Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Former Miss USA winner: TSA agent ‘touched my vagina’

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:18 PM
Original message
Former Miss USA winner: TSA agent ‘touched my vagina’
Former Miss USA winner: TSA agent ‘touched my vagina’


"The pat down at Dallas airport was completely different than the one I got at LAX," an emotional Castillo explained in a video recorded after the ordeal. "I'm sure this woman was just doing here job but she actually felt -- touched my vagina. And so, I think that's why I'm crying."

"They're making me choose to either get molested -- because that's what I feel like -- or go through this machine that's completely unhealthy and dangerous... I do feel violated."

She continued: "This woman, she touched my vagina four times because she went up my leg, up both legs, from behind and then turned around and did it in the front."

Castillo filled out a TSA compliment/complaint card while at the airport, and said she would be doing the same thing every time she was forced to go through the invasive pat down procedure.

MORE:

http://www.susiecastillo.net/blog/2011/4/25/my-tsa-pat-...
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/04/28/beauty-queen-tsa-... /

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:21 PM
Response to Original message
1. Her vagina? Really?
Was she wearing a dress with no underpants?

She chose to be touched instead of viewed... I find that weird in someone so sensitive. I would expect my crotch to be thoroughly investigated in a pat down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
demmiblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. +1 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. Very creepy ~
Very, very creepy actually ~

It's amazing what people are willing to subject, not only themselves, but others to, for political reasons. The PTBs know there are those who will go along even with the molestation of women and children by strangers at the airport, to protect their 'team', which is why we are losing all of our rights. When Republicans are in power, they can count on support for anything they do no matter how egregious, and I've learned over the past two years that the 'left' is no different.

Two states are moving to ban these machines in their states ~ and as more reports like this reach the public, I expect that decent people everywhere will eventually demand that this molestation of American citizens is stopped, and perhaps even criminalized as it should be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. What nonsense...
If you want to fly, you must go through this. I never said I was happy about it. What rubbish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghost in the Machine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #14
21. Some of us aren't so willing to give up our liberty for a false sense of security
"Those who would give up liberty for security deserve neither"

Someone famous said that.. do you know who?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MiniMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #21
30. Ben Franklin I believe
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #21
39. Thank you, sad that you have to even say that.
Even sadder that Bush was unable to get these machines into our airports. The left fought hard against them back then, for six years, successfully. But now some on the left seem to have overcome their concerns about civil liberties.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #39
45. No one had to remind me of that quote or that fact...
Nowhere here have I ever stated that I condone these actions. And I truly am upset and disgusted by the misplaced insults here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #21
41. Where did I ever say this action was OK?
I never did, not here, nor anywhere else on DU. WTF??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghost in the Machine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:35 PM
Response to Reply #41
113. Ummm...
"She chose to be touched instead of viewed... I find that weird in someone so sensitive. I would expect my crotch to be thoroughly investigated in a pat down."

Did you type those words, or are you claiming someone hacked your account and typed them for you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
adigal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #21
61. I don't see how being patted down is giving up liberty
If I want to get on that plane, then I have to be patted down, and of course, they will check out my groin area!! People could hide lots of stuff in their pants! Now, if they came to my house and patted me down for whatever, that would be giving up liberty, or if my i-phone was keeping track of where I am, that is giving up liberty. I wonder if Miss USA has an i-phone??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #61
72. People can hide lots of things in their body cavities.
So, what's next? Cavity search, anyone?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fuzz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #72
96. A snook? In her Snizz?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jp11 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #61
78. Trading flying for being pat down is giving up liberty.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/liberty

The false idea that these pat downs or scans make people safe is silly when you have to subject yourself to the violation just to keep up the dog and pony show that passes for airline safety. We are too childish to come to terms that we can't stop everything bad from happening so we say it is okay to treat people like prisoners or associates of prisoners (family visiting a prisoner) by forcing them to be pat down etc in order to fly on a plane.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
adigal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #78
79. There is no inalienable right to get on a plane
It is not like free speech, or freedom of religion. Apples and oranges.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jp11 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #79
92. Never said it was.
liberty:

2. Freedom from unjust or undue governmental control.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/liberty

I *think* those kinds of searches/scans are undue and unjust in order to fly on a plane.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 11:59 PM
Response to Reply #79
125. Wrong, and I am getting tired of correcting this rightwing
claim, that people do not have the right to travel freely in this country without government harrassment. What an oppressed country it would be if that were the case.

I have posted the information over and over again each time this talking point, and that's all it is, appears. We have the right to travel, to fly, to drive, ride a bike, walk, crawl, run, wherever we wish to go, without being harrassed by the government, so long as we are not committing a crime and so long as there is no probably cause to suspect we are committing a crime, in this country.

Please stop taking away our rights for the benefit of profits for Chertoff, Cheney, Ghouliani and Bush. I don't know where this meme came from, that we suddenly lost rights we have always had, but it really is disturbing to see how easily people will give up their rights. Give up your own if you wish, but please do not give up ours.

There is a law that clearly states that American Citizens have a RIGHT to fly. Look it up, I am tired of posting it here on this democratic board which sometimes doesn't seem like a democratic board ever since Democrats won a few elections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:29 AM
Response to Reply #125
135. +1000 I'm sick of people who are passive as we lose our rights. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #78
101. You don't have to pat down, or be scanned to fly....
... on your own private plane. If you want to fly on somebody *else's* plane, you have to abide by their rules.

http://cirrusaircraft.com/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghost in the Machine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #61
117. Wow, the brainwashing is almost complete!
"If I want to get on that plane, then I have to be patted down, and of course, they will check out my groin area!!"

How did you ever fly before 2001?!?!? Oh, wait.. there were ZERO hijackings inside the US from February 1991 until September 11, 2001, when a group of extremists hijacked 4 planes. It wasn't 4 seperate acts that weren't related, just one act, by a group... and now you think it's perfectly normal to have your "groin area" patted down before you fly. It's official, the terrorists have won!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-30-11 03:31 AM
Response to Reply #61
179. yes, so long as you stay in your house you are "free". if you actually want to do something, that's
another matter...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jp11 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #12
90. If it is 'molestation' when done to women and children it is also 'molestation' when done to men or
Edited on Thu Apr-28-11 08:10 PM by jp11
anyone who might not use those labels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maru Kitteh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 12:02 AM
Response to Reply #90
126. Durrrrrr......
who said it wasn't?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jp11 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #126
174. When one uses the phrase women and children it by design excludes those that don't fall in those
groups. Ignoring or omitting those people is wrong whether through an absent thought, accustomed style of speaking/reading, or the choice to say women and children are 'superior' groups to garner the outrage of a society/people. When those who don't fit in those listed groups are omitted there is a tacit statement that those left out don't matter. Which is where it makes more sense, to me, to say anyone treated thusly is being victimized/abused etc rather than to point out to exclusionary groups when there are people who don't fit in those groups receiving the same treatment.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:31 AM
Response to Reply #90
136. Yes, it is, I completely agree. And it has been done to men.
And some of them have decided to sue as a result of being molested at the airport. Two pilots eg, refused to go through either the Rapiscans or the patdowns and were suspended, but their Union got behind them and they won the right for pilots to NOT be subjected to these abuses anymore. However, the original two pilots, very courageous to have taken that stand, are now suing the TSA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
U4ikLefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #12
129. A-freakin'-men!!! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:24 AM
Response to Reply #12
132.  'Go, Team' hypocrisy is despicable
Those who play that game have about the same quotient of integrity as Rethugs. There are many ways to bring down planes and god forbid it happens again, it's unlikely the means will be explosives in women and girls underpants. I see these invasive searches as being meant to intimidate citizens and make us submissive to any petty 'authority figures' for any reasons at all or none!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:41 AM
Response to Reply #132
141. Yes, these searches began last year, and people should go to
Edited on Fri Apr-29-11 01:44 AM by sabrina 1
the TSA website and watch the discussions there btw, which is where I found out about them. They came about because more and more people were refusing the Naked Scanners, cynically named 'Rapiscans' btw. They wanted to sell more of them, but with people refusing to go through them and choosing patdowns which were still relatively non-intrusive, the machines were getting very little use, undermining the need to have them at all.

So some monster came up with the idea that if the pat-downs were 'enhanced', so intrusive that people became more scared of them than the machines, the machines would be used more. Apparently it worked, as we can see right here on DU with people 'advising' this woman that she should have chosen to be 'viewed' (how absolutely disgusting) rather be 'molested' and she should have known better. So the Monsters who think these things know their audiences very well it seems. I would have given people more credit, but I would have been wrong, as I now can see.

This whole discussion took place on the TSA website last year when the TSA blogger put up an announcement of the new and improved 'enhanced patdowns'. People went to the site to ask what that meant, but the TSA Rep on the site, refused to explain. Now we know.

The chances of dying by terror are so miniscule compared to the everyday threats we face, driving, getting mugged, shot or not being able to afford Health Care, that it's astounding how they can still use that miniscule threat to scare people into totally giving up their rights. There is simply no logic to it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yavin4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #141
170. Ah, But that "miniscule threat" is from brown people that don't speak english
And pray to entirely different deity. And that makes it especially scary.


:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. I was referring to a pat down in general...
If I were to be patted down by the police, I would expect my crotch to be felt through my clothing. I would expect my breasts to be felt as well. They are looking for explosives and devices. How do you do that without either looking at a scan, or doing a pat down?

I'm not saying that either method is appropriate, but we have to work with what we have. Currently in this country if you want to fly, you will be subjected to either/or. These are my expectations of a pat down. I know this to be true. I have actually had this conversation with a former police officer who now serves as an armed guard and chauffeur to a local billionaire. We worked for said billionaire together for many years, and he is my go-to guy for all things security.

I'm really at a loss as to why I should feel ashamed for stating fact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PufPuf23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #13
25. Read your words I quoted. Explicit and gross.
The TSA at airports is Kabuki and a waste of $ and traveler intimidation in general.

Currently the USA is not the way you lived most of your life, how we should not have to live in a land of freedom, and supports the slippery slope in the debasement of the ideals of the USA.

Police, at least in theory, require probable cause.

I am really disappointed by your post and defense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #25
35. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #25
38. OFFS... please read what I wrote...
Nowhere did I ever say I was in agreement with the ridiculousness of a "need" for such invasive actions! Please tone down the outrage and look at what I said.

What do you expect people to do? Refuse BOTH forms of security checks and demand to be allowed onto a plane anyway?

I am seriously disappointed in your lack of perspective, and your blatant disregard for what I said, and your insistence that I said something I clearly did not!

If you want to fly, you must subject yourself to one or the other. Period. No, it is not right. No, we shouldn't have to go through this. Nowhere in all of DU have I ever, ever said otherwise and I am appalled at being accused of such ridiculousness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. JuniperLea... I can't believe what you wrote either...
I generally agree with you, but this posting is incredibly offensive:

"I would expect my crotch to be thoroughly investigated in a pat down"

I too am totally blown away at your post....Sigh...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #40
43. How does this mean that I approve of these actions?
Show me where I said I approve!

Currently in this country we are indeed subjected to heinous treatment when we choose to fly. If you want to fly, you will either be subjected to a visual scan or a physical pat down. Nowhere did I say that was ok. All I said is that it is currently expected!

WTF... I mean really, WTF?

Can you get on a plane after refusing one of these?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #43
46. You explicitly call out this woman on her complaints...
Stating "Was she wearing a dress with no underpants?"

then to add to the apparent disdain for this woman and her complaints (and inherent defense of TSA in these purported actions): She chose to be touched instead of viewed... I find that weird in someone so sensitive. I would expect my crotch to be thoroughly investigated in a pat down."



What is it that you can't get. YES. You are approving by inference. Feel free to clarify. I think there are about a dozen here who would dearly love to see that occur. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #46
49. Bullshit
I am not approving the action, and further, I plainly stated that if you choose to fly you will be subjected to either/or treatment. It sucks, but if you choose to fly, pick your poison.

I was merely calling her out over her stupidity. There's no damn way anyone touched her vagina for crying out loud! They may have felt her crotch through her clothing, but there's no other way for her vagina to be felt without my afore-mentioned clothing description.

I don't like people touching me at all... on the rare occasions I fly, I do the scan. I don't like it; I loathe it. But I have no choice.

I have clarified over and over and over again... and I'm still being insulted for things I CLEARLY never said... I never said I approved of these search methods in this thread, or any other thread on DU or anywhere else.

This is fucking nuts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #49
50. So because this woman misspoke with repsect to the term for her
external genitalia, she deserves the derision and has no case to make that she was inappropriately dealt with? I really think you need to go read AGAIN what you wrote. I realize you are feeling defensive, but there is a reason so many posters her are feeling appalled. I think you might even be able to go back and edit your OP for clarity...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #50
52. My post is very clear if you don't try to put words into it that are not there.
Was she inappropriately dealt with? Should that area not have been checked? I understand she was upset. I don't believe she understood what a pat down entails. Have you ever experienced a pat down? Have you not read the many, many descriptions of such a thing here on DU? If there are areas on a woman's body that should not be included in a pat down, how long would it be before poor destitute women are paid to smuggle things onto planes by placing them in those areas?

I am appropriately defensive. I have been accused of something I never did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #52
84. I doubt very seriously that
Edited on Thu Apr-28-11 08:05 PM by hlthe2b
you fly 0.00001% as much as I have over the past decade, including recently. Yes, I have experienced all of this first hand, (though fortunately never the type of genital groping that has been described in many incidents)--in the US and overseas, including in the ME. No country has ever sent a security employee groping down my underwear. That is the absolute abuse without prior cause-- that some, seem willing to defend. Whre does it end? When they deem it necessary to complete a vaginal or anal exam with a camera probe?

The terrorists really have won when I am subjected to far less intrusiveness (let alone what passes incredibly close to sexual assault) in terror-accustomed countries like France and G. Britain , as well as in the ME, than in my own so-called "democratic" Republic.







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #52
86. ...
Edited on Thu Apr-28-11 08:03 PM by hlthe2b
Self-delete.. The point has been made and I don't wish to pile on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:45 AM
Response to Reply #52
143. What an insult to 'poor, destitute women'
What an insult to 'poor, destitute women' J.L. You honestly believe 'poor destitute women' would take money they wouldn't live to spend to smuggle explosives in their panties, thus killing themselves and murdering a couple of hundred other human beings?

Thank you for sharing your lovely view of 'poor women' in particular.

So far it's been crazy brainwashed dimwit religious fanatics of the male sex who weren't at all driven by financial reward who had supposedly attempted to bring down planes that way and did not succeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:36 AM
Response to Reply #46
138. Med prof pal says such TSA searches could be spreading Herpes simplex
My med prof pal says the hand searches could easily spread herpes simplex virus, the kind which gives people the tiny annoying bumps on the groin. He says the young, elderly and those with weak immune systems are particularly vulnerable. He flies fairly often (I don't) and says he observed the TSA agents do not always change out gloves.

What about women who always wear skirts instead of pants (like me)? They'd be going up one's bare skin. ICK!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guardian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #25
158. agree +1000
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #6
26. "The TSA is an entirely unnecessary agency at airports."
Seriously? I get being unhappy with the level of scrutiny, but to argue we don't need airline security? That's kind of ridiculous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PufPuf23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #26
37. There was airline security and going through screening and
emptying metal from pockets prior to 9-11.

TSA did not exist at airports but airline employees did the screening.

The system worked until 9-11 and then there was much incompetence for a morning.

One could easily argue on a benefit/cost or PNW or lives saved basis that the ever more stringent TSA involvement has been counter-productiuve to commercial air travel and federal expenditure (for what was already being done by the airlines)that current policies are just stupid to absurb.

Yeah. Feel my crotch. Sniff my socks. We are all more safe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #37
48. So, airport screening on 9/11 was good enough?
Boxcutters, anyone?

Seriously, you're not doing your cause any good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #48
71. Back then boxcutters were allowed onto the plane.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #71
76. No they were not.
Nor were the other improvised weapons smuggled onto the planes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #76
80. According to wikipedia, knifes with blades up to 4 inches were
permitted before 9/11.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:40 AM
Response to Reply #80
140. FAA regs permitted them. But the FAA didn't run airport security.
Airlines did, and they had rules against boxcutters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sen. Walter Sobchak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #76
103. I travelled with a little one for years that was part of a little tool kit
Through easily half the civilized countries in the world, never a peep. It is the very knife you see in the picture below. It was part of a little travel toolkit of that was $12.99 at Radio Shack.



9/11 happened because the policy for more than forty years had been for airlines to cooperate with hijackers, not for a lack of belligerent imbeciles at the airport finger banging the traveling public and stealing their valuables.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:42 AM
Response to Reply #103
142. Then yours was a case of the airlines not enforcing their own rules.
Boxcutters were, in fact, banned by airline safety rules.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sen. Walter Sobchak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 03:24 AM
Response to Reply #142
151. So every major airport in the US, Western Europe and Asia were all wrong?
At several airports, including JFK and London Heathrow security rummaged through the tool kit and found no concerns with the knife, although I was challenged on the socket wrench a few times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #103
152. They used to let my on board witha 4 inch switcblade.

I'd put it the bucket. They'd hit the switch, smile, and hand it back to me on the other side of the scanner. Ahh...the good old days.

One time, one of the screeners asked me what it was for and replied it was for fishing. "Ohhhh," she said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #48
154. The 9/11 hijackers didn't need boxcutters.
It was the the false claim that they had a bomb and were going to blow up the plane if passengers didn't cooperate which was the main way they took over the planes.

Today, passengers in First Class are given metal steak knives with their meals, and so the TSA keeping us from bringing aboard box cutters is absurd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #26
47. I'm not happy with the level of scrutiny either...
And nowhere did I ever say I approved.

I'm really sick of being insulted over things I never said... but you're right... it is ridiculous to say we don't need airline security at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PufPuf23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #47
55. I apologize if I hurt your feelings but was blown away by your post.
I like you JuniperLea and don't expect to always agree.

I am glad you have clarified that you did not agree with the TSA policy.

The woman felt and was violated regardless of anatomy for no good reason.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #55
60. You seriously fucked my mind... and I don't know how to get over this...
It isn't that we don't agree on this. We agree completely with the idea that putting us through these searches is ridiculous. But we have no choice, and we pick our poison.

I shouldn't have needed to clarify a damn thing. You shouldn't have put words into my post that were never there. I am highly insulted, and very hurt. An I'm out of here for the day... I can only take so much.

This woman was an idiot. She could have never had her vagina felt. That is ridiculous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #60
81. Your hurt and insult at WORDS on DU are nothing compared to the hurt and insult of this woman
who had her CROTCH TOUCHED AND INSPECTED by an agent of the US GOVERNMENT.

I am sick to death of the defense of this bullshit on DU, by the media, and by OUR PRESIDENT.

No, her vagina was not entered, but that ANYONE would try to use that as a mitigating factor in this discussion is outrageous. She had her vulva and the area over her vagina touched, against her will, by OUR GOVERNMENT.

And this happens EVERY FUCKING DAY to people not accused or convicted of any crime whatsoever.

THAT is what is hurtful and insulting, to all Americans who are supposed to be protected by our Fourth Amendment.

I don't expect to have my CROTCH thoroughly investigated when I go through airport security, and I am sad and angered beyond measure to hear that expectation from others.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:10 AM
Response to Reply #81
128. I am hurt for that woman and for the children and the men
Edited on Fri Apr-29-11 01:14 AM by sabrina 1
and other women who have been subjected to this abuse. The woman was clearly devastated, she was crying as any women so abused would be doing. To see her called 'stupid' because SHE was abused? Who would expect their own government to do this to her? That is what is upsetting.

I am devastated at the way the left has abandoned this fight against these policies, WHICH WE FOUGHT successfully under Bush for SIX YEARs, and it took a Democratic president to undo all that work and permit, no institute, since it is Janet Napolitano who is responsbible for putting those machines in place, these vile policies, and then to tell the public he is sorry, but that's the way it is?? While he admits that his own family will never be subjected to these abuses.

What kind of man or woman would allow these abuses against the elderly, the disabled, children, women, men?? I have lost all respect for the man. And for anyone who attempts to excuse this.

And no, we do NOT have to go through this in order to fly. We can do what the pilots did, what the 'don't touch my junk' guy did, and others, and simply refuse and make a fuss, and call the police at the airport, and then sue. Anything rather than act like sheep with no will of our own.

A general strike against those machines just for one day, would end these vile disgusting, abusive policies. And no, it would NOT mean privatizing them. It would mean no matter who is in charge of them, so long as they are at the airport, people will not fly.

Several lawsuits are now filed against the TSA and I hope there will be many, many more. I don't know what happened to this country. Are people really so easily scared into giving up all of their rights? I find THAT to be frightening, because when they give up their rights, they are giving up all of our rights. That frightens me far more than the minute possibility of dying by a terror attack.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 02:25 AM
Response to Reply #81
147. Woo Me with Science, great post ^^ I've another issue
There are many women in America who have had the trauma of having been sexually touched, if not raped, as children. I am among them.

For instance I severely recoil from 'touching' of that area (and breasts) until I trust a gynecologist enough to relax. It doesn't matter if the gyno is male or female, I have to get the trust and relax on. The possibility of being touched by a stranger would be fearful, traumatic and bring up feelings of 'what did I do to deserve this?'

I'm getting along in years now, so I would submit to the Rapiscan. However I fear what exposure to radiation could do to women of childbearing age and children.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pecwae Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #81
175. Damn right and thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #47
57. Then oppose it rather than wiping and dangling.
If you think something is wrong then stop defending it and attacking the outcry.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #57
63. OFFS... please read what I wrote...
I never once defended the action!!! Jesus God I'm sick of this stupid ridiculous practice of putting words into the posts of others. I never defended it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chrisa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #63
102. I think you need to re-read your first reply to this thread.
Edited on Thu Apr-28-11 08:23 PM by chrisa
You said it's this lady's fault for getting a pat down.

If you think the TSA pat down is bad, why are you blaming the victim? That's why people here are "putting words in your post."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #6
29. Homeland Security is the unnecessary agency, not the TSA n/t
Edited on Thu Apr-28-11 06:10 PM by leftstreet
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #6
33. +1,0000000000000 I think I am in shock just reading that...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chrisa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #1
95. Oh yeah, she deserved it!
While you're excusing these dumb, useless procedures that don't make us safer, someone else is actually speaking up about them.

And who would expect their crotch to be examined anywhere? W... T... F...??? These new TSA procedures are pointless and border on sexual molestation.

"Was she wearing a dress with no underpants?"

Why would that matter? Do you really not understand that they could just go into your underpants?

Why do you insist on blaming her?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Matariki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #1
106. And YOU are being stupidly insensitive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cid_B Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #1
109. Well since she is pretty and successful she deserves it right?
Maybe she is wealthy and you can the whole hate trifecta...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maru Kitteh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #1
122. Yuk. Maybe they can make a separate line for those who expect crotch buggery,
and you can go through that, whilst the rest of us go without.

Because personally I do NOT expect my crotch to be thoroughly investigated by ANYONE other than my SO and my healthcare provider.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TBF Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #1
159. LOL - I would expect that you would freely submit to whatever
PO asked you to without questions. It's your MO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #1
162. The pat down means must that, you get patted, felt, all over, including your "private area"
This does not mean the pat down helps keep us safer or is appropriate, but yes, this is what happens. To chose the pat down then complain that it happened is odd.

"My private area was grazed 4 times". Up right leg front, up left leg front, up right leg back, up left leg back. Yes, that is 4 times. It is part of what they are doing these days.

I am not saying this is right, that we should not speak out, but if you go through the pat down lane, you get this treatment.

I won't get into the "vagina vs vulva" idiocy as have in the past and been blasted beyond saying if you are going to be a spokesperson, please use the proper terms as using the improper term makes many of us take you less seriously. You don't have to exaggerate a bad situation.

Again, not saying enhanced pat downs are needed. Not saying we should not protest them as we should. Just that if you ask for you, you get one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
2. Sexually being assaulted while traveling.... Being beaten at the I Hop.
This is not acceptable....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:25 PM
Response to Original message
3. Perhaps she means vulva?
Thanks for the thread, kpete.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooky3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. Yes, there have been other threads here at DU about this mistake.
Edited on Thu Apr-28-11 05:47 PM by spooky3
Aside from the main point about the inappropriateness of the search and the no-win choices available, which I think Castillo is right about, it's amazing to me that using the wrong name of a body part is so common.

Thanks for offering the correction here.

In the present instance, it isn't just a vocabulary error. If the TSA were in fact touching her vagina during a routine search, that is a much more invasive procedure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maru Kitteh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 12:06 AM
Response to Reply #11
127. When one feels they have been violated - it is a distinction without a difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooky3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:18 AM
Response to Reply #127
130. if you read my first sentence, I think it's clear that
Edited on Fri Apr-29-11 01:30 AM by spooky3
I'm not questioning her sense of violation or the reality of the inappropriateness of the two horrid "choices". So, let's not confuse the points.

Putting a finger or hand, etc., in an internal body part is not the same as touching an external body part. It's pretty easy to think of analogous situations that I don't want to spell out here.

And, calling a body part by the wrong name should be corrected; a heart is not a liver, or an arm, etc. It's offensive to me that in this culture, we have dozens of crude, slang terms for female body parts, but many people don't care to learn the right names for them or object if someone offers the correct name. I am NOT saying you are doing this but that this happens in the culture.

There IS a meaningful distinction, legally and linguistically.

That does NOT mean that unwanted touching is OK regardless of where it occurs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 04:49 PM
Response to Reply #11
177. I've given up.
I think we've reached the point where the word 'vagina' might as well be a generic blanket term equivalent to 'female genitalia.' Everyone knows what she means. I know plenty of people will disagree with me, but the English language is dynamic, it might as well go into the dictionary as a vernacular definition. Doesn't seem worth the semantic battle anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #3
18. That's what I was inferring with my post...
Which seems to have been totally blown out of proportion.

Nowhere have I ever said the current standards of passenger security checks are acceptable to me... but I should somehow be ashamed. What a world. Say four words and be lambasted for saying ten.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
REP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #18
42. I think you meant "imply"
One could infer from 'touched my vagina' that she used a word many use to describe external female genitalia. One could try to imply she was not wearing underwear, but that would be silly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #42
51. You are right...
Mea culpa. I am more upset with DU right now than I have been in a very long time. I'm being lambasted for things I never, ever said, and that hurts more than I can say. I'm highly upset and I clearly chose the wrong word. The funny thing is I went through that mental exercise before using the word and then chose the incorrect word anyway... I'm just terribly hurt and sad right now to be so thoroughly fucked over by some I considered friends because they chose to read into what I said with something I have never, ever said.

This is so painful... you have no idea. To be wrongfully accused of such horrible action is just more than I can take.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doremus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #51
64. But which is it?
You either think current TSA pat down procedures are over the line or not.

This statement leads one to think you're fine with them:

"If there are areas on a woman's body that should not be included in a pat down, how long would it be before poor destitute women are paid to smuggle things onto planes by placing them in those areas?"

In fact, this statement makes it appear you'd be in agreement if they made women get even more invasive scanning before flying.

Just asking for clarification. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #64
66. It's a pick your poison situation...
If you want to fly, pick your poison. Note the word 'poison.' The actions of being scanned or patted down are horrible. How else will someone get on a plane today without one or the other?

I'm merely working within the facts. I'm not condoning the action.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gormy Cuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:05 PM
Response to Reply #66
91. How? By flying out of a terminal where the scanners aren't installed yet.
If you're lucky enough to go through one of the many terminals without one you simply walk through the magnetometer, just like the old days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #66
105. Get on a private plane instead.
There's always another option.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doremus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #66
118. But I think you are, despite the denials.
"If there are areas on a woman's body that should not be included in a pat down, how long would it be before poor destitute women are paid to smuggle things onto planes by placing them in those areas?"

You're saying that we'd better check women's bodies because if we don't they will be inclined, through bribery if nothing else, to place dangerous objects in/on their body.

While you're having your internal struggle between "body pat-downs are too intrusive" vs. "pat-downs make us secure when we fly," here's something to mull over: We ladies aren't (yet) subjected to gynecological exams prior to flight. Just think of all the explosive stuff we could fit up there!

Enjoy your next flight. :hi:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
REP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #51
85. Just funny - joking about use of an inexact word, then making a worse error
Using "vagina" to mean the external female genital area is inexact but common and understood. Mixing up "infer" and "imply" is a common error of another sort. And while you may understand "crotch" to mean your external genital area, it could also just mean where the inner thigh joins the body, but not the labia majora.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #85
139. Most women don't use the terms 'vulva' or 'labia'; SO WHAT? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
REP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 02:01 AM
Response to Reply #139
144. I wasn't the one complaining about the use of 'vagina;' I was replying to someone who was
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 02:15 AM
Response to Reply #144
146. I see that now. *smile*
There are many replies off replies that it gets confusing. So I was probably replying to the whole issue of nomenclature.

I think many if not most women have heard labia , vulva, et cetera, but aren't comfortable with the terminology which sounds like 'anatomy class'. And the way we tend to think is that it's all little puffy tissue which surrounds the sensitive core va-jay-jay. ;)

I think sometimes the ordinary people have an common sense intuition that the radiation scanners aren't as safe as claimed. We all know government lies to us. And those Rapiscans are supposed to make big profits for the investors. I suspect the big shots have extensive plans for putting them in courthouses and other public places.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TK421 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #42
62. regardless, no one else's hands belong in that area uninvited...no one n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #62
67. That is the point...
Today, if you choose to fly, you must choose to either be scanned, or patted down. If you refuse the scan, you are inviting the patdown... which is very thorough according to the numerous reports seen here on DU and in the news. Yes, no one's hands belong ANYWHERE on any other human being UNLESS INVITED. If it's an either/or situation, and you refuse either, you are inviting or.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TK421 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #67
68. Damned if you do, damned if you don't, and we are even patting down children
this fucking world has gone completely fucking insane...batshit

I'm no fan of flying, mind you; we all have a choice in the matter for the most part, but sometimes a person is in a position where their jobs-livelihood demand it. The shitheads who institute this kind of invasive, dare I say perverse behavior know it,too. They KNOW they have your back to the wall

THAT is what pisses me off the most
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
REP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:23 PM
Response to Reply #62
73. Oh, I completely agree
It does no good and is just gross.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TK421 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #73
75. The whole vagina, vulva thing is really fucking irritating....folks, that is just like
saying "I felt your balls, but not your dick, so what's the problem"?

really....what the fuck..what-the-fuck
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
REP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #75
82. I understand "vagina" is used to mean labia, vulva, pudendum, etc - I think most people do, really
Not using absolutely correct anatomical terms when describing an intrusive pat-down is perfectly understandable. Most reasonable people know what she meant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TK421 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:51 PM
Response to Reply #82
83. I know, and it is still your private area...that is what I find irritating
Edited on Thu Apr-28-11 07:52 PM by TK421
there is a certain "zone" to everyones bodies that is off limits to anyone else who doesn't have permission to access that "zone"

edited for drunken grammar
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
REP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #83
88. We agree; additionally, mocking her for her word choice is assinine
In case I wasn't clear: these pat-downs are useless and achieve nothing. They should not be done. Plus mocking this woman because she used "vagina" is stupid and focusing on the wrong thing - not what word she used, but that these searches are done at all.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TK421 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #88
97. absolutely...and yeah, you were clear :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #83
89. The most depressing part is seeing DUers here defending such actions...
It appears that many of us are as cowardly as RWers when it comes to "terrorism" even if it has been demonstrably shown that the risks are not being addressed in any effective way (or that the more blatant risks are not being addressed at all).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TK421 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #89
98. You say cowardly, and I'll raise you one....I say accepting of it
now THAT is much more frightening to me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shanti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #89
99. whoever it is
saying this, i cannot see, as they are on my ignore list....for good reason, apparently!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #3
31. I'm glad others notice this also
thanks for the post
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #3
32. HEY! I drive a Volva ... it has a spoiler too
that is so cool
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue-Jay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #3
87. Who cares what kind of car she drives?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L0oniX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
4. I'm glad that the TSA is protecting us from exploding vagina's.
:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #4
108. Similar attacks have already happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L0oniX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #108
157. While over 40,000 people die every year I think there are other more likely ways to die.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:32 PM
Response to Original message
5. There is only one way to stop this, and that is for the American public to stop flying
If the airline industry gets hit hard in the bottom line, they will pull the strings of their political servants in order to get TSA to ease up.

Nothing else will work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
formercia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. That's what the boys want.
Isolate the little people. Privatize publicly-owned Air Terminals. and make air travel the domain of the rich, like it was in the beginning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #7
17. No, I don't think so
Privatized airports would put the big airlines out of business, and no major corporation wants that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #7
27. Loosen your tin foil hat.
Seriously, the fact that this idea makes absolutely no sense hasn't stopped people from claiming it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chbrad2 Donating Member (14 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Travelers need to ease up!
There are no health concerns from these full body scanners. You face more harm walking down the jet way and inhaling fumes from jet fuel. Take the body scan, it's easier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #8
16. 'Scuse me, have you worked with back scatter scanners?
I have, and frankly you couldn't pay me enough to go through one. Don't believe me, go out and get yourself one of those one-off dosimeters and have it pinned on you when you go through. Send it in, and have a fainting couch ready when you get the results back.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #16
114. Don't forget to *send* the dosimeter off between the checkpoint and the plane.
The flight is going to bathe you in considerable amounts of radiation as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_X-ray#Health_e...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chbrad2 Donating Member (14 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-30-11 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #16
180. Right on
Yeah I know that there is radiation associated with the scanners, but we live in a world full of radiation. From dentists to the sun the stuff is everywhere. So is cancer. As a smoker and drinker I therefore negate any protest I have against a body scanner. I should remember some people actually care about getting dosed with radiation. My bad.

p.s. I probably wouldn't need that fainting couch as I usually have a decent buzz on going through security. Hey, it's one way to cope.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sherman A1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #5
15. Agreed
I have flown once since 2001. That was for a family emergency, I will not board an aircraft for any other reason in the future, until this nonsense ends.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #5
28. Exactly right.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: don't like it, don't fly. Airlines operate on a pretty thin margin--if even a small percentage of their travelers stopped flying, it would change their tune very fast.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #5
36. i am there. i refuse. i have turned down trips and driven across country
instead of flying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibDemAlways Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-01-11 12:43 AM
Response to Reply #5
188. My daughter gave up the opportunity for a scholarship at an
out of state university next year in part because she didn't want to be subjected to nudie scans or pat-downs as a condition of traveling to the campus. If more people made the decision to avoid flying, this crap would be quickly stopped. As long as people are willing to put up with it, however, it will continue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bad Thoughts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:39 PM
Response to Original message
9. Aren't Miss USA winners Trump employees?
It could just be coincidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #9
19. Are the children who have been molested by the TSA Trump
Edited on Thu Apr-28-11 05:57 PM by sabrina 1
employees? I am not a Trump employee and if what happened to her ever happens to me I will join the growing number of Americans who are suing them. That woman was assaulted, for MONEY. As a woman I can so relate to her distress about what happened to her. It is shameful that people on the left would condone this kind of thing. This is all about money. Do you seriously believe that this government cares one bit about its citizens? A government that allows tens of thousands to die for lacke of adequate healthcare every year??

This is so that Chertoff, the man who was responsible for the failure of Katrina, can profit from fear, and Giuliani who failed to protect NYC from an attack everyone knew was likely and Cheney, all of whom were all over TV promoting these tactics in order to profit from the Rapiscans, because that's their business, war and fear and torture and death and blood money. The irony of these people, all of whom have CAUSED the deaths of Americans, are now in the 'security business'. And people are falling for it, which makes it even more bizarre. For six years civil liberties groups kept these grotesque and aptly named Rapiscans out of our lives.

It's shameful to see how even people on the left, are helping them to profit from fear. 'Home of the Brave'! What a laugh that is.

If Trump had taken on this issue, rather than the stupid birther issue, he would have had a huge amount of support. But he didn't, did he?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bad Thoughts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #19
44. It's a question of politicization
Yes, this may be a genuine instance where this woman was mistreated and have a genuine grievance. However, I will be suspicious if it seems that someone is preparing to tee-off on this issue. Haven't a few already made this not about the government overreaching but the black usurper reaching in everyone's pants?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #44
54. Oh bullshit, sorry to be so blunt.
This is about our civil liberties and is a battle that has been fought ever since these grotesque machines were invented, successfully I might add.

I am very suspicious of all those on the left who were completely opposed to these tactics, and they weren't even this bad back then, under Bush and are now willing to sell all of our rights out for political reasons.

Obama is WRONG to have overturned six years of victories against these violations of our rights, very very wrong. Bush was wrong to try. Are you saying that something that it was agreed upon as a violation of people's rights under Bush, becomes okay now just because a Democrat is in the WH? This truly is outrageous. I have been against this creeping fascism since Bush took office. I haven't changed my opinion. Are you saying I should now, because, why??

What is happening to people at these airports is HORRENDOUS and if any stranger puts their filthy hands on me or anyone I care about, particularly children I am responsible for, I guarantee I will be reporting it as the crime it is and then suing whoever is responsible. I am disgusted to see this kind of criminal behavior being defended here on this board. I never thought that could happen.

This president has condoned this abuse. And I don't care what letter he has after his name. Until his children and wife and sister are subjected to the same treatment, which they SHOULD BE if we truly live in a democracy, and which he admits they ARE NOT, how nice for them, he has no right to tell anyone else what they should be willing to 'sacrifice' for their country.

All leaders should be willing to subject their own families to what this woman and so many, many others have been subjected to, or they need to END IT. If this is to continue, I want to see politicians and their families be subjected to the same abuse as everyone else is. They are NOT special. And I guarantee that if what happened to that woman happened to Michelle Obama, or Chertoff's wife, or Giuliani's daughter, it would be ended in a flash.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bad Thoughts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #54
58. You're naive, sorry to be blunt
Spouse abuse is serious, but people exploited it to make their petty arguments about euthanasia and the sanctity of life (see Terry Schaivo).

Human trafficking is abominable, but people used the sight of it to discredit outreach to poor minorities and reproductive services.

If you don't think someone is looking for a way to exploit this, just wait.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 11:52 PM
Response to Reply #58
124. Did you read what has been to little children? To men,
women on the pretext of 'protection'?? You are the one who is naive. There is no need to exploit anything when the actions being taken by the government against its own citizens are such blatant abuses of civil liberties and decency and personal privacy.

Partisan politics is going destroy this democracy. I am shocked that you would condone this kind of treatment of any woman, any person just because you are afraid it might be 'exploited'?? If someone touched your mother in this way, would you tolerate it for a second? How about your six year old daughter? This goes way, way beyond politics. At least it does for most decent human beings. These machines were rejected by the European Union, not only because of the clear potential for gross abuses, but because they contribute NOTHING to stopping terrorism. Nor do those profiting from them, believe they do.

These are Chertoff's and Giuliani's and Cheney's and Bush's ideas. And the president we elected to stop these abuses, instead was the one to finally overcome all the work done during the Bush years to subject Americans to the abuse even Bush was not able to get done.

I don't care what letter is after their names, when Obama sends his wife and daughters through these machines, or subjects them to some stranger feeling their private parts, THEN he can claim he believes they are a good idea.

I could not be more disappointed in a politician than I am in this president. And it's shameful that some people on the left are willing to turn a blind eye to the very same things they slammed Bush for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:54 PM
Response to Original message
20. I think anyone planning to ask for a pat-down should wear slacks.
Edited on Thu Apr-28-11 05:56 PM by pnwmom
Vaginas can't be touched through underwear and slacks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. So we should just now resign ourselves to the abuse,
And dress for it?

I don't think so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #24
34. I didn't say you couldn't protest as well.
But in the meantime it makes sense to dress accordingly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
U4ikLefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:18 AM
Response to Reply #34
131. ...or the gov't could not have flyers molested. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notadmblnd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #20
53. I wonder what happens when a woman is patted down and she wearing a maxi pad?
does she have to strip down and show them what it is?

I refuse to fly, but I think if forced to, I would strip down naked and do a spread eagle while bending over and touching the floor with my fingertips. Right in front of god and everyone- setting off a puke fest the likes of which, has never before been seen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #53
59. The police would do a strip search...
And a cavity search if they felt it was necessary.

I fly only when absolutely necessary... and no one touches me! Scan away, but keep your hands to yourself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #59
65. Why would they do that? My daughter had a pat-down while wearing a pad
and it didn't cause any problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #65
70. Then WTF is the point of these patdowns anyway?
They search people concentrating on their crotch because that's where underpants bomber hid the bomb, feel a pad and do nothing about it? WTF is the point?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #70
74. Would a pad feel like a bomb? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #74
77. Plastic explosives can be molded into any shape.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 11:33 PM
Response to Reply #77
121. What I've read is that some women who were wearing pads
were required to have a patdown after the pad showed up in the scanner. But I've never read of someone who had any other kind of search because they were wearing a pad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #121
134. How disgusting, that people are even talking about this.
And how quickly it happened, as soon as we elected a Democrat. This battle was successfully fought all during the Bush administration by the LEFT who were OUTRAGED just by the Rapiscans. They weren't even talking about Janet Napolitano's vile 'enhanced patdowns'. Notice how the 'left' adapted the Bush torture language also.

We do not deserve democracy. When people are discussing this as if it deserved anything other than complete rejection without ANY discussion, this country is totally lost. It has lost its way completely.

I want to see this happen to those who put these policies in place. I want to see Michelle Obama receive the same treatment this woman was subjected to. I want to see the children of those who support this, molested the same way other people's children have been molested.

But no president, no member of Congress is going to tell me to subject MYSELF or anyone I love, child, sister, friend, mother to these abuses and then boast that neither they nor their families will ever have to do so. They SHOULD set an example and take their families through the same process, IF they believe it is necessary. But they don't, they know it is not, they know it is for profit and that's all that matters. The politics of fear, trading and betting on it and using the American public for profit.

I am thoroughly disgusted with this party that I thought was the answer to put an end this insanity. And I have lost all respect for this president who condones these disgusting abuses of women and children.

But then, I suppose if you can order the assassination of an American citizen, or use Drones to slaughter men women and other people's children, why would anyone expect you to care about other people's wives, daughters and loved ones being abused right here in this country?? I guess you have to be a decent human being to begin with to find these actions abhorrent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Matariki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #20
111. She had JEANS on.
Your posts are generally sensible, but this one is way off the mark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #111
123. If she was wearing jeans, how could they
touch her in the vagina? The vagina is the internal passage.

All they could do is touch her on the crotch area of the pants.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 02:04 AM
Response to Reply #123
145. I don't think there is anyone here who doesn't understand what
she meant. Even if she didn't use a proper scientific name for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 02:53 AM
Response to Reply #145
148. I guess after having gone through countless exams and the birth
Edited on Fri Apr-29-11 02:56 AM by pnwmom
of three children, a brief touch by another woman through my pants doesn't seem like that big of a deal. My experience with TSA people so far is that the women are quick and matter-of-fact -- not mean and intrusive.

But I realize that each woman will react differently. If I felt like this young woman, I would opt for the scanner instead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Matariki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #148
168. It always amazes me that people can so completely fail to put themselves in another's place.
The attitude of "it doesn't bother me, why should it bother her" is really very self centered and lacking in empathy. Furthermore, you have no idea whether your assertion that it was a "brief touch" is true or not. Not that it matters - no one should have to be forced to submit to ANY touching of their privates just to travel. You have no idea how traumatizing that may be for some people. And this OBVIOUSLY bothers a lot of people, so perhaps you should stop acting like they are all wrong because "you've had countless exams and births".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Matariki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #123
166. I think you are unnecessarily nitpicking words. The point remains.
Certainly you would find it uncomfortable and invasive to have a stranger repeatedly pressing on your crotch, no matter what your are wearing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
22. Such a high profile person should denounce Homeland Security policies n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngryOldDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:00 PM
Response to Original message
23. I've been convinced for a while that some of these people think...
...this job gives them license and authority just to cop a feel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shanti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #23
104. lots of jobs
that allow that kind of freedom, but the TSA is different. it's top-sanctioned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueIris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 06:55 PM
Response to Original message
56. Whiny child. Doesn't she understand being molested is necessary to protect her from terra?
Edited on Thu Apr-28-11 06:55 PM by BlueIris
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TK421 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 07:19 PM
Response to Original message
69. I'm really beginning to think some of these agents get off on this shit n.t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sen. Walter Sobchak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #69
107. ya think? other than the opportunity to steal iShit...
why else would you take the job?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TK421 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #107
116. from what I'm told, the pay is pretty decent
I don't know how true that is, but that is what I've heard
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:10 PM
Response to Original message
93. This thread is worthless without pictures....

Here's one from Ms. Susie Castillo's website.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:13 PM
Response to Original message
94. This is a good reason not to fly w/your kids these days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:20 PM
Response to Original message
100. Next ... strip searches -- !! Body cavity searches -- !!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Matariki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:31 PM
Response to Original message
110. Someone should do a study on whether young women are being disproportionately targeted
for this treatment. I'd lay odds on it being so...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Johnny Morales Donating Member (76 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
112. Clearly it's a case of sex-crazed Lesbians being paid to run amock at our nation's airports
My question is how long will it be before the Repugnicans try to turn talk about the issue that way?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
115. Reading what she wrote, yes, a "pat down" includes "grazing private area".I don't think it is right
so anyone who accuses me of that is wrong. I don't see the need to do this intensive of a pat down. However, like a police pat down, yes, your "private area" will be part of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nailzberg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 10:19 PM
Response to Original message
119. Pics or it didn't happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demmiblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #119
120. You really want to see a woman in a situation that is obviously distressing to her? Creepy. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #120
133. Many males think it's 'funny'.
I'm beginning to think intimidation and submission to penny ante 'authority figures' is the primary goal of these time consuming humiliating 'searches.'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 03:03 AM
Response to Reply #133
149. Perverts, these tactics were thought up by perverts, just like the
torture policies in Abu Ghraib were thought up by sick perverts. Just like the Nazis, and don't anyone bother me with the ridiculous Godwin's law nonsense, if the shoe fits as far as I am concerned.

I read an article once about Nazi Germany and how perverted sex became the norm during their reign of terror. Pornography was hugely popular with women always on the receiving end of abuse. Forced sex, was apparently, very popular during that period of time.

I firmly believe that Rumsfeld, known to have sat in on at least one torture session in Guantanamo, and Cheney and Bush are sick, evil perverts who got off on torture mainly because they are cowards and probably inadequate in other ways also.

However, these enhanced, sick, abusive, gross, pat downs only came about over the past year and many people believe that they were put in place to force people to use the machines, which many had been refusing to go through. It's a win-win for profiteering perverts. They get to 'push' their product (Rapiscans) by using perverted tactics on the public to force them into using their product.

This is truly becoming a really sick society.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Paradoxical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:32 AM
Response to Reply #119
137. I kind of feel like slapping you with a book written by Judith Butler.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #119
155. sexual molestation turns you on? a woman crying excites you? nt
Edited on Fri Apr-29-11 09:58 AM by seabeyond
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crickets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 03:10 AM
Response to Original message
150. I'd rather fly out of Tel Aviv than Atlanta right now.
Edited on Fri Apr-29-11 03:17 AM by crickets
A Story We Somehow Knew Was Coming (TSA Dept) - Full Body Scanners are a Waste of Money, Isreali Expert Says
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/04/a... /
"I don't know why everybody is running to buy these expensive and useless machines. I can overcome the body scanners with enough explosives to bring down a Boeing 747," Rafi Sela told parliamentarians probing the state of aviation safety in Canada.

"That's why we haven't put them in our airport," Sela said, referring to Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion International Airport, which has some of the toughest security in the world.
Hijackings and plane bombs are not new. Governments have dealt with the problem pretty well before now by using intelligence and keeping an eye on the people they thought might actually be a risk. That doesn't mean they've always been successful, obviously, but it is a hallmark of a truly free society that you do your damnedest to safeguard your people without treating the citizenry exactly the way you would the criminals you wish to catch.

An attack like Sept 11th happened partly because the intelligence apparatus hamstrung itself with interdepartmental rivalries and largely because the people at the top ignored the warnings that got through, warnings which might have been enough to prevent the attacks if they'd bothered to listen. Without having to remove shoes or virtually drop trou, there are at least two things we could do as a country to be safe: beef up intelligence abilities to augment the pre-Sept 11 security that worked just fine aside from a rather lax rule on long sharp things, and most important, stop being international assholes.

Broad Coalition Urges Homeland Security to Suspend Airport Body Scanner Program
http://bordc.org/press/pr-2010-04-21.php
The groups contend that body scanner systems are "uniquely intrusive" and subject all travelers to an unreasonable search in violation of the Fourth Amendment. They also say that the Department of Homeland Security failed to comply with the Privacy Act when it did not inform the public about this new system that would collect personal information. And they say that the Chief Privacy Officer violated the law when she approved the program.

Chip Pitts, President of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee (BORDC), said “The program should be suspended. The body scanners don't work for the purposes claimed and actually harm true security by diverting scarce resources and offending allies and populations critical for genuine intelligence."

Shahid Buttar, executive director of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, said, “The government's use of invasive imaging technologies strays beyond both the limits of what is constitutionally permissible and the agencies' representation of their own capacity.”
As for the gropedown, it's far worse than any random "papers, please!" nightmare that might be used to stifle free travel. All I can say is, sabrina 1 is my heroine for expressing every ounce of my rage and frustration, both toward the people who've perpetrated this travesty as well as those willing to put up with it, far more eloquently than I ever could.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 09:49 AM
Response to Original message
153. Abolish the TSA.
Let the FAA make security rules, again.

Passengers weren't randomly chosen to be groped when the FAA was in charge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 10:08 AM
Response to Original message
156. I know I'll be flamed or put on ignore but...
after watching her video, it seems a bit contrived to me... She purposely went into the "pat down" line after refusing to go into the scanner line. She drew unnecessary attention to herself, which made her look suspicious and probably caused the TSA woman to do the pat down by the book just to be on the safe side.

The truth is, 99% of the TSA people couldn't care less about her image on the scanner screen. They are tired--working low wage jobs to get by while being verbally abused by passengers. I'm sure the TSA woman didn't want to pat her down anymore than she wanted to be pat down.

Also, regarding Susie's reasons for going to the pat down line--the machines have been tested thoroughly and are safe for everyone, including pregnant woman.

I think Susie is doing this for attention. She had her camera on ready to film. It would have been nice if she could have had at least one witness corroborate her interpretation of the events. If it turns out the TSA woman went above and beyond and felt her up for pleasure then I will be back to apologize.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StarburstClock Donating Member (583 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #156
160. yes you are correct
Good prediction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #156
161. No flames here. For you or Juniper. If you are getting pat down, yes, your "private area" gets
"grazed".

Your assessment could be right on.

However, I also do not see the need for these enhanced pat downs.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #161
163. Exactly. I don't see the need for pat downs either
I don't think we're made safer by them, but claiming to be molested, etc. is not helpful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-30-11 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #156
182. so she deserved it for not taking the x-ray?
WELL that's the conservative position.

and you sound like an expert in radiation. can you tell me the localized dose to the skin (not the whole body dose)?

also can you explain the difference between the amount and method of exposure (think physiology) between the scanners and what you get being on an airplane?

if you can't answer the questions correctly, nobody should listen to you.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-30-11 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #182
184. deserved what? a standard pat down?
Also, if you trust the govt on vaccines, why not trust them on scanner radiation doses? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-30-11 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #184
185. i trust science and doctors on vaccines
i don't trust the government alone on them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
164. Hate to nit-pick, but the word I think she wants is 'vulva'
Isn't the vagina supposed to be the whole shebang (no pun intended)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stockholmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
165. so so many sheep and shill comments on this thread, shame on the anti-liberty posters
:argh:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #165
167. Where? Link to one that says this is ok. Link or quit the insults
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stockholmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-30-11 03:28 AM
Response to Reply #167
178. do not patronize me, please, I know you have read the strand, starting w/ reply #1
:thumbsdown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-01-11 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #178
186. I do not think that word means what you think it means. You can read minds? wow.
Edited on Sun May-01-11 12:16 AM by uppityperson
That wasn't being "patronizing" but "challenging". You made the assertion, prove it or you have nothing to back you up.

"I know you have read the strand, starting w/ reply #1". You can read my mind? Or are you looking over my shoulder? Maybe you have a key stroke thing and are monitoring what I do? Do not assume.

And no, that wasn't "patronizing" either but mocking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamingdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 12:57 PM
Response to Original message
169. Has anyone seen the word "vagina" appear on a newspaper front page over this?
I'd like to see that, would be a first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:03 PM
Response to Original message
171. She said she's been patted down before and it was no problem
But apparently this particular agent was a bit too touchy. I don't blame her, you do feel violated. A while ago I finally agreed to visit a mosque (NOI) with my sister and I had to go thru the patdown which also required you to leave your purse in a separate room until you exit the mosque. :eyes: This patdown was a bit too much for me. I didn't like it at all. It wasn't some quick patting either. I told my sister this will be the first and last time you see me visit this mosque or any mosque. I thought it was ridiculous to do patdowns for church services anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aerows Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
172. Uh...she touched your vagina?
I seriously doubt that she penetrated you. I'm thinking you mean "Vulva". That, I could see, but your vagina?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alp227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
173. oh...this is the Susie Castillo from MTV?
I only just now learned exactly whom that Miss USA is. Interesting...she used to be a host of the old Total Request Live show and a weekend syndicated radio show TRL Latino.

And to the TSA: FUCK YOU! This is all wasteful security theater that only makes things "look" safe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pecwae Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
176. Infuckingcredible
that there are comments on this thread basically saying she deserved it and that she's using the incorrect term. Sometimes I can't believe what I read here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-30-11 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #176
183. Sorry. We know what she meant
I just believe in standard terms
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-30-11 02:09 PM
Response to Original message
181. It would be very difficult to touch a vagina on a clothed body.
The search was probably offensive to her, but she needs to get her anatomy straight. Beauty fades, dumb is forever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-01-11 12:31 AM
Response to Original message
187. I do a lot of travleing for work. Just this past week, I went through
BNA, IAH, BTR, and ATL. I've been through DFW (the airport in question) many times in the past.

I have never found the TSA agents to be anything but professional and polite. Many of them have been very nice and friendly. I find all this "outrage" against TSA agents completely unfounded. The only people I have observed who had any problems with the TSA were the few who gave them problems - and in my observations the TSA agents still acted very professionally.

From my own personal experience, I can honestly say that the TSA is doing a great job!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Jul 28th 2014, 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC