TSA destroys passengers' luggage at Palm Springs airport

Discussion in 'Aviation Passenger Security in the USA' started by Mike, Aug 26, 2011.

  1. jtodd

    jtodd Original Member

    We can argue semantics all day, processes this, processes that, next step, blah blah blah.....

    Here is the result of your organizations impractical and poorly enacted "security"
    1. Innocent citizen has his property confiscated without a warrant.
    2. Citizen is detained and questioned without a warrant.
    3. Citizens property is destroyed, without a warrant, hearing, trial, or recourse.

    What/who initiated this "proper procedures" to destroy citizens property?

    The TSA.
    Lisa Simeone likes this.

    SATTSO Original Member

    Based on others who have tried under almost the exact situation, the answer would be that they lose in court.

    SATTSO Original Member

    Do you have any idea how stupid your questions are? How stunningly ignorant you are on how an x-ray work for screening property, how x-ray interpretation works? I doubt it.

    SATTSO Original Member

    Blaah, blah, blah all you like. And courts have ruled differently than your option in situations like this that have happened before. Heck, happened to a lawyer at JFK I believe it was, she sued DHS/TSA and the local EOD - and lost. Sorry. Try again.

    As to who initiated this proper procedure to destroy a bag - that would be the local EOD (local bomb squad).

    SATTSO Original Member

    One last thing, for all of you who have advocated the use of ETD/ETP to screen people and property, how can you advocate the use of ETD OR ETP and then basically say IGNORE those technologies when they alarm? And I can tell you, in this case, they didn't alarm 1 time. It was multiple times. And when the outside EOD showed up with their equipment (they use their own equipment), their equipment alarmed. It seems to be another contradiction some of you have - you want TSA to use/do something, and when TSA does, and you don't like the results, you criticize TSA for doing so. Personally, I hope you keep it up, as it makes some of you look stupid and silly, and to be honest, vindictive. Which is why you are mostly ignored. :)
  6. jtodd

    jtodd Original Member

    So of the 3 items I listed, none of them are correct? None of that happened? The citizens property was not destroyed?

    Was the item an IED or WEI to bring down an aircraft?
    Lisa Simeone and barbell like this.
  7. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    Oh, my, somebody is on a defensive roll this morning, aren't they? :D
    Lisa Simeone likes this.
  8. RB

    RB Founding Member

    And everyone of these so called experts were wrong!
    Lisa Simeone, barbell and Doober like this.
  9. jtodd

    jtodd Original Member

    Wrong! As usual, you try to pass the buck, deflect or not answer the question altogether(something you hold in common with your employer, no responsibility, no accountability). The bag would not have been destroyed if your organization had performed due diligence in treating this citizen, as an innocent citizen. Novel concept for you and your ilk, I know, but that is what the whole US legal system is based on. If you don't like that, move to N. Korea, no terrorist acts take place there.
    Lisa Simeone, KrazyKat and barbell like this.
  10. THawk996

    THawk996 Original Member

    "We had to destroy the village in order to save it."
    Lisa Simeone and KrazyKat like this.
  11. RB

    RB Founding Member

    Can you site just one of these cases?
  12. barbell

    barbell Coach Coach

    I don't know what's funnier:

    That your absolute lack of knowledge of my skill set would lead you to make such a statement.

    Or that by asking legitimate questions based in fact of the scenario presented you have decided that I am "stunningly ignorant".

    Remember, you have not one idea of my abilities in x-ray interpretation, but I'll let you in on a secret: I guarantee you that my abilities in this arena are at least 10 times greater than yours by virtue of my background and training in this particular area.

    It's sad, really, that you will take at face value the apparent assumptions made by this agency.

    Here is what we know:

    The x-ray operator is a 9-year veteran employee of the TSA. I would hope that in 9 years of x-ray interpretation, training, and re-training that an individual could be adept at, you know, interpreting what is seen on an x-ray screen. It is, to be sure, both an inexact science and an art to interpret x-ray images. She saw something on the screen that looked suspicious and presumably called in reinforcements. Good for her. I would hope that truly suspicious items are fully vetted.

    And here's the utter breakdown of the entire charade. Having identified what "could" be a "threat" the entire operation spirals out of control. We know that neither this man nor his "suspicious" item were a threat. How do we know this? After multiple attempts to make his "bomb" go BOOM! it didn't, and he was released. This is the problem, there are some truly clueless people in this organization who see everything as a threat until proven otherwise. And this prevalent mentality is exactly how we end up with situations like these:

    As jtodd so correctly explains, an innocent person was detained without cause, and his completely innocuous property was destroyed without cause or warrant.

    TSA got this ball rolling. And from that point it was going downhill until the bag either exploded or was destroyed. This is exactly where critical thinking will take one beyond the assumption that a "bomb" was seen and prevented from getting on a plane.

    So consider, too, that when a nude image is rendered of a passenger using x-ray imaging. The unknown anomalies must now be rubbed, and yet they are not treated in this same manner. Of all of the faces, bra clasps, and pleats that I've seen rubbed down at the airport, not once have they been tested by ETD. Why is that? How is an x-ray image of a bag a threat that gets investigated by a "bomb expert" and swabbed and attempted detonation while a similar image is simply groped and sent on its way.

    It is stupid. Stupid. Stupid.
    Lisa Simeone and nachtnebel like this.
  13. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

    Or they'd like the general public to believe that everything is a threat. As is typical of a TSA show of farce, it's all theatre to blow little incidents out of proportion so the TSA can say, "Look, it could have been a bomb, and this would have saved lives," thus insuring the continued employment of a collection of layabouts, thieves, rapists, child molesters, and child porn purveyors.
    Lisa Simeone and barbell like this.
  14. barbell

    barbell Coach Coach

    Bingo. And that's exactly my point.

    There are no bombs to be found, so therefore everything might be a bomb.

    And then the bomb response squads get to play with their shiny toys.
    Lisa Simeone likes this.
  15. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

    And the perverts and thieves in blue shirts get to keep groping children, sniffing granny's underpants, and stealing stuff from the passengers. Just the way the TSA likes it.
    Lisa Simeone likes this.
  16. THawk996

    THawk996 Original Member

    Palm Springs airport reopens after evacuation

    If the threat was so serious that they had to clear the terminal, why did officials allow passengers back into the the terminal a full 2 hours and 15 minutes before the situation had been resolved???
    barbell likes this.
  17. barbell

    barbell Coach Coach

    For the same reasons they were paraded right past a "bomb" in OMA, to prove to everyone present that there might be something very, very dangerous in the very place that they are.
    Lisa Simeone likes this.
  18. jtodd

    jtodd Original Member

    Because it is all a big show, and nearly everyone of them knows it, those that don't believe every traveling American citizen is a terrorist waiting for their chance to take down an aircraft.
    Lisa Simeone likes this.
  19. SATTSO

    SATTSO Original Member

    Yeah, they were. But why don't you do something. Call up your buddies who were EOD in the military, and ask them what they would do when multiple ETDs alarm and everything else I described. Ask them if they would open the bag. When they stop laughing at you, I suspect they will tell you the same thing I did, despite your little worthless sound-bite.

    I have personally seen multiple post of yours where you say all that ETD and ETP should be used; but now your saying that equipment should be ignored. If you want to ignore what those machines tell you, I am fine with that. But then you need to change your argument, don't you? But I doubt you will do that, will you? It seems to be that most of you here alter your positions based upon personal bias. Sorry, that's a bad way to argue. Try being consistent for a change. If you want to support the use of ETD and ETP, then be prepared to accept the results those machines will provide you. If your not willing, stop pushing for the use of those machines. Pretty simple, isn't it?
  20. SATTSO

    SATTSO Original Member

    Nope, not wrong despite your exclamation mark. And I find it odd that your are arguing what TSA should have done WITHOUT even know what TSA did in fact do. Lets talk about novel concepts, if you wish - have a clue about what your talking before you type? Deal? Nah, I doubt you will agree to that....

Share This Page