Since when is a pregnant woman a threat to airport security?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Maybe if enough of this shit happens to regular people, regular people will be able to put a stop to it. So many are willing to have this happen to people who look different and act differently. "Well, you can never be too careful!" Or "If I'm safer because someone else has to give up rights and dignity, then that's fine." Or "They're only searching Arab-looking people, who might indeed be terrorists, so that doesn't affect me." Or my favorite "I have nothing to hide, so it's okay if they search me!"
 
here is the loong article

Coffee, Tea, or Should We Feel Your Pregnant Wife?s Breasts Before Throwing You in a Cell at the Airport and Then Lying About Why We Put You There?

by Nicholas Monahan


This morning I?ll be escorting my wife to the hospital, where the doctors will perform a caesarean section to remove our first child. She didn?t want to do it this way ? neither of us did ? but sometimes the Fates decide otherwise. The Fates or, in our case, government employees.

On the morning of October 26th Mary and I entered Portland International Airport, en route to the Las Vegas wedding of one of my best friends. Although we live in Los Angeles, we?d been in Oregon working on a film, and up to that point had had nothing but praise to shower on the city of Portland, a refreshing change of pace from our own suffocating metropolis.

At the security checkpoint I was led aside for the "inspection" that?s all the rage at airports these days. My shoes were removed. I was told to take off my sweater, then to fold over the waistband of my pants. My baseball hat, hastily jammed on my head at 5 AM, was removed and assiduously examined ("Anything could be in here, sir," I was told, after I asked what I could hide in a baseball hat. Yeah. Anything.) Soon I was standing on one foot, my arms stretched out, the other leg sticking out in front of me ?la a DUI test. I began to get pissed off, as most normal people would. My anger increased when I realized that the newly knighted federal employees weren?t just examining me, but my 7? months pregnant wife as well. I?d originally thought that I?d simply been randomly selected for the more excessive than normal search. You know, Number 50 or whatever. Apparently not though ? it was both of us. These are your new threats, America: pregnant accountants and their sleepy husbands flying to weddings.

After some more grumbling on my part they eventually finished with me and I went to retrieve our luggage from the x-ray machine. Upon returning I found my wife sitting in a chair, crying. Mary rarely cries, and certainly not in public. When I asked her what was the matter, she tried to quell her tears and sobbed, "I?m sorry...it?s...they touched my breasts...and..." That?s all I heard. I marched up to the woman who?d been examining her and shouted, "What did you do to her?" Later I found out that in addition to touching her swollen breasts ? to protect the American citizenry ? the employee had asked that she lift up her shirt. Not behind a screen, not off to the side ? no, right there, directly in front of the hundred or so passengers standing in line. And for you women who?ve been pregnant and worn maternity pants, you know how ridiculous those things look. "I felt like a clown," my wife told me later. "On display for all these people, with the cotton panel on my pants and my stomach sticking out. When I sat down I just lost my composure and began to cry. That?s when you walked up."

Of course when I say she "told me later," it?s because she wasn?t able to tell me at the time, because as soon as I demanded to know what the federal employee had done to make her cry, I was swarmed by Portland police officers. Instantly. Three of them, cinching my arms, locking me in handcuffs, and telling me I was under arrest. Now my wife really began to cry. As they led me away and she ran alongside, I implored her to calm down, to think of the baby, promising her that everything would turn out all right. She faded into the distance and I was shoved into an elevator, a cop holding each arm. After making me face the corner, the head honcho told that I was under arrest and that I wouldn?t be flying that day ? that I was in fact a "menace."

It took me a while to regain my composure. I felt like I was one of those guys in The Gulag Archipelago who, because the proceedings all seem so unreal, doesn?t fully realize that he is in fact being arrested in a public place in front of crowds of people for...for what? I didn?t know what the crime was. Didn?t matter. Once upstairs, the officers made me remove my shoes and my hat and tossed me into a cell. Yes, your airports have prison cells, just like your amusement parks, train stations, universities, and national forests. Let freedom reign.

After a short time I received a visit from the arresting officer. "Mr. Monahan," he started, "Are you on drugs?"

Was this even real? "No, I?m not on drugs."

"Should you be?"

"What do you mean?"

"Should you be on any type of medication?"

"No."

"Then why?d you react that way back there?"

You see the thinking? You see what passes for reasoning among your domestic shock troops these days? Only "whackos" get angry over seeing the woman they?ve been with for ten years in tears because someone has touched her breasts. That kind of reaction ? love, protection ? it?s mind-boggling! "Mr. Monahan, are you on drugs?" His snide words rang inside my head. This is my wife, finally pregnant with our first child after months of failed attempts, after the depressing shock of the miscarriage last year, my wife who?d been walking on a cloud over having the opportunity to be a mother...and my anger is simply unfathomable to the guy standing in front of me, the guy who earns a living thanks to my taxes, the guy whose family I feed through my labor. What I did wasn?t normal. No, I reacted like a drug addict would?ve. I was so disgusted I felt like vomiting. But that was just the beginning.

An hour later, after I?d been gallantly assured by the officer that I wouldn?t be attending my friend?s wedding that day, I heard Mary?s voice outside my cell. The officer was speaking loudly, letting her know that he was planning on doing me a favor... which everyone knows is never a real favor. He wasn?t going to come over and help me work on my car or move some furniture. No, his "favor" was this: He?d decided not to charge me with a felony.

Think about that for a second. Rapes, car-jackings, murders, arsons ? those are felonies. So is yelling in an airport now, apparently. I hadn?t realized, though I should have. Luckily, I was getting a favor, though. I was merely going to be slapped with a misdemeanor.

"Here?s your court date," he said as I was released from my cell. In addition, I was banned from Portland International for 90 days, and just in case I was thinking of coming over and hanging out around its perimeter, the officer gave me a map with the boundaries highlighted, sternly warning me against trespassing. Then he and a second officer escorted us off the grounds. Mary and I hurriedly drove two and a half hours in the rain to Seattle, where we eventually caught a flight to Vegas. But the officer was true to his word ? we missed my friend?s wedding. The fact that he?d been in my own wedding party, the fact that a once in a lifetime event was stolen from us ? well, who cares, right?

Upon our return to Portland (I?d had to fly into Seattle and drive back down), we immediately began contacting attorneys. We aren?t litigious people ? we wanted no money. I?m not even sure what we fully wanted. An apology? A reprimand? I don?t know. It doesn?t matter though, because we couldn?t afford a lawyer, it turned out. $4,000 was the average figure bandied about as a retaining fee. Sorry, but I?ve got a new baby on the way. So we called the ACLU, figuring they existed for just such incidents as these. And they do apparently...but only if we were minorities. That?s what they told us.

In the meantime, I?d appealed my suspension from PDX. A week or so later I got a response from the Director of Aviation. After telling me how, in the aftermath of 9/11, most passengers not only accept additional airport screening but welcome it, he cut to the chase:

"After a review of the police report and my discussions with police staff, as well as a review of the TSA?s report on this incident, I concur with the officer?s decision to take you into custody and to issue a citation to you for disorderly conduct. That being said, because I also understand that you were upset and acted on your emotions, I am willing to lift the Airport Exclusion Order...."

Attached to this letter was the report the officer had filled out. I?d like to say I couldn?t believe it, but in a way, I could. It?s seemingly becoming the norm in America ? lies and deliberate distortions on the part of those in power, no matter how much or how little power they actually wield.

The gist of his report was this: From the get go I wasn?t following the screener?s directions. I was "squinting my eyes" and talking to my wife in a "low, forced voice" while "excitedly swinging my arms." Twice I began to walk away from the screener, inhaling and exhaling forcefully. When I?d completed the physical exam, I walked to the luggage screening area, where a second screener took a pair of scissors from my suitcase. At this point I yelled, "What the %*&$% is going on? This is &*#&$%!" The officer, who?d already been called over by one of the screeners, became afraid for the TSA staff and the many travelers. He required the assistance of a second officer as he "struggled" to get me into handcuffs, then for "cover" called over a third as well. It was only at this point that my wife began to cry hysterically.

There was nothing poetic in my reaction to the arrest report. I didn?t crumple it in my fist and swear that justice would be served, promising to sacrifice my resources and time to see that it would. I simply stared. Clearly the officer didn?t have the guts to write down what had really happened. It might not look too good to see that stuff about the pregnant woman in tears because she?d been humiliated. Instead this was the official scenario being presented for the permanent record. It doesn?t even matter that it?s the most implausible sounding situation you can think of. "Hey, what the...godammit, they?re taking our scissors, honey!" Why didn?t he write in anything about a monkey wearing a fez?

True, the TSA staff had expropriated a pair of scissors from our toiletries kit ? the story wasn?t entirely made up. Except that I?d been locked in airport jail at the time. I didn?t know anything about any scissors until Mary told me on our drive up to Seattle. They?d questioned her about them while I was in the bowels of the airport sitting in my cell.

So I wrote back, indignation and disgust flooding my brain.

"[W]hile I?m not sure, I?d guess that the entire incident is captured on video. Memory is imperfect on everyone?s part, but the footage won?t lie. I realize it might be procedurally difficult for you to view this, but if you could, I?d appreciate it. There?s no willful disregard of screening directions. No explosion over the discovery of a pair of scissors in a suitcase. No struggle to put handcuffs on. There?s a tired man, early in the morning, unhappily going through a rigorous procedure and then reacting to the tears of his pregnant wife."

Eventually we heard back from a different person, the guy in charge of the TSA airport screeners. One of his employees had made the damning statement about me exploding over her scissor discovery, and the officer had deftly incorporated that statement into his report. We asked the guy if he could find out why she?d said this ? couldn?t she possibly be mistaken? "Oh, can?t do that, my hands are tied. It?s kind of like leading a witness ? I could get in trouble, heh heh." Then what about the videotape? Why not watch that? That would exonerate me. "Oh, we destroy all video after three days."

Sure you do.

A few days later we heard from him again. He just wanted to inform us that he?d received corroboration of the officer?s report from the officer?s superior, a name we didn?t recognize. "But...he wasn?t even there," my wife said.

"Yeah, well, uh, he?s corroborated it though."

That?s how it works.

"Oh, and we did look at the videotape. Inconclusive."

But I thought it was destroyed?

On and on it went. Due to the tenacity of my wife in making phone calls and speaking with relevant persons, the "crime" was eventually lowered to a mere citation. Only she could have done that. I would?ve simply accepted what was being thrown at me, trumped up charges and all, simply because I?m wholly inadequate at performing the kowtow. There?s no way I could have contacted all the people Mary did and somehow pretend to be contrite. Besides, I speak in a low, forced voice, which doesn?t elicit sympathy. Just police suspicion.

Weeks later at the courthouse I listened to a young DA awkwardly read the charges against me ? "Mr. Monahan...umm...shouted obscenities at the airport staff...umm... umm...oh, they took some scissors from his suitcase and he became...umm...abusive at this point." If I was reading about it in Kafka I might have found something vaguely amusing in all of it. But I wasn?t. I was there. Living it.

I entered a plea of nolo contendere, explaining to the judge that if I?d been a resident of Oregon, I would have definitely pled "Not Guilty." However, when that happens, your case automatically goes to a jury trial, and since I lived a thousand miles away, and was slated to return home in seven days, with a newborn due in a matter of weeks...you get the picture. "No Contest" it was. Judgment: $250 fine.

Did I feel happy? Only $250, right? No, I wasn?t happy. I don?t care if it?s twelve cents, that?s money pulled right out of my baby?s mouth and fed to a disgusting legal system that will use it to propagate more incidents like this. But at the very least it was over, right? Wrong.

When we returned to Los Angeles there was an envelope waiting for me from the court. Inside wasn?t a receipt for the money we?d paid. No, it was a letter telling me that what I actually owed was $309 ? state assessed court costs, you know. Wouldn?t you think your taxes pay for that ? the state putting you on trial? No, taxes are used to hire more cops like the officer, because with our rising criminal population ? people like me ? hey, your average citizen demands more and more "security."

Finally I reach the piece de resistance. The week before we?d gone to the airport my wife had had her regular pre-natal checkup. The child had settled into the proper head down position for birth, continuing the remarkable pregnancy she?d been having. We returned to Portland on Sunday. On Mary?s Monday appointment she was suddenly told, "Looks like your baby?s gone breech." When she later spoke with her midwives in Los Angeles, they wanted to know if she?d experienced any type of trauma recently, as this often makes a child flip. "As a matter of fact..." she began, recounting the story, explaining how the child inside of her was going absolutely crazy when she was crying as the police were leading me away through the crowd.

My wife had been planning a natural childbirth. She?d read dozens of books, meticulously researched everything, and had finally decided that this was the way for her. No drugs, no numbing of sensations ? just that ultimate combination of brute pain and sheer joy that belongs exclusively to mothers. But my wife is also a first-time mother, so she has what is called an "untested" pelvis. Essentially this means that a breech birth is too dangerous to attempt, for both mother and child. Therefore, she?s now relegated to a c-section ? hospital stay, epidural, catheter, fetal monitoring, stitches ? everything she didn?t want. Her natural birth has become a surgery.

We?ve tried everything to turn that baby. Acupuncture, chiropractic techniques, underwater handstands, elephant walking, moxibustion, bending backwards over pillows, herbs, external manipulation ? all to no avail. When I walked into the living room the other night and saw her plaintively cooing with a flashlight turned onto her stomach, yet another suggested technique, my heart almost broke. It?s breaking now as I write these words.

I can never prove that my child went breech because of what happened to us at the airport. But I?ll always believe it. Wrongly or rightly, I?ll forever think of how this man, the personification of this system, has affected the lives of my family and me. When my wife is sliced open, I?ll be thinking of him. When they remove her uterus from her abdomen and lay it on her stomach, I?ll be thinking of him. When I visit her and my child in the hospital instead of having them with me here in our home, I?ll be thinking of him. When I assist her to the bathroom while the incision heals internally, I?ll be thinking of him.

There are plenty of stories like this these days. I don?t know how many I?ve read where the writer describes some breach of civil liberties by employees of the state, then wraps it all up with a dire warning about what we as a nation are becoming, and how if we don?t put an end to it now, then we?re in for heaps of trouble. Well you know what? Nothing?s going to stop the inevitable. There?s no policy change that?s going to save us. There?s no election that?s going to put a halt to the onslaught of tyranny. It?s here already ? this country has changed for the worse and will continue to change for the worse. There is now a division between the citizenry and the state. When that state is used as a tool against me, there is no longer any reason why I should owe any allegiance to that state.

And that?s the first thing that child of ours is going to learn.

December 21, 2002

Nick Monahan works in the film industry. He writes out of Los Angeles where he lives with his wife and as of December 18th, his beautiful new son.

Copyright ? 2002 LewRockwell.com
 
Just a thought.....

As heinous as this incident sounds, the only source of information is the pregnant woman's husband. Is there any independent news of this story? :scratch:
 
People here in the US do not realize how 'free' we really were compared to many other places.... he's right, things have changed, and will continue to change, sorry to say, for the worse.
 
I will never understand why airport security personell have to be so mentally limited. We have fully trained cops patrolling highways, why can't airports be similar? They really don't make you feel safe.... It's like they don't even understand what they are doing sometimes.
I have spoken to several airline pilots in the past year and they all shake their collective heads when it comes to security. Scary!
 
the olive said:
I will never understand why airport security personell have to be so mentally limited. We have fully trained cops patrolling highways, why can't airports be similar? They really don't make you feel safe.... It's like they don't even understand what they are doing sometimes.
I have spoken to several airline pilots in the past year and they all shake their collective heads when it comes to security. Scary!
and to think, the government thought this was better than using the security they had before.
 
I read this a few days ago and looked into the man that wrote this. I really didnt take any heed of it but did anyone read that he is a writer in hollywood? Though this doesnt de-value his story but i would like to hear others versions and not a writers version who is out to get public support!
 
Well I'm not really sure who else can offer a version on this incident bonoman. The whole article didn't really seem to be pretending it was anything more than some guy's personal opinion on an unfortunate incident. I've got no idea if this even made news so wouldn't be able to offer a second article or slant on it either and I dont frequent the site it came from.
It may very well be a very biased and one sided article, but I suspect his reaction is not all that dissimilar to how many of us would react in the same situation.
 
the olive said:
I will never understand why airport security personell have to be so mentally limited.

I don't have a complete list of airport security regulations in front of me right now, so it's a bit hard to say whether the rules or the security personnel are to blame, but I would tend to agree with the statement above.
 
MissVelvetDress_75 said:
this is truly a disgusting story. i personally did not appreciate when i was asked by airport security to lift my knee length dress all the way up to my upper mid thigh so they could wand me in front of the public. :mad:

Isn't the whole point of a wand to be able to detect contraband underneath clothing?
 
Last edited:
speedracer said:


Isn't the whole point of a wand to be able to detect contraband underneath clothing?

oh silly me, how dare i forget that i may be caring contraband around my upper thigh. *smacks forehead, thanks for the reminder*

apparently the once over with their wand while my dress was already above my knee and i was spread eagle was not convincing enough for them.
 
I have been looking to see if there was any pick-up of this by a major newspaper that would interview the airport security people involved to provide a less unbiased approach.

Needless to say I am a sceptic of this story. I am curious about why they would be flying if she had difficult pregnancies in the past. We could not go out of state by car because our HMO would not cover if she went into labor or had problems. To top it off, we were told not to fly due to concernsa about our first child.

Please, I would be the first one up in arms, if the facts played out to be true. Having worked in the security/police field, I truly from the guys own words get a sense that he was not cooperative when he went through, and went back for more.


Here is a link to another sites interpretation, one which I am leaning towards.http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/airport.htm


Claim: Man is outraged because airport security personnel touch his pregnant wife's breasts.

Status: Undetermined.

Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2002]


Coffee, Tea, or Should We Feel Your Pregnant Wife?s Breasts Before Throwing You in a Cell at the Airport and Then Lying About Why We Put You There?
This morning I?ll be escorting my wife to the hospital, where the doctors will perform a caesarean section to remove our first child. She didn?t want to do it this way -- neither of us did -- but sometimes the Fates decide otherwise. The Fates or, in our case, government employees.

On the morning of October 26th Mary and I entered Portland International Airport, en route to the Las Vegas wedding of one of my best friends. Although we live in Los Angeles, we?d been in Oregon working on a film, and up to that point had had nothing but praise to shower on the city of Portland, a refreshing change of pace from our own suffocating metropolis.

(Rest of article at http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/monahan1.html)



Origins: I was once good friends with a woman whose husband (whom we'll call John) was, to put it charitably, a decidedly "act first, think later" type. One afternoon I received a frantic phone call from this woman because John was in jail, and she couldn't raise the money to bail him out. Why had he been arrested? Well, it had to do with a routine traffic stop -- this couple had been carrying Oregon license plates on their cars for years even though they lived in California (because it was cheaper to register automobiles in Oregon), and a patrolman had pulled John over for a routine traffic stop to investigate why he was driving around in a car with an expired, out-of-state registration. John, irritated that a policemen would have the effrontery to accuse him of engaging in something illegal, took a swing at the cop and was hauled off to the hoosegow for assaulting a police officer. Of course, to hear the couple relate the incident later, John hadn't done anything wrong -- that he had done something illegal and had tried to punch out a cop was irrelevant; John's actions were a perfectly reasonable employment of self-defense, and if only that mean, terrible policeman hadn't provoked him, none of this would have happened. I suspected there was lot more to this story than I ever heard from John and his wife.

What to make of the airport outrage story related above? Reading between the lines of the one-sided account, we find something that sounds to us like a man and his wife being pulled out of line for a routine random search (it is reasonable for security personnel to verify that a woman who appears pregnant really is pregnant, as a faked appearance of pregnancy is a time-worn smuggler's and shoplifter's technique). Then, after hearing but a single statement with no context from his upset wife ("They touched my breasts . . ."), the husband immediately goes charging off to angrily confront security personnel, shouting and raging at them, even though he as yet has no idea what actually happened (which itself is reason to question the accuracy of this account). Acting hostile with airport security, yelling at them, and ignoring instructions to calm down are actions guaranteed to get one taken into custody, no matter what the circumstances, as a matter of standard procedure. And we're supposed to be shocked and outraged that this man got arrested? We suspect there's a lot more to this story than we're hearing, especially the part about bearing responsibility for one's own actions.

Last updated: 23 December 2002
 
But even if the man did haul off before he knew the whole situation (which, granted, wasn't right), shouldn't the security personnel still have had more decency and sensitivity than to check the woman *in front of other passengers*? Couldn't they have taken her aside, out of public view, and had her examined confidentially by a female officer?
 
The man's wife hadn't had difficult pregnancies in the past. This was her first child, which is why her doctors wouldn't let her risk trying to deliver naturally when the baby had gone breach. In any case, I think why they chose to fly is really irrelevant to the story, whether this version of it is true or not.

From an objective standpoint, the man probably overreacted. But, frankly, I don't know many men who I think would act much differently when confronted with the same situation. And while I certainly understand the need to take him into custody, was it really necessary to prevent him from flying, ban him from the airport, and charge him with a felony? Maybe I'm not familiar enough with airport security procedure, but it would seem that once he calmed down and they determined *why* he'd reacted the way he did, there would be some room for leniency. Also, the fact that airport security lied in their report (if indeed then did) would seem to indicate that they even they felt they had to justify their behavior more than the actual circumstances allowed. But that's just my own sense of the situation.
 
Hallelujah Here She Comes said:
And while I certainly understand the need to take him into custody, was it really necessary to prevent him from flying, ban him from the airport, and charge him with a felony? Maybe I'm not familiar enough with airport security procedure, but it would seem that once he calmed down and they determined *why* he'd reacted the way he did, there would be some room for leniency. Also, the fact that airport security lied in their report (if indeed then did) would seem to indicate that they even they felt they had to justify their behavior more than the actual circumstances allowed. But that's just my own sense of the situation.

Totally agree. I don't get why some folks in "law enforcement" cannot back off after they figure out that a situation is not half as bad as they suspected. It's like they feel obligated to follow through in punishing someone just for being in a situation that APPEARED to be ugly, even if it was just a missunderstanding.
Does pride and ego play a role in these kind of situations? It sure seems like it.
 
Hallelujah Here She Comes said:
The man's wife hadn't had difficult pregnancies in the past. This was her first child, which is why her doctors wouldn't let her risk trying to deliver naturally when the baby had gone breach. In any case, I think why they chose to fly is really irrelevant to the story, whether this version of it is true or not.

HERE in the Author's own words:

This is my wife, finally pregnant with our first child after months of failed attempts, after the depressing shock of the miscarriage last year, my wife who?d been walking on a cloud over having the opportunity to be a mother...




As to their choosing to fly it most certainly is relevant! At 7 1/2 months pregnant, I sincerely doubt with months of failed attempts and a prior miscarriage, that should have been flying in the third trimester. I am not a doctor and would love to hear a doctor's opinion on this. I have read it is safe if there are NO PRIOR complications.

On top of this all, the two insurance companies my wife and I used we could not leave the state in her third trimester because of some prior complications.

This said, it most definitely lends itself to question the credibility of the author. Since there are no credible outside sources to collaborate this story, we most definitely have the right to question the credibility of the author. So did it happen?
 
I have really tried to believe this happened.

If it did happen:

First, the woman was searched by a Female Security Agent. It was not some male gropping and getting his jollies as some have implied by their statements.

Second, It does not say she lifted her shirt up over her head or anything close to that. It is implied that the shirt was raised up over her belly to show that she was indeed pregnant.

Third, going through Military Police School, I was trained to search and remove caps. There can and have been incidents in which people have had items (drugs, razor blades, ect) stored inside of the cap. It is interesting that the author, in all of his wisdom, believes that the person is totally ignorant by searching the cap, when this is a standard police procedure which has been in place since at least 1989 when I was in the military. Already, a nice bias towards a person doing a cruicial job in this day and age. Anyone who is working one of these jobs must not have greaduated high school right? He entered the airport thinking these are ignorant people. He was annoyed at being searched.

Fourth, do any of you believe that this guy kept his mouth shut during the search? By his own words and disdain for the process that he went through, I am willing to bet he made and said comments and most likely was very uncooperative.

Fifth, instead of listening to his wife, he reacted irrationally. He returned to the screening station and screamed and yelled, holding up the boarding of the plane. After his first run through the screening station, I am sure they were happy to see him. This was seen by the POLICE. The three police officers arrested him for interefering with the boarding of the plane. I am willing to bet, he was asked and asked to calm down and he did not.

Sixth, the ACLU only handles cases for minorities???? Please. The ACLU would not take his case because the security personel were behaving appropriately. You do not think they would be all over this if there was a thread of legal ground to stand on. Sounds like he has an issue with minorities based on this ignorant statement. I wonder if the airport security personnel were minorities.

Seventh, since the airport screeners are an independant group from the police force I am really sceptical that there was a conspiracy to frame him. You would need the supervisors, the people at the screening station, the three police officers all working together to shaft this guy. It makes no sense.

Eight, he was not found guilty of a felony. The charges were reduced.

Finally, I am sure the three police officers were just waiting to find someone to arrest for no reason at all. I am sure they all said, lets get this guy. Lets frame him. They had enough to arrest him right there for disrupting the screening process. They did not need trumped up stories about scissors for the screeners to arrest him. This is rediculous.


If it is true, the article is one sided, and quite honestly, lends more to my believe that the author was a complete jerk at the airport that morning.

If this is true....Do I feel badly for his wife and child? Yes. And his actions, rational or irrational, are directly responsible for the way the day went down. Would I be very calm if I saw my wife upset? No I wouldn't. I am human.

The thinking rational side of me still believes that this is not a true story.

Peace to all.
 
Last edited:
Dreadsox said:
I have really tried to believe this happened.

The thinking rational side of me still believes that this is not a true story.



At least not 100% true as told by the husband and wife. Dread makes some very good points here, most of which I had considered myself.

If this really happened, the husband probably could have prevented most of it by keeping his cool and cooperating.
 
True story- I think

here is additional info I found on this:



Hi, guys. I've been following the commentary here for a while. Both my brother and I have independent verification that this event actually took place. He and I took it upon ourselves to email several officials at Portland PDX to complain about the event. He and I were both contacted via email explaining "the other side of the story" from PDX point of view. I also received a phone call from someone at PDX, though I am not sure in what capacity they served. You can check out all the details at http://silflayhraka.blogspot.com

Here is the text of the email sent to both of us, along with the email I sent to PDX officials:

Dear Mr. NAME REMOVED:

Thank you for the opportunity to provide some details related to an article circulating on the internet written by Nicholas Monahan.

Please understand that the security checkpoints are operated and staffed by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), a federal agency, and the airport has no control over the management of the checkpoint or the screeners who work there. Therefore, the TSA is the appropriate organization to contact regarding traveler and baggage screening procedures at the checkpoint.

The Port does, however, have supervision and control over the Port of Portland Police officers who responded to this particular matter. Port Police were called to the checkpoint by the TSA to respond to an altercation with a passenger, who turned out to be Mr. Monahan. When Port Police arrived on the scene, they observed Mr. Monahan exhibiting aggressive and disruptive behavior which caused operations at the security checkpoint to be temporarily halted. Port Police first attempted to get Mr. Monahan to calm down, but when those efforts failed, the officers involved felt they had no other reasonable or safe recourse than to take Mr. Monahan into custody. He was detained for less than two hours, cited for disorderly conduct, and then escorted off airport property. After reviewing the citation issued by Port Police, the Multnomah County District Attorney elected to prosecute. According to Mr. Monahan, he plead no contest.

Mr. Monahan also contacted the Port's aviation director about this incident. After reviewing the incident, and understanding that Mr. Monahan had a business travel need to use the airport, the aviation director used his discretion to rescind the Port's exclusion order. Based on review of this incident, the Port believes the officers acted appropriately.

If you would like any information related to the screening process itself or the TSA, please contact Brian Doyle at (202) 494-9680.

Sincerely, NAME REMOVED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT
Customer Information Specialist
Portland International Airport
Port of Portland
REMOVED EMAIL TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT

-----Original Message-----
From: REMOVED
Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 12:10 PM
To: BillWyatt@portptld.com; chestm@portptld.com;
michael.d.schrunk@co.multnomah.or.us;
dozone@portptld.com; brantm@portptld.com;
PDXCustomerService@portptld.com;
brown.sen@state.or.us
Subject: Coffee, Tea, or Should We Feel Your Pregnant Wife?s Breasts Before Throwing You in a Cell at the Airport and Then Lying About Why We Put You There? by Nicholas Monahan

* Please note, the sender's email address has not been verified. (This message was forwarded from the page with the article itself)

I know that in the wake of Sept. 11 we are all more concerned with security, but blatant lying about security situations that happen on your watch is an assault on all of our civil liberties. I hope that the individual who felt it necessary to create "facts" and distort the situtation will be reprimanded, if not released outright from his or her responsibilities. I think it is disgraceful that it had to happen, but even more disgraceful that a few individuals felt it necessary to cover it up just to exonerate themselves and justify their own actions.

I hope that this matter will be investigated to the fullest extent and not just put on the back burner because you "have more important things to do" and "these things happen all the time". Perhaps these things happen all the time because they are continually relegated to the back burner? Perhaps all of our civil liberties are weakened because no one takes the time to stop even one occurrence. If you take time to deal with every injustice, perhaps they will not happen "all the time". Thanks for your time.

Sincerely,
NAME REMOVED FOR PRIVACY REASONS
News & Record
http://www.news-record.com
 
Dreadsox said:


HERE in the Author's own words:

This is my wife, finally pregnant with our first child after months of failed attempts, after the depressing shock of the miscarriage last year, my wife who?d been walking on a cloud over having the opportunity to be a mother...




As to their choosing to fly it most certainly is relevant! At 7 1/2 months pregnant, I sincerely doubt with months of failed attempts and a prior miscarriage, that should have been flying in the third trimester. I am not a doctor and would love to hear a doctor's opinion on this. I have read it is safe if there are NO PRIOR complications.

On top of this all, the two insurance companies my wife and I used we could not leave the state in her third trimester because of some prior complications.

This said, it most definitely lends itself to question the credibility of the author. Since there are no credible outside sources to collaborate this story, we most definitely have the right to question the credibility of the author. So did it happen?

I misunderstood what you had meant by "difficult pregnancy." That was my bad. But I still say their choosing to fly isn't relevant in determing the validity of the story. What I meant when I said that it was irrelevant was that regardless of whether his wife should have been flying, their choice to fly doesn't have any bearing on whether he's telling the truth about the incident itself. It may raise issues about how wise he and his wife are in making medical decisions (Honestly, I'd also like to meet the doctor that sanctioned this). But just because he may have been an idiot in this regard, it doesn't make him dishonest.

Also, don't you think that his hostile attitude towards the security personel and being searched could be a result of this incident as opposed to a cause? He probably wasn't crazy about being searched, but I'd bet that his complaints about it weren't this venemous until after the fact.

And clearly there wasn't some wild government conspiracy to frame him. I don't think even he would claim that. But isn't it possible that the security AND the police AND the supervisors were all overzealous in the way they handled the situation? Isn't that the point? That incidents like this get blown out of proportion because everyone's nervous about airport security?

That said, you bring up some excellent points, most of which I hadn't considered. I certainly don't imagine that his version of events is what actually happened. And I can't say I'm outraged that he was taken into custody. It probably did appear that he was a threat to the police who got involved. I just think that once it was determined that he wasn't actually a threat, it may not have been necessary to hold him, ban him from the airport, and charge him with a crime.
 
Hallelujah Here She Comes said:


That was my bad.


No your not!!!! HEHE If we were in the same room we could talk about it to clarify things:yes:

I 100% believe that his actions were directly responsible for what happened. He was through the station. He had no business going back. He could very well have requested to speak with a supervisor without disrupting the security station.



TO DEEP:

I thought about posting what you found as well. I read it last night but I chose not to post it. I would be very, very surprised to find that the airport responded in as much detail as they did to a private citizen. I know, that when I worked in the hotel industry, and something happened involving a guest,the police, the FBI, the Texas Rangers, or the Secret Service, we NEVER answered questions. I am very tempted to call the airport and email them myself to see if I get a response.


Peace
 
Back
Top Bottom