TSA removes security screener for note telling passenger to 'get your freak on'

The Hill ^ | 10/26/11 | Keith Laing

[markomalley]

A Transportation Security Administration airport security worker has been removed from checking baggage because of a note with sexual implications he left for a passenger at Newark's Liberty International Airport.

Jill Filipovic, a New York blogger who is also a lawyer, tweeted Monday that a note was left in her bag — which contained a sex toy, according to reports — that said "get your freak on." The note was written on a TSA notice of inspection form, leading Filipovic to believe it was written by someone at airport security.

TSA said on its blog Tuesday that it had conducted an investigation into the incident and removed the employee that was responsible from duty.

"That individual was immediately removed from screening operations and appropriate disciplinary action has been initiated," the agency wrote.

"The handwritten note was highly inappropriate and unprofessional, and TSA has zero tolerance for this type of behavior."

The TSA blog Tuesday also said the agency had issued an apology to Filipovic, who tweeted a picture of the note.

[dennisw]

She’s a female sexual swashbuckler. She wants to experience the wide variety that is usually the man’s province. Howard Johnson’s 28 flavors aren’t enough. She has hung her shingle out on the internet. If she isn’t doing with women too I’ll eat my hat.

She needs her own TV series, the nymphomaniacs of Manhattan, with the pilot episode being this TSA inspection

[WoofDog123]

Mr Eddd,

Do you feel a person with nothing to hide should not have any objection to a federal or LEO searching them or their home?

Just following a hunch here.

[MrEdd]

Do you feel a person with nothing to hide should not have any objection to a federal or LEO searching them or their home?

Do you have some sort of hunch that search of baggage by customs officials and the like when traveling was not practiced and considered appropriate by the founding fathers?

Are you following some ridiculous “Hunch” that one may not be for customs searches of luggage without also being for any search anywhere?

Should I have a hunch that some people like to practice any sort of sexual licentiousness they please, and the idea they could be ridiculed with no recourse in the event that their behavior comes to light infuriates them?

Could it be that such people desire to infect others with a conspiratorial attitude to mitigate their discomfort should they get caught?

I think my hunch is far, far more warranted than your hunch WoofDog123

[MrEdd]

I do think you're pretty naive if you think a TSA agent who would leave that type of juvenile note is going to exercise a level of restraint that makes the same differentiation that you do.

I think the differentiation I made is natural and doesn't require any sort of special restraint to make whatsoever. In fact, I assert that one has to be pretty far gone in their personal embrace of perversion as normal not to see the difference automatically.

[Joe 6-pack]

"In fact, I assert that one has to be pretty far gone in their personal embrace of perversion as normal not to see the difference automatically."

And I assert that a federal employee charged with inspecting personal baggage would have to be pretty far gone in their personal embrace of perversion to write a note to an anonymous female traveler to the effect of, "get your freak on." Perhaps that fits into your "normal."

[MrEdd]

And I assert that a federal employee charged with inspecting personal baggage would have to be pretty far gone in their personal embrace of perversion to write a note to an anonymous femaleAs if gender were relevant in any way - which in this case it is not travelerTransporting sex toys or other paraphernalia to induce orgasms to the effect of, "get your freak on." Perhaps that fits into your "normal."

I reinserted the factors you personally just tried to leave out, they are relevant with their inclusion they remove any pretense (however slight) of a point you might try to be making.

You twist and turn and twist and turn, but at the end of the day all that happened was that a person transporting pornography had a private joke made at them.

There is not now and never has been any indication that clowning around would have happened at all absent the pornography.

Sorry you personally do not like the idea that carting your porn around subjects you to jokes and that other people are not going to come to your defense.

[Joe 6-pack]

LOL...for somebody who slung accusations of "affected airs" a few posts back, you sure are pretty free with staking out the high moral authority.

I intentionally ommitted the factors you say I, "tried to leave out," because they are irrelevant. At it's core, this is about a TSA agent, empowered and entrusted to inspect private, personal luggage for contraband. Instead of doing their job they took it upon themselves to harass a traveler they are there to ostensibly reassure and protect. That's it. End of story. Any further evaluation beyond that is the twisting and contorting of which you accuse me of.

Keep in mind that a growing number of people in this country find conservative literature, bibles, etc. to be "pornographic," or "offensive." Would you be okay with a TSA agent leaving a personal note mocking a traveler based on their possession of a bible? an Alcoholics Anonymous book? How about a woman that has a tube of KY jelly for medical reasons?

The fact of the matter here is that while I agree with you that a vibrator generally falls in the category of erotica or porn, its ownership is entirely legal, and it's not a banned travel item. That a TSA agent took it upon him or herself to abuse their authority, ridicule and harass the traveler is the issue.

You apparently are in support of the abuse of authority when it complies with your moral perspectives, but you're also sadly ignorant of history to believe that such abuses, if left unchecked will continue to fall in your favor.

[MrEdd]

Instead of

Not anywhere indicated. Once again you are making stuff up and inserting it into the events that actually happened.

Just as you attempt, however clumsily and futilely to dismiss relevant factors.

Rational people admit that when something is pointed out repeatedly to be a causal factor that it is relevant. Denial, at that point is not rational and can not be made to appear so.

Keep in mind that a growing number of people in this country find conservative literature, bibles, etc. to be "pornographic," or "offensive." Would you be okay with a TSA agent leaving a personal note mocking a traveler based on their possession of a bible? an Alcoholics Anonymous book? How about a woman that has a tube of KY jelly for medical reasons?

And here we see where this perversion goes.

Equating pornography with religious material

There are indeed some people who equate erotic material with religious material or pop psychology self help books, but I am not going to join you in becoming one of them. Your apples and bowling balls comparison fails to connect to reality.

You apparently are in support of the abuse of authority when it complies with your moral perspectives, but you're also sadly ignorant of history to believe that such abuses, if left unchecked will continue to fall in your favor.

I assert that response to crude behavior should be proportionate to the offense. In this case, a letter in the personnel file recording the incident in case of future infractions was the most that is warranted. Your personal assertion that one is entitled to call harassment when one's porn is ridiculed fails to find much footing. was it unprofessional? yes. Harassment - no. It did not come unprovoked and the first insertion of titillation was the porn in question.

I am sorry that you and others want a world in which sexual proclivities never have any adverse consequences.

Since you have been trying to make rhetorical motivation alignments that are really a stretch with me, I must point out to you and others that Joe 6-pack, ACT-UP, the stonewall Veterans Association, and Planned Parenthood are in lockstep agreement on that.

Congratulations, you have earned and recieved a retort that is the same in kind and accuracy to the drivel you have been spouting at me.

Enjoy.

[Joe 6-pack]

I don't equate porn with religious materials. In an increasingly secularist society there are many who do, many of them in positions of authority and responsibility. I'm sorry you fail to recognize that fact, and for your sake hope you realize that before it impacts you directly.

"Rational people admit that when something is pointed out repeatedly to be a causal factor that it is relevant."

For such a self-righteous person you sure like to indulge in moral relativism. In your mind what the TSA agent did was fine because he ridiculed somebody you don't like. If he had done the exact same thing to somebody you agreed with your tune would change.

You can deny all you like that it is harassment but leaving an anonymous note in somebody's personal belongings after going through them is harassment. Again, your indulgence in moral relativism and choice to (re)define words to support your argument is very leftist of you, as is your general detachment from reality.

"...Joe 6-pack, ACT-UP, the stonewall Veterans Association, and Planned Parenthood are in lockstep agreement on that."

OK...since it's clear you're seriously deluded (as if that wasn't already obvious) I'm not going to further honor your silliness by responding to it. You have no clue as to my activities in Birthright or other pro-life organizations and activities and to say that I am in lockstep with PP is not only slanderous, offensive, and repugnant, it also shows that you love to indulge in falsehoods of the highest order.