Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

One blogger's TSA encounter

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Tuesday_Morning Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-22-10 11:50 PM
Original message
One blogger's TSA encounter
Very interesting read...

On November 21, 2010, I was allowed to enter the U.S. through an airport security checkpoint without being x-rayed or touched by a TSA officer. This post explains how.


http://noblasters.com/post/1650102322/my-tsa-encounter


.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
HipChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-22-10 11:55 PM
Response to Original message
1. I'm glad he had 2.5 hrs to waste..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enlightenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. I don't think he considered it wasted time.
It was an interesting experiment, certainly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tuesday_Morning Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 12:21 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. I'm sure the TSA
counts on folks not having the time. They're motivated to catch their flight and not make a fuss.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. You do not care about civil rights, do you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 12:19 AM
Response to Original message
3. Awesome! step 1 in regaining our rights
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MiniMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 12:21 AM
Response to Original message
4. Got a "Limit Exceeded" message from the ink
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollin74 Donating Member (489 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 12:33 AM
Response to Original message
6. K & R
very interesting
good for him
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 12:47 AM
Response to Original message
7. This is what civil disobedience looks like
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Misskittycat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 01:07 AM
Response to Original message
9. K&R. Good for him. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supply Side Jesus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 01:07 AM
Response to Original message
10. "considering" it assault, doesn't mean it's assault
nicely played though
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Angry Dragon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 01:12 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. i would think if you touch someone's breasts or genitals
it would be sexual assault
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supply Side Jesus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 02:09 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. So if I walked by a woman and my arm brushed her breast accidently?
I'm a sex offender then?

Sexual assault requires sexual gratification.

just because a person says it's an assault, doesn't make it so. There are elements to full fill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Angry Dragon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 02:14 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. I believe you know prefectly well what I meant


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abq_Sarah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 02:31 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. I'm pretty sure sexual assault requires intent of a sexual nature
If you willingly enter a security area of an airport knowing a physical search may be required, there is no assault.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TorchTheWitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 03:36 AM
Response to Reply #15
21. sexual assault has never had shit to do with sex
Edited on Tue Nov-23-10 03:42 AM by TorchTheWitch
Sexual assaults and rapes are about POWER, NOT sex.

And on edit: If you CONSENT to be touched whether it's because of sexual interest or not it's the CONSENT that makes it not sexual assault, NOT whether or not the nature of the touching is sexual.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abq_Sarah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #21
27. From a legal standpoint
I don't believe that holds much water.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 02:59 AM
Response to Reply #10
17. You may decide when you are being assaulted or not, but you
Edited on Tue Nov-23-10 03:00 AM by sabrina 1
don't get to decide what other people consider assault. If a stranger touches me I get to decide how I feel about it, and that stranger feels or doesn't is of no consequence. We don't have to read minds when someone touches us inappropriately, we simply have to call the police, something that people are now being advised to do if they are fondled by TSA agents, and then to call their lawyers.

I will not be flying until this danger passes. I don't go into bad neighborhoods knowingly, and for now, the TSA has turned airports into very bad neighborhoods where people are likely to be threatened for refusing to be assaulted by their agents. Best to stay away from them altogether until this agency has been reigned in and those who thought up these abuses, fired.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arikara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 02:27 AM
Response to Original message
14. I'm missing something in this story
It sounds like he was getting off a flight, going through customs and going home. Why would he have to go through security?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 03:00 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. It's mandatory now.
You have to go through customs and security getting off the plane too if you're connecting to another flight within the states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 03:16 AM
Response to Reply #14
19. I guess that's the rule now -- and it's fokkin' ridiculous. You have to submit to the Scope or
Edited on Tue Nov-23-10 03:17 AM by kath
Grope in order to go home AFTER YOU'VE ALREADY FLOWN. WTF???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KeepItReal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 04:19 AM
Response to Reply #14
22. That part makes no sense. I went to UK 3 weeks ago and had no extra screening on arrival to LAX
Just normal Customs line, get luggage, and I'm home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Matariki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 02:48 AM
Response to Original message
16. k/r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TorchTheWitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 03:19 AM
Response to Original message
20. if this is supposedly for airplane security why is it being done AFTER
the flight??? We're being told that the reason for this outrageous inspection of our bodies is to detect explosive material on our persons in order that they not be taken onto a plane. So, what the fuck is their reasoning in doing this explosive detection outrageous inspection once the person has ALREADY flown???

This just makes it more than obvious that these invasive searches have NOTHING to do with security on airplanes. NONE.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KansDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #20
26. It makes about as much sense as requiring pilots to go through scanners...
I mean, what are they worried about? That the pilots are rigged with a bomb to blow up the plane in flight? It doesn't occur to these fuckheads that the pilots could simply crash the plane if they wanted to?

This is bizarre, to say the least! :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoPasaran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 06:09 AM
Response to Original message
23. Sorry, I don't follow blind links to crazy people's blogs
Unrecced and hidden
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shireen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #23
24. too bad ...
you missed a great story.

:rofl:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
25. k and r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 02:01 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC