a binding CONTRACT in which you specifically CONSENT to a search. The extent of those searches is widely publicized.

Of course nobody should have a shred of personal responsibility for supporting the TSA by purchasing airline tickets, or agreeing to these searches in exchange for convenience. All of these videos of people flipping out over what they themselves have agreed to is the electronic equivalent of shooting oneself in the foot- expensive and usually very messy.

You do NOT have the right to use someone else's property as you see fit, disregarding their wishes, just because you wish to. I do not allow smoking in my car. If you wish to ride in it, you may request smoke breaks and I will pull over but if you fire one up inside I will ask you to leave it. You cannot sit there and demand it is your "right" to smoke inside my vehicle. It is not your "right" to be conveyed in my vehicle.

It is however my right to set conditions for the usage of my property. If you do not wish to comply you may NOT do what you wish and infringe MY rights to my own legally owned property.
edit on 14-7-2011 by SFA437 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by SFA437
 


I did not mention a right to air travel, but violation of people does violates ones right to privacy, and the law. what the TSA considers pat downs, most state laws consider sexual violation. As to the body scanners, ya i'm gonna hold off on getting cancer. whats wrong with metal detectors. most bombs that explode on airplanes, occur from the luggage section of the plane, very few number of bombs/explosives are brought in on the passenger due to the fact of a risk of detection, so give me a break, these intense searches are completely unnecessary.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by SFA437
reply to post by TXRabbit
 


That is exactly what I am saying- please read the contracts I posted or Google "Contract of Carriage" and Airline where you will see that spelled out in black and white.

reply to post by jed001
 


Standing up would be not flying in the first place.

Agreeing to the terms of a contract and then committing assault after that contract is enforced is stupidity.

reply to post by hapablab
 


They DO have the right because you give CONSENT when you purchase the ticket. Period. Full Stop.


Originally posted by technologicalsingularity
Here's how to get started: don't fly, boycott the industry, drive to destinations for at least 12-18 months, the air industry would be crippled, airlines facing administration, empty airports, empty aircraft, only flights carrying non-citizens would be operating until the profit margins cripples that availibility too, not to mention the TSA would have very few people to pat down or scan, millions of dollars spent in near redundent scanning machines. I know there would be suffering, social upheaval, job losses and such, but if you want change, and i mean true change, kick em where it hurts most, think inteligently and peacefully and your wish will come true.


THANK YOU!

At least someone gets it.


The bottom line is you are consenting to a search of your person and your baggage if you purchase passage on someone else's aircraft. You are entering a binding CONTRACT in which you specifically CONSENT to a search. The extent of those searches is widely publicized.

Of course nobody should have a shred of personal responsibility for supporting the TSA by purchasing airline tickets, or agreeing to these searches in exchange for convenience. All of these videos of people flipping out over what they themselves have agreed to is the electronic equivalent of shooting oneself in the foot- expensive and usually very messy.

You do NOT have the right to use someone else's property as you see fit, disregarding their wishes, just because you wish to. I do not allow smoking in my car. If you wish to ride in it, you may request smoke breaks and I will pull over but if you fire one up inside I will ask you to leave it. You cannot sit there and demand it is your "right" to smoke inside my vehicle. It is not your "right" to be conveyed in my vehicle.

It is however my right to set conditions for the usage of my property. If you do not wish to comply you may NOT do what you wish and infringe MY rights to my own legally owned property.
edit on 14-7-2011 by SFA437 because: (no reason given)


when a cetain line of common sense is crossed and a complete stranger wants to pat down my seven year old daughter's privates ; don't try and lawyer me and say that since i consented to a search that it is open season on little girls; maybe you get off on stuff like that but i may just be to stupid to know.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 02:49 PM
link   


I did not mention a right to air travel, but violation of people does violates ones right to privacy, and the law. what the TSA considers pat downs, most state laws consider sexual violation. As to the body scanners, ya i'm gonna hold off on getting cancer. whats wrong with metal detectors. most bombs that explode on airplanes, occur from the luggage section of the plane, very few number of bombs/explosives are brought in on the passenger due to the fact of a risk of detection, so give me a break, these intense searches are completely unnecessary.


I agree.

The way airport security is getting these days is ridiculous,it will probably be the reason why i will never go on a flight to anywhere, i like it where i am and im not going nowhere.Especially when subjected to security measures like that.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by littletheif203
 


I never said a word about them being effective nor did I say they were necessary. Matter of fact I said EXACTLY the opposite.

Why would you suggest that I did?

The sole point I am making is that the searches are legal (if utterly and totally humiliating) because of the contract a person enters into with the airline and as such the 4th Amendment does not attach.

reply to post by jed001
 


If you read the terms and conditions of the contract you enter into when you purchase your ticket you will see that they may deny you passage if you refuse search.

Nobody is saying you HAVE to be searched by TSA- just that if you wish to fly on certain air carriers that a search of any/all persons and belongings is a condition of that contract.

If a parent wishes to subject their children to a situation where they can be subjected to an invasive search there is shared responsibility. The TSA for the inane policies AND THE PARENT FOR PLACING THE CHILD IN A SITUATION WHERE IT CAN OCCUR.

I wouldn't have dropped my son off at Neverland Ranch knowing the odd things that went on out there and if I did- I couldn't yell and jump and scream and curse and gnash my teeth about how "unfair" it is and swear vengeance when I knew full well the prior conduct & actions of Michael Jackson.



Complain all you want about the TSA- it will not make a whit of difference. There is no good that will come out of taping their nonsense and posting it on YouTube. The ONLY way to force change is to NOT FLY. The airlines can opt out of TSA coverage but they have no incentive to do so. To force a corporation to change you hit them in their pocketbooks.

Bringing up things like the 4th Amendment which despite the invective and emotion displayed here does NOT apply to voluntary and consensual searches IAW a legal contract, serves only to confuse the issue.

If you wish to get rid of the TSA give up the convenience of air travel. Take your family for a drive on your next vacation and go to Yellowstone or Niagara Falls or go fishing. BillyBob up there has already done FAR more to rid the planet of these nincompoops than all the combined complaining in every single TSA thread on the net.


Attack the disease and not the symptoms folks.
edit on 14-7-2011 by SFA437 because: (no reason given)


Q

posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 05:18 PM
link   
Hmmm...all consent and law issues aside...

Did I seriously miss the point that America is under attack by pre-pubescent crotch bombers?! I don't recall that happening, but surely it must have, for us to truly require security of this magnitude.

They were probably in line behind that 95-year-old with the fully loaded (and therefore, presumably quite dangerous) diaper.




posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Q
 


That's where we get into the social conditioning side of things.

TPTB took over airport security for a while making it the sole option (which IS unconstitutional). The airlines then were absolved of the cost of providing security. TSA begins to propagate these nonsensical procedures, cavity searching (exaggeration) 95 year old women and infants.

People are inherently lazy so they do not seek out alternative transport or even find corporate airlines which do not utilize TSA- it's easier to go online and book with Delta. There is no incentive for the airlines to opt out and bring back private, well mannered and effective security since doing so would affect their bottom line and the passengers continue to pay for tickets which include TSA's invasive search procedures.

TPTB are counting on our laziness and addiction to convenience and instant gratification to reach their end game and all this crowing about Constitutionality simply plays right into their hands. If people would take the time and expend the effort to educate themselves those that seek to subjugate us would cower in fear. Instead we keep buying iPods and iPhones, watch Jersey Shore and watch internet porn.

Either you do not pay your hard earned (albeit worthless) fiat currency to the airlines and utilize alternative transport or you ARE part of the problem.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   
The TSA will not let you bring liquids on board an airplane because they may be explosive. So when they confiscate them from you at security, they toss all these bottles of liquid in one open box exposed to anyone. So what's going to stop a "terrorist" from igniting the whole box of "explosives" that are sitting in the middle of security? It's like the Guiness beer commercial: "BRILLIANT!"



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by hapablab
 


Maybe were you come from it's ok for people to walk around in public while screaming vulgarities. Where i come from it's not only considered to be in poor taste it's illegal, look up disorderly conduct. But hey I guess it depends alot on how you were raised, to each his own.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by lokdog
 




Maybe were you come from it's ok for people to walk around in public while screaming vulgarities. Where i come from it's not only considered to be in poor taste it's illegal, look up disorderly conduct. But hey I guess it depends alot on how you were raised, to each his own.



Well where I come from, I have constitutional rights, and if my childs or my rights are being trampled on, you better believe I'm going to get disorderly. From the story, it doesn't sound like she was just walking around unprovoked yelling out obscenities and causing a scene, she was defending her child from a gross violation of her constitutional rights.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Joe Slops
 


No. No she was not.

The 4th Amendment does not apply. Period. Full stop. Do not pass GO. Do not collect $200.

She placed her child voluntarily in a situation where the child was subject to an invasive search by her consent then got bent out of shape about it. She rolled the dice with her child's privacy and got pissy when the dice came up snake eyes.

Again there is NO 4th amendment attachment regarding voluntary consensual searches no matter how much you wish it to be true.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 09:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Joe Slops
 


That could have been easily done by picking her child up and carrying her out of the airport. Instead she decides she wants to cause a scene and cuss out the TSA like that's really going to do anygood. Maybe your fine with profanity being used infront of your children, myself I have a problem with it. An airport is a public place I don't think it would have killed her to use a little common courtesy around other peoples children. That is unless she's to stupid to vocalize her feeling's without the use of profanity.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 10:00 PM
link   
You can protest by not flying people....

Nothing is forcing you to fly.

Don't fly, they will change the rules.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 11:47 PM
link   
reply to post by TXRabbit
 






Originally posted by TXRabbit

Originally posted by SFA437
The nanny would have no basis to sue as she gave consent to the searches prior to accepting employment.


so buying an airline ticket is agreeing to be searched with a possible pat-down? Here all along I was thinking that you were purchasing a temporary contract to be transported from point A to point B



Here is where you seem to not understand the contract you have with the airline. I was just pointing out that indeed when you use this ticket to enter the secure area of the airport you have indeed purchased a possible groping. It is part of the contract you entered into with the airlines. This is called the “Contract of Carriage” and lays out all the responsibilities of the airlines as well as the passenger. It clearly states in this contract that you agree to let all your bags, and your person be searched prior to entering the security zone.
edit on 14-7-2011 by Byeluvolk because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by lokdog
 


You don't understand Nashville. You really don't. If she'd snapped up her daughter and tried to run out of the airport, they'd tasered or shot her on the spot. Seriously, they would have. The mother was apparently okay with the pat down until someone went for her daughter's crotch. A line should be drawn and the mother drew it. I would have been arrested too, because I would have also protested. It's possible to protest without profanity. Nowhere in the article did it say she used profanity.

If you even look at them funny in Nashville, they hold you. Seriously. It happens. There was a case of a teacher that wouldn't remove her sweater and they arrested her. She'd only been in a bra had she removed the sweater so she said "No." She was polite about it, but still got held. There is no middle ground or common sense with these people.



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 04:12 PM
link   
You CAN leave a TSA checkpoint.

If the knuckleheads detain you then you've got one hell of a 4th Amendment issue going on. Not for the search which you have given consent to by entering the checkpoint with a boarding pass subject to the airline's conditions but for the seizure i.e. curtailing your freedom to leave.

The 4th almost mimics Miranda in this respect. There are conditions that have to be met i.e. you are not free to leave and you are being interrogated in respect to a crime for it to attach. Consent voids Miranda in totalis just as it voids the 4th in respect to search. Consent does NOT void seizure however which by definition is involuntary.

Hope this clarifies the whole 4th Amendment issue.





new topics
 
51
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join