or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The TSA Feels its Oats
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The TSA Feels its Oats - Page 8

post #281 of 304
Ex-Minn. governor sues over body scans, pat-downs
Quote:
MINNEAPOLIS Former Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura sued the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration on Monday, alleging full-body scans and pat-downs at airport checkpoints violate his right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures....
According to the lawsuit, Ventura received a hip replacement in 2008, and since then, his titanium implant has set off metal detectors at airport security checkpoints. The lawsuit said that prior to last November officials had used a non-invasive hand-held wand to scan his body as a secondary security measure.
But when Ventura set off the metal detector in November, he was instead subjected to a body pat-down and was not given the option of a scan with a hand-held wand or an exemption for being a frequent traveler, the lawsuit said.
The lawsuit said the pat-down "exposed him to humiliation and degradation through unwanted touching, gripping and rubbing of the intimate areas of his body."
It claims that under TSA's policy, Ventura will be required to either go through a full-body scanner or submit to a pat-down every time he travels because he will always set off the metal detector.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #282 of 304
Feds Issue Threat: No Fly Zone for Texas?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #283 of 304
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Feds Issue Threat: No Fly Zone for Texas?

Just saw that story. I'll believe they'll do that when it happens.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #284 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Just saw that story. I'll believe they'll do that when it happens.

They probably will. The US federal government, and the TSA in particular, doesn't like non-compliance. That much should be fairly obvious at this point. And they get particularly testy when someone has the temerity to suggest they adhere to the constitution.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #285 of 304
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

They probably will. The US federal government, and the TSA in particular, doesn't like non-compliance. That much should be fairly obvious at this point. And they get particularly testy when someone has the temerity to suggest they adhere to the constitution.

Stop all flights in and out of Texas? Wow, that would be something. That's like the nuclear option.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #286 of 304
If an agent of the state gropes and fondles you, it's totally legal and "for your own good".

If you grope and fondle an agent of the state, it's felony sexual abuse.

Welcome to the United Police States of America.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #287 of 304
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

If an agent of the state gropes and fondles you, it's totally legal and "for your own good".

If you grope and fondle an agent of the state, it's felony sexual abuse.

Welcome to the United Police States of America.

I saw that. It is positively damning. It will be interesting to see where this goes in the courts. Are they really going to make the argument that a TSA uniform allows someone to be groped, even without cause?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #288 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I saw that. It is positively damning. It will be interesting to see where this goes in the courts. Are they really going to make the argument that a TSA uniform allows someone to be groped, even without cause?

This goes beyond simple groping and fondling.

"Officials say she admitted to grabbing a TSA agents breast with both hands and squeezing and twisting, but has not given a reason why."

She might have a good reason, but this is not something that will be swept away. It would be nice if it caused a storm of controversy that rolled back the TSA, but this does not look like it will.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #289 of 304
Putting your hands on anyone without their consent is not morally justifiable unless you are defending yourself or your property from aggression.

What the woman did to the the TSA agent was wrong.

AND the TSA's pat-down procedures are also wrong.

Government should not be able to do anything you or I cannot do.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #290 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Putting your hands on anyone without their consent is not morally justifiable unless you are defending yourself or your property from aggression.

What the woman did to the the TSA agent was wrong.

AND the TSA's pat-down procedures are also wrong.

Government should not be able to do anything you or I cannot do.

I agree with all of that ...
but... the TSA sees your desire to travel as consent for that type of search. If you don't want to be searched that way, then don't travel by airline. It ain't right, but that's the way the TSA sees it, and that's the way the courts have seen it so far.
When you get in line to go through airport security, you are giving them consent to search you however they deem necessary.
From out there on the moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, "Look at that!" -...
Reply
From out there on the moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, "Look at that!" -...
Reply
post #291 of 304
And when the TSA sets up security checkpoints in train stations and on roads, what then? If you don't want to be molested by an agent of the state, don't travel?

Security should be provided by the airlines themselves. If I want to be groped and fondled to prove I'm not a "terrist", I'll fly with an airline that provides that level of "security".

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #292 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

And when the TSA sets up security checkpoints in train stations and on roads, what then? If you don't want to be molested by an agent of the state, don't travel?

Exactly. After all, they did name it the Transportation Security Administration...not the Airline Security Administration. They are already noticing this generality in their naming and beginning to spread their wings a bit.

Furthermore, it might be a reasonable matter if this was really all about making things more secure. It's not.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #293 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

And when the TSA sets up security checkpoints in train stations and on roads, what then? If you don't want to be molested by an agent of the state, don't travel?

Security should be provided by the airlines themselves. If I want to be groped and fondled to prove I'm not a "terrist", I'll fly with an airline that provides that level of "security".

You're preachin' to the choir, brother!
From out there on the moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, "Look at that!" -...
Reply
From out there on the moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, "Look at that!" -...
Reply
post #294 of 304
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

And when the TSA sets up security checkpoints in train stations and on roads, what then? If you don't want to be molested by an agent of the state, don't travel?

Security should be provided by the airlines themselves. If I want to be groped and fondled to prove I'm not a "terrist", I'll fly with an airline that provides that level of "security".

Exactly.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #295 of 304

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #296 of 304
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Her side of the story

The thing is that her defense is at least plausible.

Getting back to the topic: I do understand the need for security. I would prefer if we did not have a federalized system. If the airlines did this, they would be accountable. People would "vote" on their procedures with their wallets. They would be forced to have effective procedures that didn't violate their customers' rights and dignity, or people wouldn't fly that airline.

As it stands now, the people have no recourse. They must submit to these procedures or not fly (and soon, maybe travel by any mass transit).

As for the procedures themselves, there are three real problems as I see them:

1. They are a violation of passengers' dignity and are overly invasive
2. Some (scanners) pose a potential threat to passenger health
3. They are done without any probable cause (not in a strict legal sense, but you get the idea).

Clearly, going inside a person's clothes or touching near their genitals or sensitive areas is not appropriate. As this woman demonstrated, a civilian who does this gets charged with a crime. The scanners are a problem. They were rushed into place without a full understanding of the health consequences. They do not detect certain items. And they are taking pictures of your naked body. I can see very few situations where they would be appropriate.

The final point-probable cause--is the most serious. These procedures are done with no rhyme, nor reason. The TSA admits that many screenings are random. RANDOM? This is nothing but political correctness in order to avoid the charge of racial profiling. We SHOULD be profiling. Not just racial profiling, but behavior profiling as well.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #297 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

And when the TSA sets up security checkpoints in train stations and on roads, what then? If you don't want to be molested by an agent of the state, don't travel?

Security should be provided by the airlines themselves. If I want to be groped and fondled to prove I'm not a "terrist", I'll fly with an airline that provides that level of "security".

And so it begins:

Tennessee Becomes First State To Fight Terrorism Statewide

Quote:
You're probably used to seeing TSA's signature blue uniforms at the airport, but now agents are hitting the interstates to fight terrorism with Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (VIPR).

Welcome to the United Police States of America.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #298 of 304
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

And so it begins:

Tennessee Becomes First State To Fight Terrorism Statewide



Welcome to the United Police States of America.

Yup...saw that. The procedures are not all that different from previous ones, though.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #299 of 304


On slow days, the TSA agents would sometimes visit a nearby vet’s office to keep their unique skills finely tuned.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #300 of 304
I never knew that SFO doesn't use TSA. Right off the bat they took their option, who knew there was an option, to use (GASP) private contractros. Oh and they seem better at the job too.


The TSA Just Won't Let Go
Quote:
...


When writing the law that created the TSA, Rep. Mica added a provision that allows airports to "opt out" of federalized security. San Francisco Airport took advantage of that and hired Covenant Aviation Security, a private screening company.

It was a good move. A leaked 2007 TSA study found that San Francisco's private screeners were twice as good at detecting fake bombs as TSA screeners. Passengers at San Francisco International have told us "screeners here are friendlier" and "more helpful." The private screeners also work quickly, and lines are shorter. Company managers move screeners around to minimize wait times. A 2011 House Transportation Committee report found that, in the time it takes TSA screeners at the Los Angeles airport to process 100 passengers, San Francisco screeners process 165.

That's partly because Covenant has an incentive to do well and retain its contract. So it keeps its screeners sharp by staging competitions. A screener can win up to $2,000 if he is good at identifying items in an X-ray machine or finding contraband in suitcases.

Dozens of other airports have asked the TSA to let them switch to private screening companies, but the agency said no to almost all of them, giving only one reason: "There is no clear advantage to the federal government."

...
post #301 of 304
Quote:

Good for Ventura by doing this.He has balls and guts which we need to put this nonsense patting down people to rest once and for all.Do this on the proper way and have respect when you do it to other people.
post #302 of 304
Slightly off topic but...

"A foreign artist seeking authorization to perform in the United States must navigate a system that involves a pair of government departments. Homeland Security, created in 2003, evaluates the initial application and then, if approval is granted, the State Department, assuming it is satisfied with the results of an in-person interview with the performer, issues a visa at an embassy abroad.

Congress requires the process to be financially self-sustaining, rather than depend on taxpayer support, which in practice means that fees are typically higher than those of other countries. Homeland Security even offers an expedited premium processing fee of $1,225 per application over and above the standard $325 filing fee that is supposed to guarantee a response within two weeks, but arts administrators complain that the agency sometimes fails to meet its own deadline.

As part of the process the arts group sponsoring performances in the United States must also submit written proof of the artists qualifications, all duly translated into English. Even then there is no guarantee of timely approval of a visa request, since there are often additional requests for evidence of a performers artistic worth or personal background. The government advises performers and ensembles to submit paperwork at least 90 days before they hope to receive a visa, but arts administrators say that delays of up to six months are not unusual.

Government agencies say that the enhanced procedures they have adopted are needed to safeguard American citizens. We want to facilitate legitimate travel to the U.S., but we need to keep security as our highest priority, said a State Department spokesman, who invoked department rules that do not allow him to be identified by name.

In many cases foreign troupes must also pay a consultation fee of up to $500 to an American union to certify that its performances will not adversely affect the interests of American artists. Its a revenue stream for the unions, with no cap in sight, Mr. Ginsburg said.

As a result, some large ensembles are now simply avoiding the United States. In 2006, for example, the Hallé orchestra of Manchester, England, canceled an American tour that was to include a performance at Lincoln Center after orchestra administrators calculated that complying with visa regulations for a group of more than 100 musicians and staff members was going to cost them more than $70,000."
~ http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/11/ar...s.html?_r=1&hp
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #303 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Slightly off topic but...

"A foreign artist seeking authorization to perform in the United States must navigate a system that involves a pair of government departments. Homeland Security, created in 2003, evaluates the initial application and then, if approval is granted, the State Department, assuming it is satisfied with the results of an in-person interview with the performer, issues a visa at an embassy abroad.

Congress requires the process to be financially self-sustaining, rather than depend on taxpayer support, which in practice means that fees are typically higher than those of other countries. Homeland Security even offers an expedited premium processing fee of $1,225 per application over and above the standard $325 filing fee that is supposed to guarantee a response within two weeks, but arts administrators complain that the agency sometimes fails to meet its own deadline.

As part of the process the arts group sponsoring performances in the United States must also submit written proof of the artists qualifications, all duly translated into English. Even then there is no guarantee of timely approval of a visa request, since there are often additional requests for evidence of a performers artistic worth or personal background. The government advises performers and ensembles to submit paperwork at least 90 days before they hope to receive a visa, but arts administrators say that delays of up to six months are not unusual.

Government agencies say that the enhanced procedures they have adopted are needed to safeguard American citizens. We want to facilitate legitimate travel to the U.S., but we need to keep security as our highest priority, said a State Department spokesman, who invoked department rules that do not allow him to be identified by name.

In many cases foreign troupes must also pay a consultation fee of up to $500 to an American union to certify that its performances will not adversely affect the interests of American artists. Its a revenue stream for the unions, with no cap in sight, Mr. Ginsburg said.

As a result, some large ensembles are now simply avoiding the United States. In 2006, for example, the Hallé orchestra of Manchester, England, canceled an American tour that was to include a performance at Lincoln Center after orchestra administrators calculated that complying with visa regulations for a group of more than 100 musicians and staff members was going to cost them more than $70,000."
~ http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/11/ar...s.html?_r=1&hp

Ain't big government grand?

\

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #304 of 304

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The TSA Feels its Oats