Tell me this is not one totally screwed up individual working for the TSA

Discussion in 'Civil Rights & Privacy' started by Doober, May 6, 2012.

  1. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    Screen name Ponter who responded to Boob's Civil Rights and Liberty thread:

    http://blog.tsa.gov/2012/05/tsas-office-of-civil-rights-and.html

    I'm quoting this in full as this individual alludes that he/she is speaking for the TSA.

    That TSA has hired people who think like this, and we know one intimately here, is mind boggling.
     
  2. FetePerfection

    FetePerfection Founding Member Coach

    OMG I just threw up a little in my mouth!!!
     
  3. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    What's so sad is that these sick, warped puppies actually believe this crap.

    In the U.S. generally copyright is meaningless with respect to government publications (including what's on their web sites). An individual could claim copyright for his own postings, but then fair-use doctrine would have to be considered, along with the fact that this moron already made it available in a public blog other than his own.
     
  4. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Hopefully you drink only clear, non-sweetened liquids when you read this stuff. It's safer for the equipment.
     
  5. RB

    RB Founding Member

    I think that post was intended to be satire.
     
    Ciarin likes this.
  6. Ciarin

    Ciarin Member

    Yea, it looks like you got trolled.
     
  7. Monica47

    Monica47 Original Member

    Oh yeah, nothing comforts a child more than his/her parents telling them there are EVIL MONSTERS WHO WANT TO K ILL THEM. Yup, that will work. What a jerk! The only evil monsters are the blue shirted thugs at the airport - that's who they should really be afraid of.
     
  8. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    You're quite likely right, but over the years I've had enough run-ins with delusional stupid people on patriotic missions that "satire" does not immediately come to mind when I read something like that.
     
    Lisa Simeone likes this.
  9. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    agree. this is something Pistole could say, easily.
     
    Lisa Simeone likes this.
  10. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    I don't think so. This individual has posted previously:

    Ponter Said...
    Anonymous (August 29, 2010 3:10 PM) clearly did not read my comment. I never said AIT or the enhanced pat down was "wonderful and popular." Nobody inside or outside the TSA will ever claim that they are popular with either the TSOs who administer them or passengers who are subjected to them.

    What I did say was that they are necessary to protect aviation from people who seek to kill Americans. We all surely wish they were not necessary. We wish that 19 al-Qaida terrorists did not cunningly exploit weaknesses in security, using airplanes to destroy the Twin Towers and condemn thousands of innocent people to horrifying deaths. We wish that 9/11 had not happened. But it did happen. Which is why we need the TSA to provide proven, effective protection against that threat. And thanks to the TSA's procedures that evolve to meet the continually evolving threat, there have been NO SUCCESSFUL TERRORIST ATTACKS against aviation since 9/11. For that we should all be grateful!

    As I said before, it's not that the TSA's leadership wants to put TSOs in the very uncomfortable position of executing enhanced pat downs that involve uncomfortable contact with passengers' sensitive areas. They are NOT doing this to punish or humiliate. Rather, the specific threats now posed by individuals and groups seeking to kill Americans REQUIRE this heightened level of inspection of all passengers. Remember, THEY ARE DOING THIS ONLY TO PROTECT US FROM INDIVIDUALS WHO SEEK TO KILL AMERICANS! Just as we all wish 9/11 had never happened, we wish such a thorough and admittedly intrusive inspection was not necessary. But it is a necessary response to the current threat environment. Otherwise the TSA would not need to enhance screening with measures that are even more uncomfortable for TSOs than for passengers.

    Again, it is completely out of line to make unfounded accusations about TSOs, who are doing what is necessary to keep aviation safe. It isappropriate to be angry that the level of enhanced inspection is necessary. But that anger should be properly directed at the terrorists who make it necessary. As always, the best and most constructive way to channel that anger is to give your fullest support and appreciation to the TSA, and do everything possible to aid their efforts to defeat the terrorist threat!

    Finally, regarding Anonymous (August 29, 2010 10:07 AM) who claims that a TSO painfully squeezed the testicles of "a friend": Did the friend file a claim through the TSA's official feedback channels? Is there ANY proof that this happened? Since we all know that the TSA does not tolerate that sort of conduct, we should ignore all such unfounded and implausible claims, especially from "anonymous" blog commenters. Repeating and responding to such lies only aids the enemy.
    August 29, 2010 6:56 PM
     
    Lisa Simeone likes this.
  11. Ciarin

    Ciarin Member

    It's the Law of Poe.
     
  12. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    Yes, there are those at the other place who called him/her a poe but I still am not convinced.
     
  13. Ciarin

    Ciarin Member

    This right here:



    tells me it's fake. Nonexistent SSI is nonexistent.
     
  14. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    Then he's certainly making Boob look the fool - but it couldn't happen to a more deserving person. :D
     
    Lisa Simeone likes this.

Share This Page