Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Simbi Laveau

Woman sobs during TSA pat down

82 posts in this topic

If you do not mind it, fly all you want, that is a choice anyone get's to make.

I find that line of reasoning very dangerous... Push it a bit further and it can be used to justify strip searching people who enter grocery stores. "If you don't mind it, buy your food at the store all you want. Otherwise, start a farm. No one's forcing you to go to the store."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find that line of reasoning very dangerous... Push it a bit further and it can be used to justify strip searching people who enter grocery stores. "If you don't mind it, buy your food at the store all you want. Otherwise, start a farm. No one's forcing you to go to the store."

But someone might try to sneak a bomb into the grocery store. Don't you want to feel safe while picking through produce?

(Please read my sarcasm)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think people do appreciate the lengths they go to and using fear tactics/psychology to try and submit people into accepting the lengths they take is completely wrong.

I can't speak for the way the US does things, but in the UK and Ireland who lived with REAL terrorism threats (IRA) for decades before 9/11 even happened, and had implemented security measures into all our airports etc, was no where near as ridiculous or harsh, and worked very well without all this intrusion. The record of that alone should have shown it was the common sense approach that worked without having to go to lengths which p*** people off and make people feel violated or scared for their health. It is over the top now and there is nothing to prove that it keeps us any more safer when flying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think people do appreciate the lengths they go to and using fear tactics/psychology to try and submit people into accepting the lengths they take is completely wrong.

I can't speak for the way the US does things, but in the UK and Ireland who lived with REAL terrorism threats (IRA) for decades before 9/11 even happened, and had implemented security measures into all our airports etc, was no where near as ridiculous or harsh, and worked very well without all this intrusion. The record of that alone should have shown it was the common sense approach that worked without having to go to lengths which p*** people off and make people feel violated or scared for their health. It is over the top now and there is nothing to prove that it keeps us any more safer when flying.

:tu: well said .... they need a smily face called :tiphat:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they should require that everyone strip naked to fly. Completely buck slap naked. I wouldn't mind. Then we can just get re-dressed when we reach our destination. Easy Peasy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think people do appreciate the lengths they go to and using fear tactics/psychology to try and submit people into accepting the lengths they take is completely wrong.

I can't speak for the way the US does things, but in the UK and Ireland who lived with REAL terrorism threats (IRA) for decades before 9/11 even happened, and had implemented security measures into all our airports etc, was no where near as ridiculous or harsh, and worked very well without all this intrusion. The record of that alone should have shown it was the common sense approach that worked without having to go to lengths which p*** people off and make people feel violated or scared for their health. It is over the top now and there is nothing to prove that it keeps us any more safer when flying.

I don't think you understand how evil the enemy is that we are dealing with:

gty_tsa_enhanced_pat_down_ll_111117_wg.jpg

Everyone knows that wheelchair-bound octogenarians may look like they are loving and want to bake you an apple pie, but they very well could be smuggling c4 in their bras, so they need to be groped in order to keep them in line.

tsawheelchair.jpg

We know for sure that handicapped 5 year olds are obviously evil, and a good choice for packing explosives. Little Timmy might just look like a kid that has had a tough run of things so far, but that is exactly what Timmy wants you to think, so he can have the upper hand and kill the flight crew before anyone catches on...meanwhile he is diverting the plane and heading towards cuba.

Obviously there needs to be security for airplanes, the risk is too high to leave them unsecured. However I personally think that groping, xraying, and mistreating the poor disabled grandmothers of the country are not the way to do it.

Many other countries have been dealing with terrorism of one form or another for longer than we have, and have been able to create safety systems that do not hinge on EVERYONE being a criminal until proven otherwise. I have flown all over the world and never had to deal with the ridiculous actions done by under-trained and overzealous staff. We should be learning from other countries and not trying to reinvent the billion dollar wheel.

Of course there will be people who would support any action as long as their government told them it was for their safety. I bet my tiny paycheck that if they wanted to introduce cavity checks because some idiot snuck a weapon on board in his keyster, there would be some people who could completely rationalize it and support the idea. Stupid ideas will always have stupid supporters to rationalize the idea; regardless of the damage being done. Think about all the people that loved the idea of suspending habeas corpus to take care of all of the evil terrorists; with no concern for what kind of future legal ramifications that were potentially being created. There are just too many examples of bad ideas being backed by people simply because they feel it will help their safety.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they should require that everyone strip naked to fly. Completely buck slap naked. I wouldn't mind. Then we can just get re-dressed when we reach our destination. Easy Peasy.

...and the guy that places the explosive in his rectal canal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and the guy that places the explosive in his rectal canal?

Has one last fit of explosive diarrhea?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has one last fit of explosive diarrhea?

Or... rectum darn near killed em...

Was that below the belt humor?

OK OK back on track

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has one last fit of explosive diarrhea?

Noordin may have hidden explosives in anus, say experts

The terrorist approached the prince during a breaking of fast dinner at his residence. He got past the metal detector because he hid the explosives in his anus.

Not surprisingly, it really does happen. :unsure2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people say "If you don't want to go through the security checks, don't fly?"

What if I turned around and said do away with the security checks, and if you feel the risk to your safety is too high "dont fly"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people say "If you don't want to go through the security checks, don't fly?"

What if I turned around and said do away with the security checks, and if you feel the risk to your safety is too high "dont fly"...

:tu:

Some people say "If you don't want to go through the security checks, don't fly?"

What if I turned around and said do away with the security checks, and if you feel the risk to your safety is too high "dont fly"...

:tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people say "If you don't want to go through the security checks, don't fly?"

What if I turned around and said do away with the security checks, and if you feel the risk to your safety is too high "dont fly"...

But isnt the odd person being pat down better than a plane of hundreds going down because of an explosive?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/16/woman-sobs-over-tsa-patdown_n_1428975.html?ir=Travel

I applied for a job with the TSA,part time,while trying to get my acupuncture practice going.

I would have ended up at Kennedy Airport.

I took the tests,and had my interview. One incident at the office,made me change my mind,despite needing the money very badly.

They are truly ,a bunch of buffoons.

Especially at Kennedy

Hey if you dont mind me asking but what was the incident you saw that changed your mind? Just curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But isnt the odd person being pat down better than a plane of hundreds going down because of an explosive?

It's that sense of fear and paranoia that keeps the TSA employed.

Those who would give up Essential Liberty

to purchase a little Temporary Safety,

deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

-Benjamin Franklin

Read through the thread, more carefully. A multitude of countries have been dealing with realistic terrorist threats for decades, yet don't employ such invasive procedures. Even after 9/11, when our fear of terrorism was at it's peak, we didn't resort to these measures.

These procedures are not for our safety, don't fool yourself. They are put in place so the government can create a sense of continual danger and fear, and they want to condition us to sacrifice our rights whenever the State asks us to. Doing so makes us obedient and ultimately controllable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DKO, my apologies. I assumed you were from the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what people tend to forget is that the type of terrorists we are dealing with would think nothing of secreting an explosive device on their child or granny. I agree that at times they appear to go over the top, but I would rather the kiddy in front of me is searched than not searched and all on board (including me) die as a consequence.

It is an unfortunate sign of the times that we have to go to these extremes in order to be as sure as we can be that the terrorists will not win.

I have been through machines which show that I have no explosives in my undies and am quite happy to do so. The only thing I find frustrating about it all is the extra queueing time involved but I am aware that it is necessary.

Admittedly, the only time I have been to the USA was a couple of months after 9/11 so I cannot comment on the way they conduct their searches now. Back then, even directly after the incident, I was not searched thoroughly on my return flight to the UK (which was on an American airline).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's that sense of fear and paranoia that keeps the TSA employed.

Those who would give up Essential Liberty

to purchase a little Temporary Safety,

deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

-Benjamin Franklin

Read through the thread, more carefully. A multitude of countries have been dealing with realistic terrorist threats for decades, yet don't employ such invasive procedures. Even after 9/11, when our fear of terrorism was at it's peak, we didn't resort to these measures.

These procedures are not for our safety, don't fool yourself. They are put in place so the government can create a sense of continual danger and fear, and they want to condition us to sacrifice our rights whenever the State asks us to. Doing so makes us obedient and ultimately controllable.

:tu::tu::tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what people tend to forget is that the type of terrorists we are dealing with would think nothing of secreting an explosive device on their child or granny. I agree that at times they appear to go over the top, but I would rather the kiddy in front of me is searched than not searched and all on board (including me) die as a consequence.

It is an unfortunate sign of the times that we have to go to these extremes in order to be as sure as we can be that the terrorists will not win.

I have been through machines which show that I have no explosives in my undies and am quite happy to do so. The only thing I find frustrating about it all is the extra queueing time involved but I am aware that it is necessary.

Admittedly, the only time I have been to the USA was a couple of months after 9/11 so I cannot comment on the way they conduct their searches now. Back then, even directly after the incident, I was not searched thoroughly on my return flight to the UK (which was on an American airline).

No one is saying there aren't sick people in the world who wish to do harm to innocents.

But if I told you that were far more effective methods of terrorist detection than taking naked pictures of people or groping them, would you still willingly submit to those procedures?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is saying there aren't sick people in the world who wish to do harm to innocents.

But if I told you that were far more effective methods of terrorist detection than taking naked pictures of people or groping them, would you still willingly submit to those procedures?

Hi TK0001

I know we are far from being perfect in our detection of terrorists. They will always be one step ahead. But in answer to your question, I would rather submit to the procedure than be blown up in mid air!

I am well aware that for some people it is an embarassing procedure.

If you know of better methods for detecting terrorists, why does the government also not know, and if they do know, why do they not use them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know we are far from being perfect in our detection of terrorists. They will always be one step ahead. But in answer to your question, I would rather submit to the procedure than be blown up in mid air!

Why are these the only two options?

And do you believe such invasive procedures are keeping planes from being blown up in mid-air? If so, whatever kept them from being blown up in mid-air before these techniques were employed? And what keeps it from happening today in countries which have a far larger terrorist threat, who do not employ these techniques?

I am well aware that for some people it is an embarassing procedure.

Embarrassing for some, a violation of civil rights for all.

If you know of better methods for detecting terrorists, why does the government also not know, and if they do know, why do they not use them?

Read what I have written. I have clearly explained why they do not use them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But isnt the odd person being pat down better than a plane of hundreds going down because of an explosive?

But were not talking about the "odd" person being patted down. How many people, not demonstrating any suspicious signs, have been patted down since the TSA implemented the policy?

And to answer your question, no, I don't consider it worth it. I believe in innocent until proven guilty.

I believe that the measures taken by the TSA are too extreme and too loosely controlled. I believe that if a person isn't truly acting suspicious, then his rights should not be infringed. There seems to be some people in the world, however, that would have you believe a "terrorist" would attempt to not act suspicious in order to get by security. As such, non-suspicious behaviour is suspicious behaviour in and of itself, and justifies extreme treatment by the TSA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what people tend to forget is that the type of terrorists we are dealing with would think nothing of secreting an explosive device on their child or granny. I agree that at times they appear to go over the top, but I would rather the kiddy in front of me is searched than not searched and all on board (including me) die as a consequence.

And through very few extra steps I can use that same logic to justify shooting to kill anyone that demonstrates the slightest sign of suspicion or anger at the way they are being treated.

If the "terrorist" knows he's about to get caught through a cavity search, he may just detonate himself on the spot, killing potentially dozens of people. So by that very paranoid logic, if the child or grandmother struggles or acts suspicious, would you rather the kiddy infront of you is shot and killed, preventing him from detonating a potential explosive, or would you rather he is not shot and kills the dozens of people surrounding him (you included)?

This game of "statistics" can be used to justify anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a friend who works for the TSA in Denver, and she says you wouldn't believe what people say and do at the security checkpoints. People who would never be rude to anyone feel they can abuse the TSA agents. I have never given anyone trouble, taken the full body scan and still have been patted down, but I get through quickly by being fully cooperative. I don't know some people make a fuss. On the other hand, there are extreme cases where greater sensitivity is needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a friend who works for the TSA in Denver, and she says you wouldn't believe what people say and do at the security checkpoints. People who would never be rude to anyone feel they can abuse the TSA agents. I have never given anyone trouble, taken the full body scan and still have been patted down, but I get through quickly by being fully cooperative. I don't know some people make a fuss. On the other hand, there are extreme cases where greater sensitivity is needed.

Maybe people "make a fuss" because they feel like they shouldn't have to be humiliated and treated like a criminal in order to board a plane? Maybe because they feel they are being violated by the State, and aren't real happy about it?

In fact, I'm surprised people don't lash out more often. It's actually alarming how many people just accept a stranger groping them in the name of security. Of course, if they give the TSA any fuss while being groped, they can be detained, so I guess it does make sense.

Still, this is America? The land of the Free?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.