Video SPOKANE WASHINGTON TSA DOING INTRUSIVE PAT-DOWNS AFTER BACKSCANNER

Discussion in 'Aviation Passenger Security in the USA' started by Fisher1949, Jun 13, 2011.

  1. SATTSO

    SATTSO Original Member

    That was just a stupid comment. You know very well why its different - something here some people simply do not want to address. Its the context and for what purpose.
     
  2. CelticWhisper

    CelticWhisper Founding Member

    What context and what purpose?

    Spell it out.
     
    Lisa Simeone likes this.
  3. SATTSO

    SATTSO Original Member


    Really??? Seriously?? When you touch people on the street, under what legal authority are you doing so? What law passed by congress mandates that you clear people of WEI?

    Despite what is said here and other sites, the reason for what TSA does is to find WEI. You know this, and I know this - even if you don't like or want to admit it. And TSA does so by authority of the ATSA. And you know this, too. I believe your simply being difficult.

    What is a valid argument is if TSA exceeds it's authority. That is always a valid question - concerning ANY government agency.

    To even suggest that randomly touching people in public, under no granted congressional authority, is the same as what TSA does is to deliberately be dense.
     
  4. RB

    RB Founding Member

    I don't recall anything in the TSA bill that allows for sexual assault. Can you point that out please?
     
    Lisa Simeone likes this.
  5. SATTSO

    SATTSO Original Member

    As has been discussed to death in FT, and by lawyers, I might add, sexual assault is about intent. To stubbornly stick fingers in your ears so you can ignore that fact is to be dishonest.

    And you very well know that the ATSA has not defined ANY procedure for screening. All it has done is to authorize the TSA to conduct screening, and has authorized the TSA to determine how that screening shall be conducted.

    As I said, its a legitimate concern to question what TSA does under its authority. But as the previous person I responded to - to attempt to compare what TSA does, under its legally granted authority, to touching someone on the street is more than stupid. And to try to defend that position by diversion, BD, is beneath you.
     
  6. RB

    RB Founding Member

    When a person puts their hands in my crotch and I don't know them all that well it is an assault regardless of what TSA tries to call it.
    When did TSA comply with the Administrative Procedures Act for public comment on this form of screening?
     
    Lisa Simeone likes this.
  7. CelticWhisper

    CelticWhisper Founding Member

    Yes.

    Yes.

    I don't. I respect the bodily sovereignty of other human beings.

    No legal authority and it's a moot point because I don't touch people on the street.

    None. What law passed by congress mandates that you violate people's Constitutional rights in order to clear them of WEI?

    Bear in mind that the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land, and the ATSA does not supersede it.

    Correct, but a reason and a justification are not one and the same.

    See above - Constitutional rights trump ATSA prescriptions. All the time, every time.

    I'm not simply being difficult.

    Now you're getting it. TSA is vastly exceeding its authority by forcing people into the Morton's Fork dilemma of "irradiation or molestation."

    Incorrect. Congressional authority was given to screen passengers for WEI. Congressional authority was NOT given to use any means necessary to do so. Any Constitutional means, perhaps, but not "any means TSA says it needs to use."
     
  8. SATTSO

    SATTSO Original Member

    It's not what the TSA say, it's what our States have said. Take Texas, fox example. State law defines what sexual assault is, and neither you nor I can say otherwise. All that can happen is that state law can be changed...and look what Some legislatures in Texas are trying to do...

    I would further argue the fact that because there is a proposed bill in Texas to make the pat down illegal, it is legal until that bill is passed.

    And consider this: sexual assault can never be made legal. In other words, even with probable cause, no LEO can sexually assault a person during a search. Nor can any TSA employee.

    The fact that YOU think it should be sexual assault does not make it so. You know this, and it's why your argument is dishonest - Or you really, honestly do not understand these legal concepts.
     
  9. SATTSO

    SATTSO Original Member


    Now we know your have lied: you clearly stated you have started to rub against people on elevators and such. Unless you are playing word games...

    And all your stupid comments about the constitution- you do know that as of yet nothing the TSA has done has been declared unconstitutional? Do you not find it surprising that none of the cases brought against the TSA have not been heard by the SCOTUS? I do. A cases does NOT need to work it's way up to the SCOTUS it can be brought direct to them, or the SCOTUS can call up a case: why has that not happened?
     
  10. CelticWhisper

    CelticWhisper Founding Member

    Not all bills exist to change the intended legality of something. The TX bill may well be an attempt at closing a legislative loophole that permits for TSA gropedowns to be technically legal even when the people agree that they should be illegal.

    And yet they do, day after day. Fuzzy words don't change the reality of the action no matter how much TSA HQ hands down directives to try to desensitize the passengers and the blue-gloved kiddie-fiddlers tasked with molesting them.

    "Resistance" means TESTICLES.
    "Resistance" means PENIS.
    "Resistance" means LABIA.

    What do you think it should be? What do you think we should call it when TSOs touch the breasts, genitals, and buttocks of passengers in the airport?

    Do you think we should call it "Screening for WEI and prohibited items"?

    Do you think that screening for WEI and prohibited items justifies touching the genitals of complete strangers? Yes or no?

    My argument is not dishonest.

    I understand them just fine. So does Texas, which is why they're working to fix the problem that is TSA's ability to grope people at the airport.
     
  11. RB

    RB Founding Member

    So it would be ok for me to put my hands in your daughters crotch in Texas or some other state said it was ok even if she didn't want me to? Really.

    From reports TSA sexually assaults people on a regular basis so i guess that's ok.
     
  12. CelticWhisper

    CelticWhisper Founding Member

    I know my have lied too. Isn't my have lied a great have lied? It's a good thing to know all about people's have lieds.

    No, that was barbell.

    I'm just making note of this here - an employee of TSA, a US federal government organization, thinks comments upholding and defending the Constitution of the United States are "stupid." Good to know.

    Oh, I know. Give it time. Scope-n-grope isn't even a year old yet.

    None of them have not? Well that ain't not no non-unclear kind of way to talk.

    But I believe you meant to say that "None of the cases brought against the TSA have been heard by SCOTUS."

    Perhaps they're busy with other matters. Perhaps they're biding their time and waiting to see how the TX situation plays out. You're right in that SCOTUS can call up a case. On the flipside, though, they don't have to and they may be waiting for a case to rise through the lower courts.

    I'm not a Supreme Court justice. I don't know what they're thinking. Frankly I wish they would hurry up and rule TSA sexual assault unconstitutional (and sentence every TSO who ever performed a Pistole-spec post-10/2010 "enhanced" patdown to death by immersion in molten glass, but dang that silly imagination of mine running away on me again) but it's not like SCOTUS has a time machine. And it's not like the government crime ring that is the TSA is going to abandon these procedures on their own so SCOTUS will have plenty of opportunities in the future.
     
  13. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Talk about dumb comments ....

    The only appeals that normally go directly to the U.S. Supreme Court are appeals from state Supreme Courts that involve federal constitutional issues, but as with everything else the U.S. Supreme Court can pick & choose what it hears. Only in extremely rare circumstances of national urgency will they allow a federal case to bypass the appellate courts. They do not "call up" cases.

    It is unlikely that the Supreme Court will hear any case involving TSA until one of two conditions is met:
    1. There is an appellate case which raise interesting issues that enough of them want to hear it and there are no technical reasons to reject it.
    2. There are conflicting appellate decisions in different circuits.
     
  14. LeapingFrogs

    LeapingFrogs Original Member

    Just because there's a "law" doesn't make the "law" right. It's our duty as American citizens to FIGHT like (expletive deleted) against wrongs of society and "laws" and mandates brought down upon us which we believe to be wrong for good reasons.

    The TSA's scope and grope is SO wrong it's causing people mental angish, causing people like me to stay home, leaving the citizens of this country feeling incredibly violated. You just can't deny that.

    SATTSO, you are feeling it too... you're really not feeling the love of the American people are you? You're actually feeling pretty hated am I correct?

    Anytime someone feels that hated by so many, there's generally some kind of reason behind it. We don't want to be strip searched, touched, or viewed naked. So much so, we want these procedures taken out of the airports, and we'll take our chances with terrorists. We really feel this way. We cannot understand why our government would choose to violate us in this way, when we've been very clear that we want nothing to do with people touching our genitals just to get on a plane. It is a far more likely to scenario to fall out of the sky due to mechanical failure or pilot error than it is to be taken over by a terrorist. In fact, nearly 10,000 people have died in commercial airline crashes due to pilot error or mechanical failure after 9/11.

    So is this really about keeping people from dying? Is this the real goal of the TSA? If so--you're looking at the wrong source for death.

    Or is this about vengence? You'll get back at those terrorists by terrorizing the american public? Which is exactly what the terrorists wanted. Congratulations folks at the TSA. You've ensured we lost the battle and maybe even the war.

    So this brings me back around to the question that no TSO or others have been able to answer... what is the real motiviation behind the justification for stripping, groping and generally treating the traveling public like criminals? I can't imagine it's to prevent death since we seem to accept commercial air traffic accident statistics as acceptable risk. So what is the real reason?
     
    DeafBlonde and Doober like this.
  15. KrazyKat

    KrazyKat Original Member

    U.S.C. TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

    PART I - CRIMES

    CHAPTER 109A - SEXUAL ABUSE

    Section 2246. Definitions for chapter (1/5/99)

    As used in this chapter –
    (2) the term "sexual act" means –
    (C) the penetration, however slight, of the anal or genital opening of another by a hand or finger or by any object, with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person; or
    (3) the term "sexual contact" means the intentional touching, either directly or through the
    clothing, of the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent
    to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person;

    (5) the term "official detention" means -
    (A) detention by a Federal officer or employee, or under the direction of a Federal
    officer or employee
     
  16. KrazyKat

    KrazyKat Original Member

    Section 802 of the U.S. Patriot Act, titled “Definition of Domestic Terrorism,” provides several definitions of domestic terrorism, including this one:
    “The term `domestic terrorism’ means . . . activities that appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population.”
     
  17. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    Very insightful.

    Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate . Hate leads to suffering.
    Seems to sum it all up, both for the flying public and for TSA screeners.
     
    Rugape and DeafBlonde like this.
  18. RB

    RB Founding Member

    I suspect many TSA employees are feeling the effects of who their employer is. I'm sure many are embarassed to even tell friends and family what they do for a living. Imagine telling people; I feel up 6 year old girls and 95 year old grannies for National Security.:eek:
     
    DeafBlonde likes this.
  19. AngryMiller

    AngryMiller Original Member

    Is that the same Constitution you took an oath to protect when you hired in at TSA?




    But hey, what can we expect from a government Choad? Honesty? Upholding an oath they took? Their sworn oath is little more than cow flatulence in a high wind - here for but a moment and gone forever. They daily wipe their collective behinds on that document. The Constitution, at least in their eyes, is but a stumbling point to absolute power. They forget that absolute power corrupts absolutely.
     
    Doober likes this.
  20. 4nsicdoc

    4nsicdoc Original Member

    You wouldn't, would you?
     

Share This Page