TSA strip searches lady, handles feeding tube, and steals food at Dallas Love Field

Discussion in 'Aviation Passenger Security in the USA' started by RB, Jul 18, 2012.

  1. Rugape

    Rugape Original Member

    Read that entire sentence in the blog post - "The passenger, in a private room with a supervisor as a witness, patted down the area around her feeding tube, as required by our standard operating procedures. At no time did an Officer touch the feeding tube area." (bolding mine). Followed by - "At no time did an Officer touch the feeding tube area."
    It appears that the blog post is saying that a different set of events is what occurred.
  2. Rugape

    Rugape Original Member

    Is TSA claiming that the victim is being dishonest?

    My question to you Rugape, is it TSA's claim that the Deaton's lied about the encounter with TSA?[/quote]

    You have read the blog post, and it is different than what has been published in other sources. TSA says that no TSO touched the tube or the area around it, that the passenger patted the area around it and their hands were tested with the ETD.

    Luis made the statement that what was described is not what is supposed to happen, not that it happened, not "this happened and it was not supposed to". Making a statement that something is not supposed to happen is simply that, nothing more. Any implication was drawn by the reader, not implied. A spokesperson (from what I usually read, and in this case) make a statement that indicates that certain things are not supposed to happen, and then defers further comment if there is an investigation going on (which is what happened here). It makes certain that you let the public know that the claimed activity is clearly the wrong process, but you are not going to be able to give further information until after the investigation is finished.

    I am not certain that much difference would have resulted if she had told them about it or not.

    I do not know about the private screening room/area. Some private screening areas are made of curtained off spaces, perhaps that is what she was describing.

    You can read the blog post and see exactly what TSA has claimed.
  3. Rugape

    Rugape Original Member

    I have no idea what prompted this situation.
  4. Rugape

    Rugape Original Member

    I was not and do not have personal knowledge of what happened. I have only the press from the passenger and the info from TSA HQ.
  5. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

    Which situation? The fact that the TSA is forcing people to expose medical implants and open wounds, and touching them with nonsterile items? Or the fact that the TSA has yet again been caught in an outright lie?
    Elizabeth Conley likes this.
  6. RB

    RB Founding Member

    I read the TSA Blog post and do not find it credible.

    Why is there a need to tell TSA about medical issues if it wouldn't make much difference?

    edit to add: Why should I take the information provided by TSA over the account of the victim?

    We have known cases where information posted by TSA on the TSA Blog was deceitful if not an outright lie. I have personally attempted to deal with TSA over a couple of issues and not once was anyone forthcoming or even helpful.

    TSA has demonstrated that the agency will be dishonest and mislead the public rather than dealing with problems.

    In my book TSA lacks integrity, both as an organization and in its employees.
  7. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

    I wouldn't say all of the TSA's employees lack integrity.

    Some of them are just too stupid to understand that what they're doing is useless from a "security" perspective, and ideal for the introduction of a police state.
    Elizabeth Conley and barbell like this.
  8. barbell

    barbell Coach Coach

    It is fascinating to me that in reviewing situations such as this one the standard response is along the lines of, "Well, I wasn't there, and I don't have first-hand knowledge of what happened. I've asked my buddies at that TSA station to tell me what happened, and will let you know what I hear back."

    What follows then is... nothing. And then sometimes there's a post on the blog generally denying the claims, always placing blame back on the passenger, and usually calling the passenger a liar in some underhanded, passive-aggressive way. And at that moment it is perfectly clear, crystal even, what has happened in the eyes of anonymous TSA internets posters. Indeed, there was no problem, proper procedures were followed, and the poor, poor TSA was blasted in an unfair light.

    It must get really tiring carrying that burden around all of the time.

    I imagine when someone at TSA finally does kill someone, and it will happen, it will be the passenger's fault, because the TSA blog told them so.

    What a bunch of loonies.
    Elizabeth Conley likes this.
  9. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Becky Akers @ LRC Blog: The TSA: Always Respecting Our Privacy

    When its loyal lapdogs in the corporate media asked the TSA to explain away — sorry — comment on its colossally cruel strip-searching of a woman with a feeding-tube in her stomach, its spokesliar huffed, “…we respect the right to privacy of the passenger in question and will reach out directly to her…”

    Yeah, right: respecting the privacy of someone its perverts humiliated and stripped of her clothing solely because she needed to fly from Dallas to Minneapolis for medical treatment. No students have more eagerly imbibed Hitler’s observations on The Big Lie than Our Rulers. And of course their Biggest Lie is that the TSA has anything whatever to do with passengers’ well-being — though, I grant them, it has everything to do with Leviathan’s.

    Meanwhile, New York’s Daily News reports that, yet again, the TSA is defending its brown —I mean — blueshirts, as it does with each new atrocity: “On Thursday, the TSA issued a statement reinforcing their commitment to professionalism. But it did not express remorse for the treatment [this latest victim, Melinda] Deaton received: ‘In this specific incident, an investigation was initiated and it was determined that the Transportation Security Officer (TSO) followed standard operating procedures conducted in the presence of a Supervisor TSO.’”

    Astonishing, isn't it? Criminals are seldom so forthcoming. Yet the TSA admits, even insists, that shaming passengers and risking their lives by contaminating their feeding-tubes is SOP, just as it did with pedophilia.
    Elizabeth Conley likes this.
  10. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    I do not believe that is what the blog post said at 7:50 this morning. I believe the post has been changed, something we know has happened in the past.
  11. Rugape

    Rugape Original Member

    I am pretty confident that the words that I quoted, have been there since the post went live.
  12. Rugape

    Rugape Original Member

    That is entirely your decision, I can not convince you otherwise, nor will I try.

    Every situation is different, some require different screening protocols than others. With notification ahead of time, some screening can be a bit quicker for the passenger, as the TSOs know what screening needs to be done. Without that notification, it becomes a little bit longer process, because the TSOs then have to find out what has caused the alarm and then apply the proper screening.

    I take the information because it is what I understand to be SOP. According to the blog post, there were 2 TSOs there, one performing the screening, and one witness that was an STSO. Why would I automatically assume that the 2 TSOs were lying? That is part of the reason that there is always at least one witness in the private screening area (at least one from TSA anyway), and the reason that the passengers have the right to have their own witness present if they so desire. The witness is there to provide protection for both the passenger and the TSO conducting the screening.
  13. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    Sorry, I read it several times to make certain I was reading correctly. My error was in not copying the entire sentence.
    Rugape likes this.
  14. Rugape

    Rugape Original Member

    I sincerely thank you for this comment.
  15. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

    Why is there any question as to SOP? Either you know it, or you don't.

    Because that's what TSA employees do. They screw up and lie about it. Repeatedly and often.

    Typical TSA bovine excrement. If providing protection for the passenger was any part of it, the TSA wouldn't be preventing people from recording their "private" pat-down. If there were a recording of what really happened, the TSA and its inept-and/or-evil employees wouldn't be able to lie about what happened.
    barbell and Elizabeth Conley like this.
  16. Frank

    Frank Original Member

    Which is why, like cops, they object to video recording of their actions. The only thing they can't do that cops can is kidnap under color. They are forced to merely insert their lard asses between the victim and the camera.
    Caradoc, barbell and Elizabeth Conley like this.
  17. RB

    RB Founding Member

    I didn't ask that you try to convince me otherwise, I am asking you why I or anyone else should trust the word of TSA given the history of inaccurate statements and twisting of the truth to discredit anyone speaking out against TSA.

    But you said this; "I am not certain that much difference would have resulted if she had told them about it or not."

    If it wouldn't make much difference then that statement doesn't really mean much does it?

    Well, if the public knew how we were going to be screened then perhaps we could be more helpful. But TSA has made that impossible with its illegal and secretive searches that exceed any definition of a limited administrative search for WEI. You ask why you would automatically assume that 2 TSO's were lying. I suggest you look at the history of TSA. We have examples of TSA employees giving false testimony in courts, we have numerous examples of TSA employees engaged in all manner of illegal behavior, we have the head of TSA, John S. Pistole, giving false testimony before Congress. I think the question should be why you would ever trust the word of anyone wearing a TSA uniform.

    Lastly this witness thing, having a second TSA employee as witness is not for the benefit of the public and I suspect you know that. It just makes it easier for TSA continue its pattern of dishonesty. If TSA was truly interested in being open abouts its screening procedures TSA would have people not affiliated with TSA to act as observers at the screening checkpoints.

    I will ask you again, why should we automatically question the honesty of the victim of this TSA screening?
  18. Elizabeth Conley

    Elizabeth Conley Original Member

    The "private room" lie terrifies me. No one in their right mind wants to leave the protection of public scrutiny with a pair of assailants.

    The only people gaining "privacy" here are the sadistic thugs of the TSA, who can torment their victims away from public scrutiny and inevitable censure. The victim isn't given the benefit of privacy, the victim is simply being subjected to the additional terror of isolation.

    The lady says she was publicly humiliated, and I believe her. It doesn't matter if the TSA scum took her to an isolated location to assault her or if they assaulted her in public view. The victim received no privacy, because (at a minimum) the TSA thugs viewed her disrobed person.

    The TSA has no credibility here.

    1. They deny isolated passengers the right to record their isolation room humiliations. Honorable people do not fear recording devices.
    2. They've been caught lying countless times. Every time there's a recording, it turns out the victim's account is accurate and the TSA thug is lying.
    Monica47 and barbell like this.
  19. barbell

    barbell Coach Coach

    If you don't understand how this is a problem, if you don't understand how this tips the already unequal clerk/pax relationship, if you don't understand how this can create the opportunity and even encourage lies, then you are a moron.

    I know you aren't a moron.

    Your friendly fascism of "Oh, shucks, the TSA just wants to help. We're good guys! We shove our hands into your crotch for your own good!" is appalling. What is wrong with you?
    Elizabeth Conley and Caradoc like this.
  20. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

    TSA employee. Res ipsa loquitur.
    barbell likes this.

Share This Page