so, the terrorists win... - Page 30 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-15-2010, 10:12 AM   #436
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,998
Local Time: 12:26 AM
All this security theater yet a teenager can somehow bypass all security and get into a wheel well of an airplane in NC and die a horrible death falling into a suburban neighborhood in MA. If he could do that then why not someone with terrorist motives?




TSA Agent Tells Boy You Don't Have Boobs | Adrienne Durso | Video | Mediaite

A California woman is suing the TSA following an allegedly harassing and offensive episode at Albuquerque International. Adriene Durso claims to have been subjected to an “invasive breast groping” in full public view by a TSA agent, despite protestations that stemmed from undergoing a mastectomy in the previous year. When the woman’s son asked why he wasn’t getting similar treatment, the TSA supervisor reportedly told the boy “you don’t have boobs.”

Writing for InfoWars, Steve Watson reports:

Adrienne Durso describes how a female TSA officer pulled her out of line after she had gone through the metal detector and proceeded to pat her down, “Heavily concentrating on my breast area” in a search that “just seemed to go on and on”.

Relating her story to KOB Eyewitness News 4, Ms. Durso explained how she was made to feel humiliated in front of her seventeen year old son and the rest of the queuing passengers.

“I felt as though I didn’t have any rights other than I had to stand there and let them do what they want to do to my body,” Durso said.

Feeling violated and embarrassed, Ms. Durso asked to speak to a TSA supervisor.

As if things couldn’t get any worse, when the supervisor arrived and Ms. Durso’s son asked why he had also not been subjected to the body search, the TSA agent told the boy “well you don’t have boobs”.
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2010, 11:20 PM   #437
The Fly
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 131
Local Time: 12:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1131 View Post
No, but you may be missing the bigger picture.

Flying a plane full of fuel into a building was, um, a terrorism "Think Different". It doesn't seem to have been on anyone's radar before it happened, and after it happened it will never likely occur on the scale of 9/11 ever again due to the new precautions.

So we have made air travel as uncomfortable and dehumanizing as possible, and now we move on to, "Oh what if they attack a train, or a Greyhound bus, or what if someone sticks a bomb up their ass and walks around Time Square."

And bam, you wake up in a police state (or England).
So? Whats wrong with a minor inconvience to avoid a tragedy?
__________________

__________________
adam4bono is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2010, 11:25 PM   #438
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 11:26 PM
There soon might be underwear that distorts the image:

Privates Underwear - Betabrand
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2010, 11:55 PM   #439
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,894
Local Time: 12:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adam4bono View Post
So? Whats wrong with a minor inconvience to avoid a tragedy?
It's beyond minor inconveniences, and that's the whole point. There's a reasonable amount of security checks that everyone should respect is necessary. These examples go well beyond that.
__________________
PhilsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2011, 01:09 PM   #440
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,998
Local Time: 12:26 AM
(CNN) -- Count Jesse Ventura among fliers who don't want their "junk" touched by Transportation Security Administration agents.

The former Minnesota governor and pro wrestler filed a lawsuit Monday in federal court in Minnesota against the Department of Homeland Security and the TSA.

The suit alleges enhanced airport security procedures, including pat-downs and full body scanning, violate Ventura's rights under the Fourth Amendment, which protects Americans from unreasonable searches and seizures.

Ventura is not seeking monetary damages, according to his attorney, David Olsen. Ventura wants an acknowledgment from the court that his rights have been violated and a court order that would stop the government from subjecting him to the screening procedures, Olsen said.

"We consider the pat-downs and the whole body scanners to be a step too far, and they have crossed into the realm of the unreasonable," Olsen said.

The TSA said it cannot comment on pending litigation, but it has characterized pat-downs as one of multiple layers of security used to protect the traveling public.

"Pat-downs are one important tool to help TSA detect hidden and dangerous items such as explosives," the agency said on its website.

The lawsuit calls the TSA's enhanced pat-downs "warrantless, non-suspicion-based offensive touching, gripping and rubbing of the genital and other sensitive areas of the body."

Ventura had hip replacement surgery in 2008, and the resulting titanium implant routinely sets off metal detectors, requiring him to undergo pat-down searches, according to court documents. The lawsuit alleges the pat-downs and the TSA's whole body imaging procedures meet legal definitions of unlawful sexual assault and unlawful video voyeurism.

Ventura, who is host of a TV program called "Conspiracy Theory" on truTV, a CNN sister network, flies two to three times a week for work, according to the suit.

His professional schedule means he must either submit to routine searches, "or retire from his television work and forgo his income," the lawsuit said.

Ventura has stopped flying commercially to avoid the screening, Olsen said.

"It virtually makes it impossible for him to work in his present job," he said.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2011, 01:54 PM   #441
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,998
Local Time: 12:26 AM
If it's true that the mastectomy was the reason for the patdown, well I don't even know what to say about that. Any "irregularity" in the scan I guess. Way to go TSA.

(AP)SEATTLE — An Alaska state lawmaker is returning home by sea after refusing a pat-down search at a Seattle airport, a spokeswoman said.

Rep. Sharon Cissna underwent a body scan as she was preparing to leave Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Sunday and was then required to undergo the pat-down by Transportation Safety Administration officials, said Michelle Scannell, her chief of staff.

Scannell said that TSA called for the pat-down because the scan showed Cissna had had a mastectomy. But it wasn't immediately clear from statements by the lawmaker's office and TSA why that would necessitate the further search.

Scannell described the pat-down search as "intrusive" but did not elaborate on the Anchorage Democrat's decision.

TSA spokesman Kwika Riley was asked to respond to Cissna's comments when contacted by The Associated Press. But a general statement issued later did not mention her or her claims, saying the agency is "sensitive to the concerns of passengers who were not satisfied with their screening experience and we invite those individuals to provide feedback to TSA."

Both full body scanners and pat-down searches have come under increasing criticism as the TSA has stepped up its airport security measures.

Cissna, who had undergone medical treatment in Seattle, is traveling by ferry from Bellingham, Wash., to Juneau, Scannell said.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2011, 05:51 PM   #442
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 05:26 AM
Why wasn't she arrested for not completing the screening process?
__________________
AliEnvy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2011, 12:29 PM   #443
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,998
Local Time: 12:26 AM
LOUISVILLE, Ky. — A Kentucky couple said Wednesday that they want the Transportation Security Administration to change how it screens children after their 6-year-old daughter was frisked at the New Orleans airport.

Selena Drexel told ABC's "Good Morning America" the family was returning home from a vacation earlier this month when their daughter Anna was selected for a pat-down.

The couple posted a video of the search on YouTube. It shows a TSA agent patting down the child and explaining the procedure to the girl and her parents. The screener says that she will use the back of her hands on sensitive areas and will "put my hand in the waistband."

YouTube - TSA still groping kids...and drug testing them

The girl's father, Todd Drexel, says Anna was confused by the search and started crying afterward because she thought she'd done something wrong.

Selena Drexel says such searches are inappropriate for children because they're usually told not to let adults touch them in sensitive areas. She said she posted the video because she "had a very bad feeling that what happened was wrong."

In a statement, the Transportation Security Administration says the officer followed proper procedure but that the agency is reviewing its screening policies for "low-risk populations, such as young passengers." The statement says the agency is exploring ways to "move beyond a one-size fits all system."

TSA screeners are instructed to use a "modified" pat down for children 12 and younger, according to the agency's website.

A congressman whose subcommittee oversees national security issues said he was "personally outraged and disgusted" over the security pat-down.

"This conduct is in clear violation of TSA's explicit policy not to conduct thorough pat-downs on children under the age of 13," Rep. Jason Chaffetz, of Utah, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, said in a statement Wednesday.

Jennifer Mitchell, a child safety advocate, said after viewing the YouTube video that the pat-down seemed "a little invasive."

"This is a hard issue because we have national security on one hand... and children's safety on the other," said Mitchell, co-president of Child Lures Prevention, a Shelburne, Vt., organization that works to prevent crimes against children.

Mitchell said she knows families who have declined to fly because they don't want their children frisked. She recommended that parents tell children before going to the airport that they may get a pat-down.

But children should be told "the only reason it would be allowed is the parents are right there, the clothes are not being removed, the parents are watching to make sure it's done ok," Mitchell said.

Martin Macpherson, the director of the London-based Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, said he is not aware of instances when terrorists have used children as young as six in an attack.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2011, 03:07 PM   #444
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 63,731
Local Time: 09:26 PM
You'd think common sense would come into play at some point. That poor kid.
__________________
corianderstem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2011, 04:11 PM   #445
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 12:26 AM
I think either you're against the pat downs or not. Seems pointless to pat down the parents if their children are exempt. It wouldn't be the first or last time a parent has used their child as a mule of some sort. The hullabaloo over this video really blows my mind. A couple seconds of thought after the initial outrage and it makes perfect sense.
That said, I think the pat downs in general are ridiculous.
__________________
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2011, 04:29 PM   #446
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 63,731
Local Time: 09:26 PM
I don't know if "drug test" means they were seeing if she were being used as a mule, or if it means something else, but a TSA representative has said this:

"TSA does not drug test air travelers. We screen passengers for dangerous weapons and explosives. I realize the mother of this little girl speculates that we're going to test her for drugs, but that couldn't be further from the truth."

So if it wasn't a drug test, then you were seeing if she had bombs strapped to her? The kid's wearing a snug shirt and snug leggings - anything bulging out of there would be pretty visible to anyone looking without touching, I'd say.
__________________
corianderstem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2011, 04:45 PM   #447
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 12:26 AM
I meant 'mule' in the sense of anything: drugs, weapons, whatever. If they're going to be screening people, it would seem a fairly large hole in the process if all you had to do was bring a kid along with you to hide stuff. It didn't have to be a bomb. Could've been a blade or what have you.
__________________
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2011, 04:46 PM   #448
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 63,731
Local Time: 09:26 PM
Gotcha.
__________________
corianderstem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2011, 04:49 PM   #449
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 12:26 AM
Otherwise you'd get people like GAF adopting kids just so he can smuggle extra booze in from the Duty Free
__________________
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2011, 04:59 PM   #450
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 09:26 PM
That was a regular, all-American kid.

Not a Muslim kid or some other minority. Of course Americans are upset.
__________________

__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
U2's christmas cards 2009: Win a t-shirt or album+single Regina O'Numb Everything You Know Is Wrong 1 12-31-2009 12:13 PM
The 2009 Formula One Thread. Accept No Imitations. cobl04 Put 'Em Under Pressure 86 10-21-2009 08:26 AM
Win A Britney Spears-style Wedding ABEL Free Your Mind Archive 20 03-04-2004 12:49 PM
Your Opinion: *SHOULD* U2 Win A Grammy For Album Of The Year For ATYCLB? Michael Griffiths Everything You Know Is Wrong Archive 29 12-13-2001 09:17 PM
Question Regarding Terrorists 80sU2isBest Everything You Know Is Wrong Archive 38 10-11-2001 03:54 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com