"Opt Out"

[Sharky]

Re: "Opt Out"

()

[tsetsefly]

Re: "Opt Out"

More on this:

TSA - Sexual Assault

I have an incident to share that occurred late Friday afternoon, November 12, 2010, around 5:15 in the Dayton International Airport.

I realize the publishing this publically on the internet puts me into a delicate situation, given that I am a high profile blogger and author. This is a difficult incident to share, but it needs to be said...Because I will not be a silent victim.
I will share the facts of the incident in as a matter of fact manner as I can.

I checked into my flight and had a boarding pass printed that included “plus infant.” My baby and I were flying from Dayton, OH, to San Antonio, TX, so I could run in the San Antonio Half Marathon. I was taking my baby along because he is still breastfeeding for part of the day.

I entered the security line, removed the special formula that I had with me for the baby, as well as my quart size baggie with my other liquids. I went through the x-ray machine and metal detector, carrying the baby, with no incident.

Because I was traveling with baby formula, I knew to expect that they would test it with the paper circles for explosives. The TSA agent took all of my belongings over to the table in the center of the explosive screening tables. She asked me, “Are you aware of the NEW policies for carrying liquids through security that were instated 4 years ago?” (capitalized to show the emphasis that she placed on that word.)...

link for the rest of the story: http://www.ourlittlechatterboxes.com...l-assault.html

TSA encounter at SAN


[These events took place roughly between 5:30 and 6:30 AM, November 13th in Terminal 2 of the San Diego International Airport. I'm writing this approximately 2 1/2 hours after the events transpired, and they are correct to the best of my recollection. I will admit to being particularly fuzzy on the exact order of events when dealing with the agents after getting my ticket refunded; however, all of the events described did occur.

I had my phone recording audio and video of much of these events. It can be viewed below.

Please spread this story as far and wide as possible. I will make no claims to copyright or otherwise.]

He did the pat down but said he would not be molested (ie. have his junk handled), he was not allowed to fly. He was also told he gave up rights when he bought the ticket! http://johnnyedge.blogspot.com/2010/...y-between.html

Get the Government Out of Our Pants

Has the Transportation Security Administration finally gone too far?

When it comes to protecting against terrorism, this is how things usually go: A danger presents itself. The federal government responds with new rules that erode privacy, treat innocent people as suspicious, and blur the distinction between life in a free society and life in a correctional facility. And we all tamely accept the new intrusions, like sheep being shorn.
Maybe not this time.
The war on terrorism is going to get personal. Very personal. Americans have long resented the hassles that go with air travel ever since 9/11—long security lines, limits on liquids, forced removal of footwear, and so on. But if the Transportation Security Administration has its way, we will look back to 2009 as the good old days.
The agency is rolling out new full-body scanners, which eventually will replace metal detectors at all checkpoints. These machines replicate the experience of taking off your clothes, but without the fun. They enable agents to get a view of your body that leaves nothing to the imagination.
A lot of people, of course, couldn't care less if a stranger wants to gaze upon everything God gave them. But some retain a modesty that makes them reluctant to parade naked in front of people they don't know, even virtually. Henceforth, Jennifer Aniston is going to think twice before flying commercial.
Besides the indignity of having one's body exposed to an airport screener, there is a danger the images will find a wider audience. The U.S. Marshals Service recently admitted saving some 35,000 images from a machine at a federal courthouse in Florida. TSA says that will never happen. Human experience says, oh, yes, it will.
For the camera-shy, TSA will offer an alternative: "enhanced" pat-downs. And you'll get a chance to have an interesting conversation with your children about being touched by strangers. This is not the gentle frisking you may have experienced at the airport in the past. It requires agents to probe aggressively in intimate zones—breasts, buttocks, crotches. If you enjoyed your last mammography or prostate exam, you'll love the enhanced pat-down....

http://reason.com/archives/2010/11/1...ent-out-of-our

[shiny!]

Re: "Opt Out"

I suspect my cynicism was a tad too subtle.

Yes, I appreciate that you were criticizing the way security is handled, and surely there is much to criticize.

I was suggesting that this whole bloody mess is a charade, a giant false flag. I was suggesting that the entire War on Terror was concocted, from the get-go, not by radical Muslims "angry at our freedoms", but rather by British-Israelie-American intelligence operatives as a cover story for increased domestic surveillance and control, and for increased foreign military aggression against non-cooperating nations.

My views on this matter are dark and sinister.

You have my permission to dismiss this post as the deranged work of a conspiratorial nut-job.

I think you're totally right. It's not the only false flag that's been run up the pole. I've always thought that by continuing drug prohibition, by keeping drug traffic in the hands of criminal gangs instead of regulating and taxing it as we do liquor and cigarettes, the "War on Drugs" was a way to increase violent crime in the streets and use that violence as an excuse for increased gun control.

I remember hearing Ross Perot talking about the War on Drugs when he was running for president, saying that people had to realize that we were at War, and when at War people had to be willing to give up their Constitutional liberties in order to win.

I was all set to vote for him until he said that...

If you judge the War on Drugs based upon it's actual effects, it's real purpose is to disarm the American populace.

If you judge the War on Cancer based upon it's actual effects, it's real purpose is to enrich the Cancer Industry (Big Pharma), which employs more people than the number of people who actually have cancer. They don't want to find a cure for cancer, because that would put them out of work.

If you judge the War on Poverty on it's actual effects, it's real purpose is to erode self-reliance and create addictive dependence on the State for sustenance and life itself.

If you judge the Central Bank on it's actual effects over a century, it's real purpose is to transfer wealth from the middle class to the top 1% ultra-rich elite.

If you judge the War on Terror by it's actual results, it's real purpose is to turn Citizens into terrified sheep, willing to give up their freedom for an illusion of security.

I see a pattern here...

[tsetsefly]

Re: "Opt Out"

I think you're totally right. It's not the only false flag that's been run up the pole. I've always thought that by continuing drug prohibition, by keeping drug traffic in the hands of criminal gangs instead of regulating and taxing it as we do liquor and cigarettes, the "War on Drugs" was a way to increase violent crime in the streets and use that violence as an excuse for increased gun control.

I remember hearing Ross Perot talking about the War on Drugs when he was running for president, saying that people had to realize that we were at War, and when at War people had to be willing to give up their Constitutional liberties in order to win.

I was all set to vote for him until he said that...

If you judge the War on Drugs based upon it's actual effects, it's real purpose is to disarm the American populace.

If you judge the War on Cancer based upon it's actual effects, it's real purpose is to enrich the Cancer Industry (Big Pharma), which employs more people than the number of people who actually have cancer. They don't want to find a cure for cancer, because that would put them out of work.

If you judge the War on Poverty on it's actual effects, it's real purpose is to erode self-reliance and create addictive dependence on the State for sustenance and life itself.

If you judge the Central Bank on it's actual effects over a century, it's real purpose is to transfer wealth from the middle class to the top 1% ultra-rich elite.

If you judge the War on Terror by it's actual results, it's real purpose is to turn Citizens into terrified sheep, willing to give up their freedom for an illusion of security.

I see a pattern here...

You can add the war on obesity to that list... Government fighting the war on "obesity" while doling out millions in subsidies to the agriculture industry.

I forgot where I heard this, might of been Bowling for Columbine, but everything in America has to be turned into a "War" against something.

I really hope the american people wake up and realize what's going on... the results of proposition 19 where not a good start btw...

[karim0028]

Re: "Opt Out"

I think you're totally right. It's not the only false flag that's been run up the pole. I've always thought that by continuing drug prohibition, by keeping drug traffic in the hands of criminal gangs instead of regulating and taxing it as we do liquor and cigarettes, the "War on Drugs" was a way to increase violent crime in the streets and use that violence as an excuse for increased gun control.

I remember hearing Ross Perot talking about the War on Drugs when he was running for president, saying that people had to realize that we were at War, and when at War people had to be willing to give up their Constitutional liberties in order to win.

I was all set to vote for him until he said that...

If you judge the War on Drugs based upon it's actual effects, it's real purpose is to disarm the American populace.

If you judge the War on Cancer based upon it's actual effects, it's real purpose is to enrich the Cancer Industry (Big Pharma), which employs more people than the number of people who actually have cancer. They don't want to find a cure for cancer, because that would put them out of work.

If you judge the War on Poverty on it's actual effects, it's real purpose is to erode self-reliance and create addictive dependence on the State for sustenance and life itself.

If you judge the Central Bank on it's actual effects over a century, it's real purpose is to transfer wealth from the middle class to the top 1% ultra-rich elite.

If you judge the War on Terror by it's actual results, it's real purpose is to turn Citizens into terrified sheep, willing to give up their freedom for an illusion of security.

I see a pattern here...

Its kind of disappointing isn't it when you start noticing how easy it is to manipulate a group of people through mantras and the illusion of something for free....

[Chomsky]

Re: "Opt Out"

Heads Up! Senate TSA Oversight Hearing -- 17 Nov

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/trave...ng-17-nov.html

[DToM67]

Re: "Opt Out"

More on this:

link for the rest of the story: http://www.ourlittlechatterboxes.com...l-assault.html

In the above link, the blogger states:

I will leave you with this thought: “It is acceptable and encouraged that a TSA government official can do something to an American citizen that US military personnel cannot do to a member of the Taliban.”

Anyone know if she's correct in this assertion? If she is, Americans should, en mass, rightly tell the TSA to f*ck right off.

[tsetsefly]

Re: "Opt Out"

In the above link, the blogger states:

I will leave you with this thought: “It is acceptable and encouraged that a TSA government official can do something to an American citizen that US military personnel cannot do to a member of the Taliban.”

Anyone know if she's correct in this assertion? If she is, Americans should, en mass, rightly tell the TSA to f*ck right off.

Don't know if its true, but I do know there is tougher restrictions on military raid in Iraq than drug raid in America so it can't be that far off...

[Shakespear]

Re: "Opt Out"

Ohhh, this is Bad but slowly getting Insane.

http://www.aero-news.net/columns/avs...-80683acad131&

Now-General (ret.) Joe Foss, 86, paid for his own flying lessons partly by waiting tables; at 27, he was considered "too old" to fly combat; but the second lieutenant finagled 150 hours in Wildcats, and was soon given Pacific Theater duty, where he ran up 26 kills, equaling Capt Eddie Rickenbacker's WWI total. In 1943, Franklin D. Roosevelt awarded him the Congressional Medal of Honor. He nearly had that medal taken from him by some of the jerks who screen passengers at Sky Harbor International, in Phoenix (AZ), as he tried to board a flight to DC on January 11.
These dimbulbs were giving Foss, a man whose loyalty to the USA is unquestioned, a hard time, because of their "one level of security" (lack of) mentality. They didn't know what the Medal of Honor was, and they wanted to take it, because it might be used as a weapon!


....

What Happened in Phoenix?
Basically, “security” goons working for America West treated Foss like dirt (or any unclean word of your preference). They tried to run him through a machine that could have stopped his pacemaker, killing him. They played a shoes-off, shoes-on game with him over and over, helped themselves to a few of his trinkets, and most egregiously, they seem to have attempted to steal his Medal of Honor.
“I was sizzling,” Foss remembers. "They're so nuts about this thing now,” he told the Associated Press. “That whole program needs to go back… and start from square one. It's nutty. Why should you have to go through such a hassle?” He told the Washington Times, "They just didn't know what it was but they acted like I shouldn't be carrying it on. I kept explaining that it was the highest medal you can receive from the military in this country, but nobody listened."
Joe Foss is not the Lone Ranger; many have been dismayed at the ineptitude and crudity with which “enhanced” security has been deployed. It appears that pilots and other successful people are singled out for abuse, as Foss was, by insolent guards ("Metal Hip, eh?" 01-09-02, ANN).
In a much longer column that ANN has had in the pipeline for a while (and will hopefully run now as a longer sidebar to this one – hey E-I-C, that’s a hint!), I have described how poor and futile our present security procedures are. But this outrage really distills the whole thing.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: "Opt Out"

I see a pattern here...

I must advise you to eat a box of Twinkies, drink some fluoridated water, and watch your daily quota of six hours of television. Repeat each day for the next 30 days. There seems to be some risk that you are losing touch with the Matrix reality, and it would unfortunate if you had to undergo more advanced treatment methods. </sarcasm>

[LorenS]

Re: "Opt Out"

Wear a cup.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: "Opt Out"

Heads Up! Senate TSA Oversight Hearing -- 17 Nov

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/trave...ng-17-nov.html

From the notice you linked:

The committee chair is Sen Jay Rockefeller (D-WV)

Nothing good will come of this hearing. At best, they will put a dab of grease on the next shiv to be stuck in our ribs.

[flintlock]

Re: "Opt Out"

Ohhh, this is Bad but slowly getting Insane.

http://www.aero-news.net/columns/avs...-80683acad131&

That's funny I was just reading a book about Guadalcanal that had a picture of Joe Foss in it!

[flintlock]

Re: "Opt Out"

I liked the photo and headline on the Drudge Report today. "The terrorists have won!". With a picture of an apparently Muslim TSA employee frisking a nun.

[tsetsefly]

Re: "Opt Out"

And just to keep on going: