Posted on 06/26/2011 3:39:10 AM PDT by LibWhacker
You are right. I wrote that in anger. What we do need, though, is a loud leader who reminds us to stand up and fight for our freedom that G-d gave us.
That is so, so, so horrible, I’m so sorry.
I had to fly in ‘08 because my uncle had died, but thankfully it was two smaller airports and no radiation scanners in use then. I can’t imagine the emotional pain you were in.
Sometimes we just have to fly, like you said, and the sadistic-ness has most definitely increased. The TSA brainless jackboots are especially happy to see non-affirmative actions in pain or distress.
Caveat: I am retired and can afford the time to drive where ever I need to go.
I flew hundreds of times when I was working. Fortunately, that was before all this intrusive stuff started.
bump
Until the communist is out of the WH and the degenerate sex pervert he put in charge of DHS is collecting her pension.
January 20, 2013.
If that happens again,such as having all your personal items and valuables out of your sight and control loudly and repeatedly call out “SUPERVISOR, SUPERVISOR TO THE CHECKPOINT”
If no one comes or you are told to be quiet demand to see either a manager or the PD as it is TSA policy to be responsible for and keep you in view of your valuables at all times. This is to limit liability on their part. The TSA do not have police powers of arrest only the PD has that.
Explain politely to what ever responsible party shows up TSA responsibilities regarding personal possessions. If the PD shows up be polite but firm and DO NOT GET ABUSIVE OR HAVE A TEMPER TANTRUM. The airport assignment for the local PD is a plum assignment and easy money for the PD. They like to do as little work as possible but know how to handle direct confrontation quite well.
If all else fails exit the holding area on your own and stand in plain view by your personal possessions and refrain from touching them if possible. I guarantee that will draw a response. If there is a cam in the area position your self in view of it. The TSA may be pure lard on the inside but have 6” of armor up front. They know how to deal with direct confrontation like tantrums,screaming,yelling etc.
Some TSA like the power trip but if handled well can be neutralized. DO NOT BE AFRAID OF THEM.
In February I was flying back to LAX from a small regional airport in Arkansas. They only had the walk through xray scanners. I had on a tank top (no bra) with a pull over sweatshirt over it. When I was ready to walk through the scanner the TSA gal asked me to take off my sweatshirt and I politely said no. She motioned me to come on through. Once I got through she told me they were going to do a pat down ( I knew it was because I refused to take off the sweatshirt). I told her no, they were not going to pat me down and quite the polite argument ensued. Finally she just patted down my top back, under my arms, and neck area.
I got lucky because it was a small regional airport. Had it been LAX I probably would have wound up in jail. Lol
This TSA is a direct result of pissing on the warnings of the Founders.
A populace that gave algore more votes than Bush, elected Clinton twice, put a communist Pelosi in as SOTH in 2006 and a ommunist named Hussin in the WH in 2008 has clearly demonstrated that this doesn't get solved at the ballot box
There was a REASON the "right" to vote wasn't put in the Constitution.
The Founders specifically warned against enfranchising women, imbeciles, those under 21, and non freeholders, and for the first 150 years of this Republic these groups did not vote.
After 4 Constitutional Amendments and Motor Voter, these are the groups that vote for democrats and will continue to do so.
The final nail will be immigration reform, and then its over.
John Adams to James Sullivan on women, the poor, and voting rights
May 26, 1776
[Adams explains why women, children, and the poor are excluded from the vote. — TGW]
It is certain in theory, that the only moral foundation of government is the consent of the people. But to what an extent shall we carry this principle? Shall we say, that every individual of the community, old and young, male and female, as well as rich and poor, must consent, expressly, to every act of legislation? No, you will say. This is impossible. How then does the right arise in the majority to govern the minority, against their will? Whence arises the right of the men to govern women, without their consent? Whence the right of the old to bind the young, without theirs?
But let us first suppose, that the whole community of every age, rank, sex, and condition, has a right to vote. This community, is assembled—a motion is made and carried by a majority of one voice. The minority will not agree to this. Whence arises the right of the majority to govern, and the obligation of the minority to obey? from necessity, you will say, because there can be no other rule.
But why exclude women? You will say, because their delicacy renders them unfit for practice and experience, in the great business of life, and the hardy enterprises of war, as well as the arduous cares of state.
Besides, their attention is so much engaged with the necessary nurture of their children, that nature has made them fittest for domestic cares. And children have not judgment or will of their own. True. But will not these reasons apply to others?
Is it not equally true, that men in general in every society, who are wholly destitute of property, are also too little acquainted with public affairs to form a right judgment, and too dependent upon other men to have a will of their own? If this is a fact, if you give to every man, who has no property, a vote, will you not make a fine encouraging provision for corruption by your fundamental law?
Such is the frailty of the human heart, that very few men, who have no property, have any judgment of their own. They talk and vote as they are directed by some man of property, who has attached their minds to his interest…
I should think that wisdom and policy would dictate in these times, to be very cautious of making alterations. Our people have never been very rigid in scrutinizing into the qualifications of voters, and I presume they will not now begin to be so. But I would not advise them to make any alteration in the laws, at present, respecting the qualifications of voters.
Your idea, that those laws, which affect the lives and personal liberty of all, or which inflict corporal punishment, affect those, who are not qualified to vote, as well as those who are, is just. But, so they do women, as well as men, children as well as adults.
What reason should there be, for excluding a man of twenty years, Eleven months and twenty-seven days old, from a vote when you admit one, who is twenty one? The reason is, you must fix upon some period in life, when the understanding and will of men in general is fit to be trusted by the public. Will not the same reason justify the state in fixing upon some certain quantity of property, as a qualification.
The same reasoning, which will induce you to admit all men, who have no property, to vote, with those who have, for those laws, which affect the person will prove that you ought to admit women and children: for generally speaking, women and children, have as good judgment, and as independent minds as those men who are wholly destitute of property: these last being to all intents and purposes as much dependent upon others, who will please to feed, clothe, and employ them, as women are upon their husbands, or children on their parents…
Society can be governed only by general rules. Government cannot accommodate itself to every particular case, as it happens, nor to the circumstances of particular persons. It must establish general, comprehensive regulations for cases and persons. The only question is, which general rule, will accommodate most cases and most persons.
Depend upon it, sir, it is dangerous to open so fruitful a source of controversy and altercation, as would be opened by attempting to alter the qualifications of voters. There will be no end of it. New claims will arise. Women will demand a vote. Lads from 12 to 21 will think their rights not enough attended to, and every man, who has not a farthing, will demand an equal voice with any other in all acts of state.
It tends to confound and destroy all distinctions, and prostrate all ranks, to one common level.
Until the communist is out of the WH is deported back to the country of which is he is a citizen and the degenerate sex pervert he put in charge of DHS is serving her sentence in federal prison.
There, fixed it.
This is downright intentionally evil.
You can see how this mob will “progress” to deal with controlling health care and population numbers. They have no have no respect for human beings. We are cattle to them. They will give the Nazis a run for their money before this time of their rule is over.
That is my one experience with the TSA and it was great fun.
The time for saying no seems to have passed. If everyone had just sat down in the tyrannical line, or gone on strike, back when this began nearly 10 years ago, we might have had a chance. Or in November when it began surfacing about Chertoff's radioactive CAT-Scan scanners in almost every airport. But, the sheep always go back to sleep.
And now, TSA is showing up at train stations, bus stations, and soon, malls.
This Koshetz guy needs to swing from a tree. This has to end.
ML/NJ
Thank you, G.W. Bush, for the TSA!
BTW, I voted for Mr. Bush TWO times. But he should have read up on Ben Franklin’s advice before he pushed that one through.
President Palin ought to clean out “the dirty diapers” throughout that agency out first thing when she’s inaugurated in January 2013.
Just sayin’...
It is disgusting how they treat people who are obviously not a threat like this lady or yourself.
In your case, crying can be as reflexive and uncontrollable as hiccups. How dare they demand you stop. What could be their reasoning? Did they think you would be less of a threat if you didn't cry?
Political correctness is a disease, and it is killing us as a nation. We are losing our freedom and individuality. They want us to be a nation of unemotional robots that say "yes master" like slaves as we do what we are told.
no....
BECAUSE WE LET THEM.
NAIL. HEAD.
The thing that gets me is that this wasn’t at work. These jackboots theoretically work for us — what right do they have to demand someone stop showing emotion? Gearing us up for the gulags? I spit on their tyranny.
Why don’t they just implant us with robot chips and be done with it....
It's not up to that person.
It's up to us. If we continue to let it happen we deserve everything they dish upon us.
Either we hang together or we hang seperately. Simple as that.
Threatened to arrest you for crying? That’s yet another parallel between the TSA and the Nazis. In the 1930s, the Nazis, in at least the region my family was from, would routinely arrest kill people who cried around them. The stated reason was that crying showed dislike of the Nazis or sympathy to the partisans.
I heard these stories first hand, years ago, from the holocaust survivors in my family. Now, I’ve just heard a similar story again, from you. Makes one think, it does.
From what I have read, Muslims are exempt from searches because of their religion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.