TSA Loudspeakers Threaten Travelers With Arrest For Joking About Security

page: 2
25
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 06:43 PM
link   

RickyD

Eta: I seem to remember an item in the bill of rights stating I have the right to speak freely and to be able to express my views in any verbal manor I choose...including blatenly offensive ones...hence why the westborugh people can piss off everyone and still be protected. But I guess in the new Reich that acrticle I quote doesn't carry water anymore...I truly wonder if I should refer to our country as the United States of America or come up with a new name to represent our country not being the same country...least we won't be confused about what parts of the basically defunct constitution still apply (if any)
edit on 12-10-2013 by RickyD because: (no reason given)


I seem to remember something that also said you can not go into a theater and scream "fire" as well. That is the equivalent to what you are doing by saying "bomb" in an airport. Or did you forget that part of it?

I also seem to remember something about businesses being able to limit what you can say, and an airport is the airline's place of business.




posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by RickyD
 





Eta: I seem to remember an item in the bill of rights stating I have the right to speak freely and to be able to express my views in any verbal manor I choose...including blatenly offensive ones...hence why the westborugh people can piss off everyone and still be protected. But I guess in the new Reich that acrticle I quote doesn't carry water anymore...I truly wonder if I should refer to our country as the United States of America or come up with a new name to represent our country not being the same country...least we won't be confused about what parts of the basically defunct constitution still apply (if any)


I think your avatar comes close to displaying what we have become.

Died, fried and tied. I would quickly leave this lands, I just have no clue of where to run. With most places it would be running from the frying pan into the fire.

I know I should throw up my hands and give in, I am just not made that way. I know they are going to win because most with any American spirit or even remember what our ancestors sacrificed to earn us these freedoms are dead or dying. We made a huge mistake when we spent so much time spoiling our children and making them think that they were "special" just because they where born in America. We failed to teach them that they were "lucky", the country was special. It was special because of the blood sweat and tears, because of the scarifies made by those that came before us. Our children are about to lose it all, the saddest thing being is that they will not know what they have lost until it is gone, and we can thank ourselves for that.

We where always so quick to gloat and to profess the greatness of our country, but we were liars and fakes, because if we really believed it was as spectacular and so grand, we won't piss on it and throw it away so easily.

God Bless America is not statement, it is a plea.



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Zaphod58


I seem to remember something that also said you can not go into a theater and scream "fire" as well. That is the equivalent to what you are doing by saying "bomb" in an airport. Or did you forget that part of it?

I also seem to remember something about businesses being able to limit what you can say, and an airport is the airline's place of business.


I think people voicing their concern are criticizing the policy more for the open endedness and subsequent abuse of power that may result i.e. being arrested or detained for saying something the TSA agent doesnt like as opposed to an argument against the incitement of panic ruling by the Supreme Court.

Businesses can limit what you say on their private property, but their power is limited to asking you to leave. I dont recall a law on the books allowing for McDonalds or Wal Mart having the power to have you placed under arrest for voicing an opinion they dislike which from my perspective is whats really getting people worked up.
edit on 12-10-2013 by Kgdetroit because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 07:00 PM
link   
This is absolutely nothing new.

Where the hell have you been for the past decade?

At least research before posting something. To not do so makes you appear...well...ignorant.



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Do you have a mental disability I should know of before I debate with you...because no where in my post did I mention bomb and no where in the quoted section from the article did it say bomb either. I ask you why use that as a point to debate with me. I'd like to debate what I wrote sure.



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by NightSkyeB4Dawn
 


We also failed to remind them what it takes to be special. I grew up feeling we were special because we were supposed to live in a country where we weren't subservient to a ruling class. We were all equal. But as I grew older and with more and more real experiences to the contrary I soon learned I was very wrong. I too don't just give up...I'm very stubborn like that but I have however learned to shift my focus to possible tasks and leave the impossible ones alone. So convincing the blind to see is not for me...



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by RickyD
 


And yet, that is what the law in question is talking about. You can not go into an airport and make statements about bombs, guns, hijacking, etc. You can say just about anything else, but you can't make statements about those objects. That is what all the warnings are about, and all the signs in the airport are about.



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Kgdetroit
 


But that has been the law since at least the 1980s. The only thing new is the announcement.



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by RickyD
 


"Convincing the blind to see"

You are again right. "None are so blind as those who will not see".

I think that it is not a matter of being blind. Those that choose to live in denial will some day come face to face with the object of their denial. It is at that moment that they will experience vision, acceptance, regret and death in an instant.

It will be a life wasted and if tears are shed they will be shed for what could have been.



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Also I just wanted to add that the wording in the article is very vague and seems to have no guidelines as to what qualifies as breaking the law and what doesn't. My whole point is we have a bill of rights and that's part of the supreme law of the land. My right to joke in any manner which does not pose harm to others (that's where bomb jokes and fire in the theater comes in...those bare the possibility of harm to others) is protected or at least should be in this country. This is what I was trying to point out before and I'm pretty sure that argument carries a ton of water.



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Please source that for me...where does it say they are referring to only those kind of jokes.


Eta: you can't because their site is down and they haven't publicly explained what is included yet.
edit on 12-10-2013 by RickyD because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 07:44 PM
link   
You know what? Screw it. You guys sit and scream about old laws that have been on the books for decades. Have fun with that.
edit on 10/12/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 07:49 PM
link   
The fact that they now threaten the general flying people that the security they're supposed to be providing has turned into a laughing matter for some, now punishable by law, is already beating the horse on their(govt) own competency issues.
edit on 12-10-2013 by gardener because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 09:02 PM
link   


I think people voicing their concern are criticizing the policy more for the open endedness and subsequent abuse of power that may result i.e. being arrested or detained for saying something the TSA agent doesnt like as opposed to an argument against the incitement of panic ruling by the Supreme Court.
reply to post by Kgdetroit
 


Yes. Add to it that the more complacent we become, the more forceful they become. We can't give these people the benefit of the doubt. Some say we are supposed to trust them and read between the lines. If we have learned anything ,we better have learned that we can't trust them, and at the rapid way our liberties are being eroded, it is juvenile to expect that this people don't mean exactly what they say.

They can go on believing that the NSA is a friendly government organization that has the American peoples best interest at heart. They are as friendly and servile as the SS, "Protective Echelon,". Read how the started. See what they became. See the resemblance and be very very afraid.



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Zaphod58
You know what? Screw it. You guys sit and scream about old laws that have been on the books for decades. Have fun with that.
edit on 10/12/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)


Is there a statute of limitations on outrage? I personally dont care if the law has been around since the Wright Brothers, it is open ended and potentially allows wanton abuse of power now same as it did when enacted. Difference is now it seems we're having our noses rubbed in it.

The logic you're using doesn't really stand to reason. Because something has been around for a while but is now being brought to the forefront of public cognizance doesn't make people ignorant for giving a crap about it or add to its vailidity. By that reasoning humanity would not have advanced past a hunter/gather species because well, thats just the way its been so why look toward progress?

I've long been a proponent of laissez faire style governance, both economically and socially. Im glad there are people who are making things like this an issue, a more informed public is a more powerful public.



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


No, you're wrong. It's a new thing since someone didn't know about it and put it on youtube.

Stop being wrong.

You're wrong... why are you wrong.

Planes are safer with people doing anything they want.

*screams*

Oo



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 10:18 PM
link   
reply to post by RoScoLaz
 



1986

Amr Sherin Osman, an Egyptian national, was only "joking" with a stewardess when he told her he had a bomb in his suitcase high in the skies near Philadelphia last April 8, his attorney says.

Osman was released on bail three days later after he agreed not to travel on airplanes while awaiting disposition of his case. He will be allowed to fly home, Ainslie said.

articles.philly.com...

1988.

Chen, 23, is a native of Taiwan and a student at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton, gave a handwritten note to a flight attendant.

According to the Broward County Sheriff`s Office, the note said this:

"Captain, yes. The thing that you fear the most is happening right now. Yes, I do have a bomb. My demands are simple. After we arrive in Fort Lauderdale, I wish to have some pictures taken in the cockpit with you guys for the school paper."

The flight landed at 11:05 a.m., Chen was arrested and he spent the rest of his birthday, and that night, in the Broward County jail. Neither the airplane`s crew nor the sheriff`s detectives thought it was funny.

articles.sun-sentinel.com...

1990

One man, a computer technician, had a bag full of tools, equipment and wires. He told ticket agents the bag contained a bomb. He was charged with one count of a false report of placing a bomb.

That is a second degree felony carrying a sentence of up to 15 years in prison and a $10,000 fine. Any part of that maximum sentence would be a stiff price to pay for a stupid remark.

A college student from Brooklyn and a 36-year-old Lauderhill woman also got into the act.

The student said the carry-on luggage she placed on an X-ray conveyor belt contained a gun and a bomb. She told deputies she was just joking. The arresting officers told her she was not funny.

The Lauderhill resident was arrested as she prepared to board a Delta Air Lines plane for LaGuardia Airport in New York after telling a security person that she had a bomb in her carry-on bag.

articles.sun-sentinel.com...

1992

A man who said his airplane hijacking note had been a joke was sentened Tuesday to 30 years in prison.

www.nytimes.com...

2000

A Wellington property developer who sparked a bomb scare at Auckland Airport when boarding an Air New Zealand flight has been ordered to pay the airline $1000 for causing a half-hour delay.

Hayim Nachum, aged 42, caused a bomb alert on March 3 when he boarded a flight to Wellington and told the flight attendant: "My friend has a bomb in his bag."

Nachum pointed to his friend's bag and then took his seat but the pilot called in airport security and a bomb dog handler to check the aircraft before taking off.

No bomb was found and Nachum was taken off the flight and charged with providing false information relating to the safety of an aircraft.

www.nzherald.co.nz...

2000

A 40-year-old Lake Worth woman was arrested on Thanksgiving Day for making a
wisecrack about taking a bomb onto a plane at Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood
International Airport.

archives.californiaaviation.org...


Man in 2013, what has happened to the world where they tell you not to make jokes about this sort of thing, or you may be arrested. What sort of tyrany and oppression is this. By god, we should all be allowed to take AR15s on a plane, fully loaded and shoot people. Why I am offended....

you never had this 20 or 30 years ago, no sire.. not .. uhh..

yeesh...



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 10:26 PM
link   
.

what would chopper think of all this



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


So basically what your saying is, since that law has been on the books,..as a patron once I enter the airport premises I relinquish all rights and concerns as to my personal safety for the interim...The airport accepts full responsibility for my well being physically AND mentally... The airport business can essentially put us all in pods and sedate us and then wake us up when they've gotten us to our destination and we have no say in the safety of our well being during that process.

Of course, we would be required to read the fine print before accepting the service of the airport business in the form of paying for it...



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 11:37 PM
link   
With this talk about bombs and such I begin to wonder, do terrorists announce they have a bomb jokingly before they blow themselves up?





new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join