Posted on 11/20/2010 7:14:06 PM PST by kara37
TSA strip searches young boy.
Yes, isn't it ridiculous that some people here think that terrorism is a threat and that terrorists can be ruthless creatures who will use innocents to carry their materials through security or even to detonate them?
I, for one, want to be sure to make it clear to terrorists that we will not check certain people too carefully. We shouldn't make it so difficult on these hijackers/bombers--I mean, they're going to have a rough day as it is, martyring themselves...why try to stop them? </sarc>
After seeing that video the first words out of my mouth were “This country is done” what could that little boy have been carrying that was considered a threat..I am just at a loss for words, how Muslims can basically search themselves and not have to go through this nonsense but the TSA finds it necessary to STRIP SEARCH, basically molest him in front of everyone, and for what, what was he carrying, a knife, a gun, NOTHING, he was carrying nothing. This is what happens when people elect a Marxist bastard as their leader
The Israeli model wouldn't be supported by many...the questions are too invasive and we'd end up with a zillion lawsuits...plus their multi-layered model is impossible to implement here, what with our much larger and more diverse nation.
And remember, Richard Reid made it onto an El Al plane prior to the flight on which he was caught with the shoe bomb.
So I'm glad you're pointing out that it's "just one suggestion." Too many have no clue what the El Al model entails, nor do they consider it's not a silver bullet.
Shhh... you’re ruining their fun with those awful cold hard facts. :-)
They probably videotaped it and sent the tape to Senator Al Franken’s office at his request.
He looked to be about 6. At that age even a boy will sometimes feel "naked" without his shirt. It takes some serious convincing sometimes for my son to run around on a hot day without his shirt. It's the age when they first start realizing they need to have clothes on. They can be very modest. This may have been traumatic for him being in public and having to remove his shirt.
Okay, Gondring. Which one of your children shall go first?
Courtesy ping to 444Flyer for the image of the pedophile TSA agent. Thanks 444Flyer!
I just had an idea. If one airline would insist on special gates and publicly stand that they will be using the El Al style behavior profiling only, and eschewing this useless invasive searching and scanning (they can scan the luggage), that airline would get EVERYONE’S business. (And then all airlines will want to do it.)
Are the airlines still “free” enough to do such a thing? I am thinking of airlines that have a more individual bent like Jet Blue. Does Obama have too strong a hold over their right to conduct business? Can they get around the airport security somehow??
Perhaps you aren't aware who sits on the Homeland Security Board? It was reported that 5 Muslims are currently on the board. And CAIR's orders are adhered to. Oh, and dogs are offensive to Muslims - get it?
Which is why you see things like this -
a muslim woman - who could go through WITHOUT the screening or the pat down - molests an elderly nun.
We are taking orders from the enemy. How they must be laughing.
The nude scanners accomplish exactly the same thing as a strip search, so what’s the difference, other than the pat downs are worse because of the touching? We are being attacked at a very fundamental level here. The taboo against genital touching, except as a matter of either medical or parental care, or as erotic contact, is very strong and very old. In free, western cultures, the only people who experience genital contact outside of those categories are people who 1) have knowingly and voluntarily surrendered their physical privacy (consent) for purposes of employment, etc., 2) have involuntarily forfeited certain rights through voluntary criminal acts (forfeiture), or 3) are the victims of nonconsensual sexual assault.
TSA groping is nonconsensual, even with the appearance of consent, because consent given under severe duress is no consent at all. Therefore, as the genital touching is clearly unwanted, and is irresistibly perceived as sexual, it is classic sexual assault, even if the father, in his rage at the situation, makes an angry gesture of submission; the very anger of the response makes it a faux submission, a protest arguably designed to appeal to the conscience of the attacker.
Such rage is well founded. Citizens have a sovereign constitutional right both to travel (and by extension the means of travel) and to protect the privacy of their persons. If Patrick Henry is right, even the threat of death does not supersede those rights; they are the very essence of our liberty. Furthermore, there are ways to do this that are not geared toward low capacity employees doing mass produced security theatre, but rather, like Israel, use sophisticated pattern recognition and intel gathering techniques to effect genuine safety without breaching the ancient and useful barriers of modesty.
In short, while you personally may not have a visceral reaction to what is happening here, the culture as a whole is feeling this deeply, and for good reason. It does violence to who we are as a people, and it is completely unnecessary. What happened to this boy, and is now happening to so many others, is clearly a bridge too far, and we do need to fight back.
And we can't see the father's face. (Note, we are assuming it's the boy's father...a likely case, but I point out that we are already making many assumptions before even getting started.)
And if he'd not been that way with the child, you would be reading the comments complaining that he didn't act friendly toward the kid.
Why? Why not keep the cattle, I mean, the line of people moving?
Because they want to move people through as fast as possible... you could find a good book or local engineering school to learn about how seemingly faster interruptions in flow can slow down an overall process, plus we don't know what else those people are doing. Some folks here want the "Israeli model" without realizing that elements of it are being included in what you're seeing.
WHY was the child pulled out of line in the first place????
Consider this...
What if, hypothetically, we obtain credible intelligence that al-Qaeda is training operatives to use innocent mules to transport components either knowlingly or unknowlingly.
How can the government respond? By telling everyone? FReepers would rightly go nuts about revealing intelligence.
I'm not saying they have any direct intelligence of that, but we do know that technique has been used before (which is why you hear the repeated "don't let your bags out of sight" messages, and why you should be careful nobody slips something into your pocket/hood/etc.)
Is this the ideal method? Heck no...but it's the natural result of the pushes from Law and Order "Conservatives." Imagine the ridicule Ron Paul would have gotten if he'd proactively tried to push a law that prevented more intense screening at airports!
Worth reposting. I think you nailed it!
That brings up the question: When did TSA ever gain the right to level fines against people?
You #in’ racist? You know those homies once be crackers ...
Thank you Laxcoach! What you said, all of it bears repeating:
laxcoach wrote:" bd476 wrote: 'til then keep your mouth shut about what you you label an 'overreaction' on anyone’s part over that young boy being fondled half naked by adult male strangers at the behest of your government'
ditto.
I have a 3 year old girl and 7 year old boy. Parents spend so much time teaching them to be wary of strangers. We teach them that their body is theirs, and that their “privates” are private. We teach them that that only parents and doctors can see or touch them there if there is a medical problem.
Then, we are going to go to an airport and teach them that any schlub in police like uniform has the right to touch them all over?
I think not.
Let’s be really clear. These are not law enforcement officials. They are administrative officials performing administrative searches. This is not a police officer performing a law enforcement search due to probable cause or arrest. This is not a medical doctor performing a required medical procedure.
These are f_cking bureaucrats in a uniform that is supposed to make people believe they are cops, so that we will do as told.
I know case law says that REASONABLE administrative searches can be required. What I haven’t been told is where in the law it says that administrative searches supercede sexual battery laws.
Further, as a parent I have no right to say “sure touch my kids genitals” other than for medical and hygiene reasons. Without a law giving these bureaucrats the right to touch children’s genitals, they are LITERALLY molesting children.
Finally, if and when someone tries to pat down my kid(s), I will say no and I will demand to see a background check on anyone that wants to touch my child. I will also demand to have my phone so I can look up that person on the child molester registry.
I will teach my children that their bodies are their own, and I won’t let anyone grope them... damn the consequences in the short term. "
these children are NOT over 12 -
watch this one - at almost the end - you tell me they aren’t molesting that child! And how is that child ever to know when he should let a perv do that to him and when not to? This is AUTHORIY molesting him in public with his mother treating it as perfectly okay. Send THIS one to your senators and congressmen - well first to Drudge and FOX - and everyone in your email adds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VN6pJ7nP1yA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3niEaOBntqs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlYIgSMQyYg
these children are NOT over 12 -
watch this one - at almost the end - you tell me they aren’t molesting that child! And how is that child ever to know when he should let a perv do that to him and when not to? This is AUTHORIY molesting him in public with his mother treating it as perfectly okay. Send THIS one to your senators and congressmen - well first to Drudge and FOX - and everyone in your email adds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VN6pJ7nP1yA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3niEaOBntqs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlYIgSMQyYg
I think we see it because terrorists don't always "play fair".
Some might trust terrorists, but I don't. Perhaps some assume they'd never dress up in a nun's habit, but I don't.
Ever heard of Daisie King? She had a bomb in her suitcase and the plane ended up scattered over the countryside north of Denver.
But she didn't build the bomb or know it was there. It was put into her luggage by her son.
And though dogs can sometimes alert to someone suspicious, that's not reliable--nor can they detect bladed weapons.
Yes, CAIR, et al., are big reasons for the specifics--I'm not disputing that, at all!-- but there are bigger questions even beyond them.
Horse-feces. Their purpose is to build bureaucracy.
They can't institute individual rules like that, as airport security isn't for the passengers of the plane as much as those on the ground. United Airlines Flight 93 would have been shot down to save D.C.
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.
