TSA Molests Miss USA, Makes Her Cry... For Your Safety

from the feeling-safer? dept

Thu, Apr 28th 2011 8:19am — Mike Masnick

Since the TSA "enhanced patdown" experiences started last fall, I've heard from a variety of people who came out of the experience feeling seriously violated, with more than a few asking about legal actions they could take after feeling sexually assaulted and molested by the experience. It really is a lot more common than you might think. Many of those I've spoken with have decided that they didn't want to go public with the story of their own experience and their own feelings, because it felt so intrusive and so personal, that having to "relive" it by fighting the TSA would be just horrible. This is part of what I find most nefarious about the TSA groping brigade: like many sexual assault victims, they're put in a position where after it's over, doing something about the assault only forces you to relive the experience.

Thankfully, some people are speaking out. The latest is former Miss USA, Susie Castillo, who has posted an emotional video right after being groped by the TSA and feeling totally violated, leading her to break down and start crying: What's really bizarre is after she goes to complain to the TSA... they give her a "complaint card" to fill out as if that makes being sexually assaulted better.

In a blog post about the experience, Castillo notes that she's gone through the patdown before, but this one was much more invasive than previous ones:

Well, this pat down was completely different. It was MUCH MORE invasive than my first one at LAX, just a week before. To say that I felt invaded is an understatement. What bothered me most was when she ran the back of her hands down my behind, felt around my breasts, and even came in contact with my vagina! Honestly, I was in shock, especially since the woman at LAX never actually touched me there. The TSA employee at DFW touched private area 4 times, going up both legs from behind and from the front, each time touching me there. Was I at my gynecologist�s office? No! This was crazy!

I felt completely helpless and violated during the entire process (in fact, I still do), so I became extremely upset. If I wanted to get back to Los Angeles, I had no choice but to be violated, whether by radiation or a stranger. I just kept thinking, �What have I done to deserve this treatment as an upstanding, law-abiding American citizen?� Am I a threat to US security? I was Miss USA, for Pete�s sake!

Yes, for your safety, the TSA needs to sexually assault Miss USA.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: airports, patdowns, sexual assault, susie castillo, tsa

157 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

John Doe, 28 Apr 2011 @ 8:31am

I don't feel safer,,,but I didn't feel unsafe to begin with
The best thing they did was lock the cockpit doors. They can bring down a plane, but they can't fly it into buildings anymore.

As for the security theater, I have been flying in and out of Atlanta lately which is the busiest airport in the country. They have 2 x-ray/backscatter/nuke screeners for over 20 lines. I have yet to see them nuke anyone while I was going through screening. I have yet to see them pat anyone down either. So thousands of people are being let onto planes without being nuked or groped.

How safe is that? I would wager it is as safe as it would be if they nuked and groped every passenger. Why we the sheeple put up with this is beyond me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- HM, 28 Apr 2011 @ 8:36am
  
  Re: I don't feel safer,,,but I didn't feel unsafe to begin with
  Apparently Atlanta is the busiest in the world. I was surprised to learn that too. Then I realized, who wouldn't want to get the fuck out of Atlanta.
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%27s_busiest_airports_by_passenger_traffic#2010_statis tics
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:18am
  
  Re: I don't feel safer,,,but I didn't feel unsafe to begin with
  To my mind, 9/11 pretty much improved security on its own, although locking the doors was also a great move.
  
  By that, I mean that pre-9/11, most airline hijacks were for the purpose of hostage taking. Common knowledge dictated that these men were probably desperate or ruthless but ultimately wanted to land the plane and demand ransom. Better to just sit down and shut up if you're in that position as trying stop them would get you shot.
  
  Post-9/11, it's the opposite way round. If someone makes a move on your flight, you'll immediately assume they're going to blow it up - so any would-be hijacker has every able bodied passenger on the flight to deal with.
  
  My big worry nowadays is the queues. If you want to blow up a lot of people now, the best target is the queue of people proving they're not carrying bombs...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:28am
    
    Re: Re: I don't feel safer,,,but I didn't feel unsafe to begin with
    Then they'll start queuing up for the queues and those will get bombed next.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:24am
      
      Re: Re: Re: I don't feel safer,,,but I didn't feel unsafe to begin with
      Eventually everyone will be required to marry a TSA agent so that someone can watch them constantly.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 1:02pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: I don't feel safer,,,but I didn't feel unsafe to begin with
        At least the sexual contact might be consensual then!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - CommonSense (profile), 29 Apr 2011 @ 7:57am
      
      Re: Re: Re: I don't feel safer,,,but I didn't feel unsafe to begin with
      Yo Dawg!! I heard you like queues, so I made a queue for your queue so you can wait to wait!!!
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - John Doe, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:34am
    
    Re: Re: I don't feel safer,,,but I didn't feel unsafe to begin with
    "My big worry nowadays is the queues. If you want to blow up a lot of people now, the best target is the queue of people proving they're not carrying bombs..."
    
    That was my exact thought last Friday when standing in line at the Atlanta airport. There are more people in line than any one airplane can hold.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Trails (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 8:32am

Never thought I'd say this
Hooray for Ms. USA.

It's good to see someone in this position taking on a tough issue for once.

Hopefully this garners some attention to this issue for the minor fraction of americans who don't read techdirt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thomas (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 8:36am

Working for TSA
is a great opportunity for perverts to fondle not only adult women, but underage children. Why is anyone surprised? Once they bring up "National Security", the government feels that anything they want to do is perfectly allowable.

One wonders what kind of background check they do for TSA workers? Do they check for criminal records at all? do they care if they hire convicted molesters?

Not only does TSA molest people, they also riffle through your luggage and then steal items of value. It's a great opportunity for criminals.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- CommonSense (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:34am
  
  Re: Working for TSA
  The best thing to happen to perverts since the Catholic Church!!!!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Xtrdouglas, 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:55pm
  
  Re: Working for TSA
  As I am currently going through the now 8 month process of background checks and government security clearance before even being interviewed for the TSA air Marshall position--- each one of the officers go through just a gruesome of a time ( both in length and in divulgment) it would actually be easier to become a cop or local sheriff---
  
  So quip at something else--- this girl is Really blowing it out of proportion as a natural drama queen
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - CommonSense (profile), 29 Apr 2011 @ 7:55am
    
    Re: Re: Working for TSA
    Considering all of the rights you'll be able to strip away from airline customers with that position, I'd say it's only right that you get violated before they let you violate everyone else.
    
    She may be exaggerating, but that doesn't mean it isn't a problem. So go try to minimize the impact of something else.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 29 Apr 2011 @ 8:33am
    
    Re: Re: Working for TSA
    So the requirements for being a TSA groper are the same as being a TSA Air Marshall?
    
    Yeah, I didn't think so, but nice try... troll harder
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
codeslave (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 8:39am

The saddest thing is...
..now that she's made a video and a complaint, she'll be subjected to enhanced pat-downs every time she flies. Complaining about security is a sign that you are a potential terrorist threat, after all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:32am
  
  Re: The saddest thing is...
  But then again, so is not complaining.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- ethorad (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:38am
  
  Re: The saddest thing is...
  I just hope she's not wearing a casio F-91w watch or she'll get a free flight to Cuba
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - halley (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:28am
    
    Re: Re: The saddest thing is...
    I didn't get your reference to the Casio F-91W watch, so I googled. http://www.aolnews.com/2011/04/26/how-can-you-tell-someone-is-al-qaida-look-at-his-watch/
    
    (Some kind of irony in pushing "I feel lucky" and getting AOL News.)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Vincent Clement (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 8:42am

Funny how the Tea Party is totally quiet on this issue. Socialized medicine is bad, but socialized airport security theatre is perfectly fine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Vincenzo Clement, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:04am
  
  Re:
  WTF does the Tea Party have to do with this issue? Thumbs Down there dbag
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - blaktron (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:14am
    
    Re: Re:
    Actually its a good point. Why arent your self-appointed protectors of freedom and democracy yapping off at the mouth about this?
    
    3 words: Soft on terrorism. Those 3 words scare politicians to death, and because of that you wont get a President with the political capital to fight the TSA until one kills Osama Bin Laden with his pair hands on the steps of the White House.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - xs (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:15am
    
    Re: Re:
    Well, with Tea baggers so worked up about constitution, personal rights, get government out of our lives, etc., etc., I would think this violation would be chalked up as another evidence that government is seriously out of control.
    
    But, No?
    
    Ok, I guess it only matters when it's Tea Bagger's tax bills are concerned.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - JC, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:38am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      So, the Tea Party, which is a loose association of people with similar goals, must now make statements regarding every discernible violation of the constitution?
      
      Isn't saying that the constitution should be followed enough to cover all the minutiae?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - xs (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:08am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        When one of the prominent "similar goals" for this loose association of people was the return to constitutional rule, then silence on any discernible violation of constitution is a strange thing indeed.
        
        Or judging by your second sentence, you must think there are situations where constitution needn't be followed. Good to know where your kind is coming from.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        JC, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:59am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        That's an interesting rationalization you're making about my comment. I'll be honest, I don't have the necessary skills it would take to convince you how ridiculous your reply is.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - JC, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:34am
    
    Re: Re:
    I agree. Obama has been totally quiet on this issue, too. I can only assume he completely supports what is happening.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased) (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:36am
  
  Re:
  Funny how the mainstream media is totally quiet on this issue.
  
  Rand Paul even wrote about this serious and pointless invasion of privacy in his book called...what was it..."The Tea Party Goes To Washington."
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:52am
  
  Re:
  Please, no. The only value the Tea Party has is in encouraging the stupid, the racist, the bigoted, the sexist, the xenophobic, the delusional, the gullible -- you know, the inferior people -- to all self-identify.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - weneedhelp (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:59am
    
    Re: Re:
    What a fucking mindless comment. Even from an AC. You work for CNN?
    
    you know, the inferior people - Takes one to know one.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:16am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      But that's an entirely apropos description: only inferior people would even consider being part of the Tea Party. It's the first, last and best refuge for scumbags and filth.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - The eejit (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 12:05pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Then why are you not a member?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 2:03pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Wow, Guess the Unions and Democrats are a bit fearful, only thing you have left is name calling.
    
    Its like watching a child on the playground, sticking out their tongue and saying "Nah, Nah, Nah, I cant hear you" its funny to watch you self destruct.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- btr1701, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:21am
  
  Response to: Vincent Clement on Apr 28th, 2011 @ 8:42am
  > but socialized airport security
  > is just fine
  
  Yes, this security nonsense is useless and ridiculous, but how the he'll is it "socialized"? It's not comparable in any way to Obamacare.
  
  You seem like one of those people with a personal axe you like to grind and will turn every issue into an opportunity to grind it, no matter how tortured the logic.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:12am
    
    Re: Response to: Vincent Clement on Apr 28th, 2011 @ 8:42am
    Government handles all the air port security. Obamacare, government handles all the healthcare insurance. Seem they are both socialized (meaning government run). Oh wait, we didn't get single-payer insurance or even a public option. So you're right, they aren't comparable at all. Our airport security is socialized, but Obamacare is not. Thanks for clearing that up.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - btr1701 (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 6:51pm
      
      Re: Re: Response to: Vincent Clement on Apr 28th, 2011 @ 8:42am
      > they are both socialized (meaning government run)
      
      The definition of socialism is not "government run".
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Skeolan, 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:20am
    
    Re: Response to: Vincent Clement on Apr 28th, 2011 @ 8:42am
    Actually I'd say the two have a few fairly important characteristics in common:
    
    1. Underpinned by reliance on a universal mandate for participation by all citizens
    2. Funded by the federal government
    3. Constitutes an (arguably misguided) attempt at a top-down solution to a nationwide problem which opponents believe is a non-issue
    4. Subject to broad constitutional critiques by opponents
    
    Significantly, neither program meets the classical definition for Socialism. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialization_(economics)#Misuse_of_the_term
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 29 Apr 2011 @ 7:17am
    
    Re: Response to: Vincent Clement on Apr 28th, 2011 @ 8:42am
    Just wait for it....
    
    Next announcement, "Due to increased health care costs and to help share the burden of increased security to protect the children. TSA agents will now be performing prostate exams and pap smears during their regular screening exams for a nominal mandatory fee. Please have your health insurance card, or the appropriate cash deductible ready when you get to the screening area.
    
    All Agents will be fully trained with this handy video we produced (points to VHS tape labeled "Molesting people for fun and profit" with a sticky note saying 'replace label with TSA Medical Procedure Training' before releasing), and all proceeds from these procedures will go to supporting future TSA training video production. This will cut down on unnecessary doctor visits, and help share the cost of health care with TSA agents, who after all have your health in mind every time they screen someone."
    
    Yeah... It's been one of those days already
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jim Wilson, 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:11am
  
  Re:
  I couldn't agree more.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 4:29pm
  
  Re:
  Not everyone has been quiet. Ron Paul has been very vocally against the TSA and its security theater. He introduced a bill last year which would make pat-downs and backscatter x-ray machines illegal at airports.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
John, 28 Apr 2011 @ 8:42am

Of course she was picked for a pat down
They pick people based on who they'd like to pat down not on who they think would be a security breach.

I have flown internationally and once domestically in the last month and a half and not once have I been patted down or scanned by the machine. Just the metal detector. Because I'm not a good candidate for a good time during a pat down.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 8:51am
  
  Re: Of course she was picked for a pat down
  They pick people based on who they'd like to pat down not on who they think would be a security breach.
  
  [Citation Needed]
  
  Aren't pat-downs done by the same sex? I'm sure the male TSA employees love picking out the men that they want to fondle.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Forge, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:17am
    
    Re: Re: Of course she was picked for a pat down
    So in your world, there are no homosexuals? I don't swing that way myself, but I can imagine it being quite entertaining for those that do.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Erin B., 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:55am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Of course she was picked for a pat down
      Yeahhh...gay people are people, so it stands to reason that some of them would be abusive creeps, much like how straight people are people, so it stands to reason that some of them are abusive creeps.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:03am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Of course she was picked for a pat down
      I'm sure there are, but he was making it sound like every TSA agent is stalking their prey...ready to sexually molest them. The reality is much different.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - crade (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 3:19pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Of course she was picked for a pat down
        Jealousy?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased) (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:38am
    
    Re: Re: Of course she was picked for a pat down
    Some might just want to watch the woman-on-woman action.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Vincent Clement (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:07am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Of course she was picked for a pat down
      Who wouldnt?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Erin B., 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:53am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Of course she was picked for a pat down
        Gay dudes, probs.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - JC, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:42am
    
    Re: Re: Of course she was picked for a pat down
    As any competent therapist will tell you, sexual violations are not about the sex. It's an act of domination.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:10am
    
    Re: Re: Of course she was picked for a pat down
    Just because a woman is doing the pat down on a woman doesn't mean someone isn't getting their jollies.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 29 Apr 2011 @ 9:29am
    
    Re: Re: Of course she was picked for a pat down
    Nope. The guys pick the rape machine so they can look at the hot chicks. If they opt out they don't get to look at them.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:58am
  
  Re: Of course she was picked for a pat down
  I've been fondled by TSA before and most people wouldn't want to feel me up.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Annoyed, 28 Apr 2011 @ 8:52am

Why not file a police report
I don't get why if people feel they have been violated or molested not take legal action? Call the police, tell them someone just touched you inappropriately, and when they come point them at the TSA agent. TSA rules do not rise about the law. If the law has been broken, then call the police.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- blaktron (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:16am
  
  Re: Why not file a police report
  Actually they do. Otherwise your 4th amendment would apply.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Amber, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:23am
  
  Re: Why not file a police report
  It's not as simple as call the police. I have filed so many different complaints with the police and not one of them has been taken even half seriously. All the complaints someone could possibly want to file can be filed, but that's not going to say that anything is going to be done about it. It's "he said she said" and government will respond with it's national security, u dont like it dont fly. sooo I think the matter is beyond police authority.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- proximity1, 30 Apr 2011 @ 6:57am
  
  Re: Why not file a police report
  "TSA rules do not rise about the law. If the law has been broken, then call the police."
  
  You are very, very naive.
  
  Guess what? The TSA's practises have been challenged in court and, instead of protecting our rights, the courts have ruled often, if not always, in the government's favor; apparently, your privacy rights are merely an optical illusion. When needed, they vanish--by courts' rulings.
  
  NEXT?
  
  (All the same, court challenges should be made again and again--by thousands of people-- as long as this nightmare continues.)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - cece (profile), 30 Apr 2011 @ 10:28am
    
    Re: Re: Why not file a police report
    Little by little we give up our rights-does this not remind you of Germany in the 1940's what next?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sean, 28 Apr 2011 @ 8:53am

Mike, I'm surprised you would use such a phrase as hyperbolic as 'sexual assault' to describe this woman touching this other woman. This seems no better than demonizing pirates as 'thieves'.

Disappointing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:00am
  
  Re:
  I guess we can all rest easy now that we've heard from the Clueless Wonder Division.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Sean, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:46am
    
    Re: Re:
    If you have nothing in the slightest to contribute, then why post? I imagine your post was a stab at humor.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:55am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      It was a stab at something, got that part right.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Marcus Carab (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:08am
  
  Re:
  But a lot of people describe their experience as feeling like sexual assault, saying it leaves them feeling powerless and violated. It has reduced quite a lot of children and adults to tears. And, quite simply, it involves a complete stranger thoroughly groping every nook and cranny of your body.
  
  So is 'sexual assault' really so hyperbolic?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:21am
    
    Re: Re:
    When you have no choice, no control, and no power in the situation, yeah, that pretty much sums up assault. Sanctioned assault, no less.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Sean, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:44am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Exactly, so when I stop at a red light and I have no choice to, no control over it and no power, the light is assaulting me.
      
      So are stop signs.
      
      And pedestrians.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:01am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Having fun trolling? Good for you.
        
        Get back to us when observing a stop sign is anything like being assaulted, sexually or otherwise.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Marcus Carab (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:03am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You can play your little game of technical analogies if you want, but we're talking about uniformed officials feeling up five-year-olds. That calls for much more consideration than a stop sign. It's kind of disturbing that you don't see the difference.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - weneedhelp (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:08am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Straws a flyin here.
        
        "Exactly, so when I stop at a red light and I have no choice to, no control over it and no power, the light is assaulting me." - Just go outside and ask someone to kick you in the nuts.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:13am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You're looking at it the wrong way.
        
        The red light isn't stopping you. It is letting others pass. For others to be free, you give up some control.
        
        The equivalent to TSA's situation would be: you are sacrificing the freedoms of EVERYONE ELSE so that YOU can be free (or just stay alive). I find that behavior pathetic coming from the supposed "leader of the free world".
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Bob Vila, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:13am
  
  Re:
  My favorite alternative acronym meaning: TSA = Trained Sexual Assault.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The eejit (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:16am
  
  Re:
  Miss USA described the experience as a 'violation'. I'm pretty sure sexual assault often comes up when you're violated, too.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Groove Tiger (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:25am
  
  Re:
  You're right, Sean, I mean, they probably had it coming, with their provocative mini skirts and stuff.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- JC, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:46am
  
  Re:
  Seriously? You're saying that women are incapable of sexually assaulting other women? *This is the sound of me picking up my jaw from the floor*
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- alternatives(), 28 Apr 2011 @ 8:37pm
  
  Re:
  Mike, I'm surprised you would use such a phrase
  
  Gosh, perhaps Mike didn't use "that phrase"?
  
  'sexual assault' to describe this woman touching this other woman.
  
  sex�u�al assult
  Sexual assault is an assault of a sexual nature on another person. Although sexual assaults most frequently are by a man on a woman, it may be by a man on a man, woman on a man or woman on a woman, or adult on a child
  
  What's next? Gonna defend Adult on child situations as 'OK'?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Michael, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:01am

Complaint card
I wonder if that complaint card can cause a paper cut?

They may want to take those away from people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- David (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 1:11pm
  
  Re: Complaint card
  Take them away carefully, you might increase the incidence of paper cuts by jerking them away...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mark, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:02am

TSA Molests Miss USA, Makes Her Cry... For Your Safety
Don't put up with this unconstitutional garbage! It�s all worthless security theater that does nothing to keep you �safe�. Boycott Flying ENTIRELY until sanity returns! Please join us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Boycott-Flying/126801010710392
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:42am
  
  Re: TSA Molests Miss USA, Makes Her Cry... For Your Safety
  I think we also need to boycott facebook. So let's move your boycott flying page somewhere that careful folks can join.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:04am
    
    Re: Re: TSA Molests Miss USA, Makes Her Cry... For Your Safety
    sorry we are now boycotting boycotting facebook
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Greevar (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 12:07pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: TSA Molests Miss USA, Makes Her Cry... For Your Safety
      I'm going to boycott boycotting!
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Ryan (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 1:23pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: TSA Molests Miss USA, Makes Her Cry... For Your Safety
      If you would like to join the Official "Boycott the Internet" please reply below... :P
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- RcCypher (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 12:11pm
  
  Re: TSA Molests Miss USA, Makes Her Cry... For Your Safety
  This is simply not an option. If your job tells you to fly there and do that. You do it. Especially in our economy. So how bout a functional idea instead.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Louis Smith (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:11am

Let's help TSA make it better
It seems to me that there is a MUCH easier way to solve this - that TSA is just approaching it wrong. I guarantee that this can be eliminated and make the pat-down become the desired method of passing security.
All they need to do is to direct their HR department to hire all new inspectors. Go to Hooters, Cheetah Club, Gold Rush - and for the ladies - Chippendales and Harlequin to find new TSA agents. There isn't a man alive that wouldn't gladly volunteer to be patted down during a lap dance or by a totally qualified Hooters girl. And the women would be lining up for their Chippendale dancer or Harlequin cover model. The only complaints would be the length of the line to get to the inspectors! And if TSA is short on funds, they can start charging for the "service".

Approach and Attitude - makes all the difference.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Michael, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:20am
  
  Re: Let's help TSA make it better
  I'll throw a dollar at that idea.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:36am
  
  Re: Let's help TSA make it better
  Thats a good idea. Can we make it so they are not allowed to use their hands to pat me down while we are at it. Boobs and face only.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- wnzook, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:33am
  
  Re: Let's help TSA make it better
  They(TSA) have been give the opportunity to learn less invasive methods of screening but they said no thank you.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ron Rezendes (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:35am
  
  Re: Let's help TSA make it better
  Make it rain, baby!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Hayley, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:42am
  
  Re: Let's help TSA make it better
  So then we're still getting sexually molested, but by better looking people? I don't care WHAT the person molesting me looks like -- I care about not getting touched inappropriately, period. Sure, I might think someone's cute, but that doesn't mean I want to get molested by them, or that I'm going to line up to get touched.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - weneedhelp (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:12am
    
    Re: Re: Let's help TSA make it better
    Thank you Hayley.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:20am

I've been through the extra security before. for several years my plane tickets always got punched for extra security. It was from the times I took emergency leave from Iraq. Apparently when someone else purchases last minute tickets for you from a middle eastern travel agency and there is no record of how you got to the middle east in the first place (because I flew over via military charter), it made me a terrorist for good. Never mind the fact that the US government is the one that purchased the tickets, or the fact that I had a secret security clearance at the time. The most fun was when they tested my carry on luggage for explosive residue. I used my combat pack as my carry on. Guess how that test turned out? The poor guy running the test had to go ask a supervisor what to do because he had never had one turn up positive before. It should be noted that this was purely a TSA issue. I got through customs in less than 60 seconds every time I've entered the country, even without a passport! (Military personnel can travel on orders through any Geneva conventions country without a passport) It was only when traveling inside, or leaving the US that I had my ticket punched with the quadruple S. It took 3 years for them to fix this. And if you think the TSA search is invasive, don't ever get accused of a crime...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:38am
  
  Re:
  "And if you think the TSA search is invasive, don't ever get accused of a crime..."
  
  Thats kinda the point, buying an airline ticket shouldnt put me in a class under civilian and just over criminal
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Ron Rezendes (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:37am
    
    Re: Re:
    Trust me - there is no way you are "just over criminal" until the search is completed and you've been cleared!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cathy, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:20am

The TSA made me cry last week too. And wrecked my eye.
http://www.cathygellis.com/soi/2011/04/time-to-ice-the-tsa.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- aldestrawk (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:22am
  
  Re: The TSA made me cry last week too. And wrecked my eye.
  Interesting story. I won't defend TSA's practices but I think the security personnel you asked for ice did the correct thing. It is their job TO ONLY make sure the people who get by them go through the hoops TSA requires. Your bruising and swelling is best helped by immediate application of ice but there won't be permanent damage because it was delayed by a few minutes. I would suggest, while in a security line, or at the front of the line, that you never ask the security personnel for anything. Corner any airport personnel, before you go through security. I'm sure they will have to help in acquiring first aid. If no one is around and the line is empty, call out to the security person to get someone to help with first aid without actually getting into line.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- aldestrawk (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:58am
  
  Re: The TSA made me cry last week too. And wrecked my eye.
  One more comment. If the TSA security personnel were allowed to act intelligently, they would have instructed you to go back a little bit away from their check point and wait while they got a colleague to bring some ice. However, they are trained to be unthinking automatons who cannot deviate in the slightest from protocol. Once you have entered the machine, there is no turning back until they spit you out.
  
  BTW: the title of your blog post may get you special attention in the future. I used to travel all the time, I was always selected for extra questioning, by ICE, upon return to the U.S. I never knew why. This was before 9/11 and I hate to think what the process would be like for me now.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 12:38pm
  
  Re: The TSA made me cry last week too. And wrecked my eye.
  If you have a real medical emergency, then just go through the damn scanner already. You caused your own situation.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - xenomancer (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 7:37pm
    
    Re: Re: The TSA made me cry last week too. And wrecked my eye.
    What if she had just gone through chemo and radiation therapy? What if that extra little toasting in the TSA oven would have shut down several of her vital organs? She would have died is what would have happened. Look at how shitty her experience was with a bruised eye. I know the situation I described seems fairly far fetched, but the demonstrable imperative to provide medical care on only one side of a fucking line simply does not exist. She needed medical care then and there, not after several minutes of sexual assault across the room. The TSA was clearly in the wrong by not immediately providing or seeking medical care for Cathy.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - HTL2001, 29 Apr 2011 @ 1:16am
      
      Re: Re: Re: The TSA made me cry last week too. And wrecked my eye.
      Different "radiation"
      The scanner that you walk through uses infrared. Technically it is radiation, but then again so is visible light. Its not an xray, like what your luggage goes through.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - aldestrawk (profile), 29 Apr 2011 @ 12:56pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: The TSA made me cry last week too. And wrecked my eye.
        Infrared? I don't think so. There are two different types of full body scanners in airports; the millimeter wave scanner and the backscatter x-ray scanner. There are two types of millimeter wave scanners, active and passive. Millimeter waves are not x-rays but keep in mind the common term, microwaves, is really a misnomer and refers to millimeter waves. The passive scanners do not emit radiation. You stand in front of them and are similar to how a camera operates. I don't think they are being used by the TSA. The TSA is using both active millimeter wave scanners and x-ray backscatter devices. These devices a person enters to be scanned. Are they dangerous? Maybe, maybe not. People should keep in mind that they get a lot more radiation sitting in a plane at 30,000 - 40,000 ft than on the ground. Is the comparison of scanners to such high altitude radiation valid? It does put things in perspective. The criticism is that the scanners radiation is all focused on the skin so a comparison has to take that into account. The other comparison is to the radiation received from cell phones which is at a higher intensity. At any rate, one pass through these scanners undoubtedly is not a problem. The concern is accumulation of radiation absorbed from multiple scans.
        
        @xenomancer: For both types of scanners used by the TSA, the radiation is not penetrating, it is absorbed by the skin and so vital organs, other than the skin, are not affected.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        xenomancer (profile), 30 Apr 2011 @ 1:35pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The TSA made me cry last week too. And wrecked my eye.
        Electromagnetic radiation passes right through the soft tissues of the human body. The back scattering is just the x-ray version of Ramman IR spec. So, though the x-rays still pass through, the scattered emissions coming back are what are measured. No matter what any TSA parrot (or unfortunately confused innocent) may tell you, x-rays ARE penetrating radiation. This is a simple fact that should have zero confusion attached to it. The accumulation issue is the primary concern as the machines have so far been inconsistent at best at maintaining emission levels within their own specified safe limits. For frequent fliers, even a reasonably safe rise in exposure for a single pass may be excessive overall. The ridiculous resistance to proper scrutiny and open regulation standards is also a major drawback.
        
        Anyway, nice a diversion as the machine specifics are, my point was the medical issue and the failure of the TSA to adequately address it. I may have over emphasized my hypothetical hyperbole a touch too much.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        aldestrawk (profile), 30 Apr 2011 @ 10:27pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The TSA made me cry last week too. And wrecked my eye.
        I don't think the issue of penetration of backscatter x-rays is as straightforward as you claimed or I claimed. The following excerpt, from a letter signed by several UCSF scientists to an adviser to the president, is what I based my comment on. It is a bit vague as to depth of penetration and percentages.
        
        http://www.npr.org/assets/news/2010/05/17/concern.pdf
        
        "Unlike other scanners, these new devices operate at relatively low beam energies (28keV). The majority of their energy is delivered to the skin and the underlying tissue. Thus, while the dose would be safe if it were distributed throughout the volume of the entire body, the dose to the skin may be dangerously high."
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Glen, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:24am

Study
I really wonder if anyone has done a study to see if slim women are fondled more than obese women? That would be interesting to see.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- aldestrawk (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:26am
  
  Re: Study
  If such a study was done, the result would have to be classified.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
ScytheNoire (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:35am

America, Land of the Free?
America is far from being the "land of the free" it was once claimed to be. It's so far from what the founders wanted. But like all great empires that rise up, they eventually fall, and that is what we are seeing now, the fall of America. It will take many more years, but America is destroying themselves.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:37am

Maybe the answer is MORE groping?
I fly a lot. I go through security a LOT. I'm peeved over the Theatrical Security Agency's methods, but I put up with it ... just barely. The one time I did get selected, I made a game of it. "Oh, yeah, that's it! Aaaaah! Yes, that's the spot!" The agent was not amused with my behavior, but I did get a few smiles from other passengers. There are times where I wonder if I should simply choose the groping experience when I go through security. In doing so, it's MY choice, not theirs. I'll endure the grope the same way I endure a physical exam; I know what's coming and I just grin and bare it. If I look at it as entertainment instead of abuse, I can tolerate it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TSAgame, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:37am

I made a game that pokes fun at the TSA and their body scanners...
My way of protesting the issue, I suppose...

http://sites.google.com/site/tsagame/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous a-hole, 28 Apr 2011 @ 12:21pm
  
  Re:
  I thought the game Rapelay already existed.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - The eejit (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 3:01pm
    
    Re: Re:
    No, you're looking for F.A.T.A.L.
    
    Do NOT ask why I know this, it is Top Secret Umbra information.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Joe Publius (profile), 29 Apr 2011 @ 7:30am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Holy cow, A FATAL reference?
      
      Can I apply for my Top Secret Umbra Clearance now? I happen to be the other guy geeky enough here to know exactly what you're talking about.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
JW, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:01am

Tea party movement beliefs
Hurm. Although the actual issues of the movement are strictly fiscal, I wonder how the people who tend to identify with the tea party movement *do* feel about this issue. If only we had some kind of engine of search to find public statements about issues.

Oh, wait. We do.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=tea+party+tsa

Pretty much all people in the tea party movement seem to be very opposed, mostly condemning it as unconstitutional abuse. Note, of course, that the tea party movement is not a political "party", but rather a fiscal philosophy named after an event that happened to be called the "tea party", so if you think it's a party like the Republican Party or the Democratic Party (or even the Libertarian Party, which would be the closest match), you're probably so confused about politics, it's best to start with a basic primer of the difference between a political movement and an organized political party.

There are plenty of atheists and evangelicals in the movement, gay marriage supporters and homophobes, open borders and controlled borders folk in the tea party movement: the belief that we need to have a balanced budget and not lay the cost of unnecessary wars and other government directed excesses on following generations has nothing to do with cultural views.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
WTF TechDirt?!, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:10am

Is TechDirt running out of tech stuff to cover that it needs to dive into the whining-of-the-day topic?

Unless one of you come up with a FAIR, LEGAL and Fool-proof method of identifying and stopping terrorists, all your whining isn't helping.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Rich, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:27am
  
  Re:
  So, we should give up our freedoms and be molested because there is no fool-proof why to stop terrorists? Why don't you just go hide under your bed. 9/11 made me feel safer, not terrified. The next time someone tries to intimidate a plane full of passengers, they are going to get a rude awakening. THAT is real security, not this groping crap.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:41am
  
  Re:
  Unless one of you come up with a FAIR, LEGAL and Fool-proof method of identifying and stopping terrorists, all your whining isn't helping.
  
  Since the current screening methods are neither FAIR nor Fool-proof, can I count on your support in calling for the end of them?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- harbingerofdoom (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:08am
  
  Re:
  oh look... its the very common yet sometimes difficult to spot rabidinus trollicanus.
  
  well known for their hiding mechanisms, the trollicanus will frequently employ a method of camouflage which attempts to hide the real issue by resorting to irrelevant rhetoric that in no way pertains to the topic at hand and ad-hominem.
  
  the rabidinus trollicanus is the predominate food source for the sawwhatinus youdidicus where it has followed an evolutionary track that allows it to easily spot the camouflage techniques being employed.
  
  This episode of trolling toady was made possible by a grant from the corporation for not listening to idiots and by sponsors like you!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - weneedhelp (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:17am
    
    Re: Re:
    I would ask your permission to repost this sometime, but I dont want to be rude, or waste your time so I just will.
    
    Beep Beep.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- NotMyRealName (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:38am
  
  Re:
  Just like sitting in the emergency seats, they should have a "do you feel comfortable carrying a firearm?" type program that anyone who has gone through the checks for a concealed carry permit can opt in to. If (pull number directly from ass) 5% of passengers are carrying (more once constant travelers start applying for permits) they could totally skip security theater. I really don't see how a plane with a locked cockpit is really much different than a restaurant or movie theater when it comes down to it. People with a permit basically have been told by the government that they are trusted enough to not go on a killing spree. They could have a mandatory safety class much like a drivers test for people that want to carry on a plane. done and done. Fair, Legal, and Fool-proof method of stopping terrorists.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike Masnick (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:44am
  
  Re:
  Unless one of you come up with a FAIR, LEGAL and Fool-proof method of identifying and stopping terrorists, all your whining isn't helping
  
  Unless you can come up with a FAIR, LEGAL and Fool-proof method of stopping car accidents, we shouldn't be allowed to drive, right?
  
  And, um, do you think that sexually molesting people is a fair, legal and fool-proof way of stopping terrorists?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 1:53pm
  
  Re:
  Since you're so frightened of "terrorists" maybe you should be cowering in a corner somewhere instead of taking flights. Let the rest of the adults fly without having to pander to the lowest common denominator (in case you can't take the hint, that would be YOU)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:15am

I guess the TSA's motto should be: "Fight terrorism with terrorism".

Or perhaps, "With agencies like the TSA, who needs Terrorists?"

Or maybe: "TSA: Terror Services Agency"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:21am

Unless one of you come up with a FAIR, LEGAL and Fool-proof method of identifying and stopping terrorists, all your whining isn't helping.

Personally, my rights being intact are more important than some supposed government supplied 'safety'. So first, let's make sure it's FAIR and LEGAL; then if we can somehow add some safety within the bounds of our legal system; then so be it. But if we toss out the 'rule of law' in order to 'preserve our society' - then what good society governed by the rule of law that are we seeking to maintain, since it's been destroyed by those that would supposedly 'protect us'.

If we forget the rights of the citizens in an attempt to protect them, we've lost the whole concept of what we are trying to protect, then it becomes pointless as we'll just be another tyranny.

In reality; there's no way to really 'stop terrorists' - some of these people are willing to commit suicide to reach their goal, obviously.

I suspect as many people have been traumatized by the TSA now, if not more, than those traumatized by 9/11 itself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:33am

Yes, this security nonsense is useless and ridiculous, but how the he'll is it "socialized"? It's not comparable in any way to Obamacare.

It's yet another example of the "government nanny".

They are claiming to be protecting us, but at what cost?

You can protect your house with an 18 foot high wall, razor wire, carbon steel doors... so ok, you're protected, but isolated from society. You may not die from an external threat, but eventually, any normal person would become highly depressed due to the isolation. Making life unbearable anyway.

On that note - why not just lock the pilot's door tight and put an Air Marshall on each flight. Doubt it would cost much more than this farce now.

But hypothetically; let's say a group of 10 board a plane - all of them are trained in martial arts or some other fighting style giving them a severe edge over other typical passengers. What would stop them from being able to hi-jack the plane? Do they even need a weapon?

I mean - where does it stop? Shoe stings/purse straps/laptop bag straps/luggage straps could be used to choke someone. A laptop, book, or luggage could be a blunt weapon. Someone with suitable physical ability could easily take a knife from another person. Especially when they are more than willing to give their own life and have been in years or life-long training for just such an event.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Andrew D. Todd, 28 Apr 2011 @ 12:18pm
  
  Re:
  To: Overcast (Apr 28th, 2011 @ 10:33am)
  
  That reminds me of the time a gang of teenage crooks tried to rob me on a Philadelphia street corner, about twenty years ago. I took off my backpack full of books, which must have weighed at least ten pounds, and began swinging it, swinging it like a baseball bat. They did not succeed in robbing me, and eventually ran away. Three of them ran away from the one of me. Ha!
  
  A lot of people here have said, at one time or another, that they have to fly for their jobs. However, it may be possible to divert around the edges. Granted that you have to fly from California to visit a customer in Indianapolis, IN, but you can volunteer to rent a car and visit other customers in Louisville, KY; Cincinnati, OH; Dayton, OH; Columbus OH, Pittsburgh, PA; Youngstown, OH; Cleveland, OH; Toledo, OH; Detroit, MI; and Chicago, IL, taking a week or so, sleeping in cheap motels, and eating at Micky D's when you aren't treating a customer. With any luck, that gets you ten customers who ask for you personally when they call the home office, plus giving your boss the feeling that you've done your share of "commercial traveling" for a couple of months. You develop a collection of funny stories about the truck driver in the next room, to suggest that you've been away on hardship duty, and that you are more dedicated than the other people in office.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:36am

Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

March 23, 1775
By Patrick Henry

http://www.law.ou.edu/ushistory/henry.shtml
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sean, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:51am

Everyone loves to post about boycotts and liberty...

But how about taking some actual action instead of posting on the Internet about the action you want everyone else to take? The civil rights movement happened without the Internet - let's remember that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- weneedhelp (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:46am
  
  Re:
  Don't get hurt falling off your high horse.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The eejit (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 12:09pm
  
  Re:
  I do, I blow up ballons with goat's piss in them and I'm saving them for Congress post-holiday.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - JC, 28 Apr 2011 @ 1:20pm
    
    Re: Re:
    *SIGH*... There's always someone who has to bring ballet to the argument.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - The eejit (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 3:03pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      No, not ballet, ballons - as in the bladder in a football.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
csgatorman, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:52am

TSA Screening Techniques
As a frequent flier, I have no issues with the current security screening techniques used by TSA. If you don't want to run the risk of someone of the same sex touching you for additional screening purposes(which IMO is not groping), then DON'T FLY. Take a train, bus, boat, bike, car, etc.

All the screenings I've seen either on video; witnessed first hand; or experienced is not groping. Some people just don't like to be touched. Those people shouldn't fly, so quit complaining.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Erin B., 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:00am
  
  Re: TSA Screening Techniques
  It's not really -- you can't really say "that's not groping" -- I think people have the right to say when they feel violated. Obviously, they don't have the right to legal recourse in all cases of violation, but flat-out stating "that's not groping" is a) rude, b) not accurate, and c) rather dismissive of people's feelings.
  
  "Some people don't like to be touched" -- yes, some of us have been sexually assaulted and go through what's called "triggering" when we're touched by strangers in that way. Ever heard of it? Basically what happens is that kind of touching triggers a violent memory of assault. You get to stand there and relive your assault and then you get to be told you're a whiner for it.
  
  That isn't to say that every person who complains about a TSA pat-down/feel-up is an assault survivor. Still: there's really no conclusive evidence that these measures are doing anything to increase security, and there's plenty of conclusive evidence that they're being badly implemented. The return on investment here is terrible.
  
  If you're trying to say that you don't feel violated, then I counsel you to cut your comment off after the first sentence. If you're trying to say that you're tired of listening to/reading from people who do, then I counsel you to, you know, stop reading articles about TSA overreach and the people it's affected.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- proximity1, 30 Apr 2011 @ 6:23am
  
  Re: TSA Screening Techniques
  Sure--Why not give all that up. And why stop there?, why not also all these and more:
  
  Don't like your phone calls being illegally tapped? Simple, don't use a phone. Your e-amil is illegally spied on and filed for future reference and you don't like that? Simple, don't use e-mail. The surveillance cameras everywhere, recording everyone who comes within range of the cameras lenes--don't want to be filmed, photographed, everywhere you go? Well, simple, don't go in those stores, banks, post offices, hospitals, schools, sports arenas, parks, parking lots, office buildings, airports, train or bus stations. And, you don't like being arrested, booked, photographed and a rap sheet filled out and filed on you? Simple, resign your rights--all of them--never protest, never assemble, never march, never sign a petition objecting to the invasion of your privacy or the rampant denial of your (former) civil rights.
  
  There, problem solved. Don't like it when your rights are violated? Simple: surrender them. Traveling around, using public carriers, who needs it? The rich---they have private planes, chauffered limos, private entrances, exclusive elevators, offices with separate out-of-the-way doors, etc.
  
  You? You're not rich? You don't have these perks? Simple: shut up and submit or just renounce enjoying the freedom to travel about unwatched, unfilmed, unphotograped, without line-ups, pat-downs, body-scans and searches, without having to remove your hat, jacket, belt, shoes---and, depending on what new and ingenious methods those who scheme to attack 'our faithful public servants and protectors, the government authorities, come up with next, your who-knows-what?, too.
  
  While you were watching sit-coms and pro sports television, people in high places of government authority decided to take away your rights and everything attached to them and leave you with the "choice" between liking it or lumping it.
  
  "Have a good one!"
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Common Sense, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:55am

Sieg Heil...Must see your papers!
TSA are a bunch of Nazi's. We should just call them SA's after the Nazi stormtroopers. As one comment stated Locking the cockpit is pretty damn secure. Sure a bomb can still go off but them again what are the stats on engine failure vs bombs on a plane. Not only do they provide a useless service...they have too much authority. Heaven forbid you complain...you might just mysteriously get on the "No Fly List" or "Nein Fliege Liste".

CS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- NotMyRealName (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:42am
  
  Re: Sieg Heil...Must see your papers!
  I call Godwin's. You lose.
  
  :)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - harbingerofdoom (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 12:59pm
    
    Re: Re: Sieg Heil...Must see your papers!
    i am honestly amazed that stuff doesnt get godwinned around here on a way more frequent scale.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - proximity1, 30 Apr 2011 @ 6:46am
    
    Re: Re: Sieg Heil...Must see your papers!
    People who, in invoking "Godwin's" moronic idiot nonsense 'law,' merely dismiss automatically and unthinkingly, everything which in fact does resemble the once-thought-to-be-outrageously-unacceptable tactics practised by the Nazi regime are, wittingly or not, giving such practises cover and excuse; and, very often, these idiots who invoke Godwin's (moronic) Law are nearly or completely ignorant of the close resemblance between the neo-Nazi tactics and the former practises they echo.
    
    The typical officer, enlisted man, whether a party member or not, under Nazi rule in 1930s and 40s Germany was precisely like the servile, obedient fuctionaries of the TSA: average people doing what others above them in authority told them to do, without thinking, without questioning, without objecting or refusing.
    
    If you don't recognize the many parallels between the deepening autocratic bureaucracy's ever-more Draconian ways and means, then you, I suspect, are very ignorant of the history you object to others' raising in example. And that ignorant oobjection on your part is also very, very STUPID and blind.
    
    Next time you are tempted to invoke "Godwin's Law," if you cannot honestly assert that you've read and are familiar with such standard works on Nazi history as William Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, Victor Klemperer's diaries, (in English) I Shall Bear Witness, and Ian Kershaw's texts on Hitler and Nazism, then you should do yourself and us a favor and stop yourself from invoking "Godwin's" stupidity.
    
    Go, read these sources, inform yourself and THEN think before you parrot stupid nonsense in internet fora or, if you have not, then, please STFU about "Godwin's Law". THANK YOU!
    
    Today's forms of tyranny-in-everday-life often (usually) resembles that of former regimes--including, yes, the Nazis of Germany in the 1930s and 40s. But clueless and ignorant publics just repeat Bwak! Nazis! Bwak! Godwin's Law! Bwak! Bwak!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
John, 28 Apr 2011 @ 10:55am

The part that upsets me the most is that when I fly I never see them check anyone that is that same nationality as people who are terrorist. That is called profiling, so only little kids and cute girls get checked.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:57am
  
  Re:
  "...check anyone that is that same nationality as people who are terrorist."
  
  What nationality was Timothy McVeigh? I was under the impression he was American.
  
  This quote the stupidest one I've seen in two years of reading Techdirt articles and comments.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 1:12pm
    
    Re: Re:
    What nationality was Timothy McVeigh? I was under the impression he was American.
    
    What plane did McVeigh use in his attack? I was under the impression we were discussing terrorism as it relates to air travel and the TSA's role in it.
    
    This reply [is] the stupidest one I've seen on Techdirt in two hours.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - harbingerofdoom (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 1:21pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      the point was more along the lines of 'why are we not checking the obviously middle eastern guy' with a retort of 'thats not always the terrorist'.
      
      which, ya, its not really the nuts and bolts of this particular discussion but surely you realize that its a point that is very frequently going to be brought up.
      
      both points could have been worded better for sure, but its a valid question and the answer of "its the brown guy" is not always the correct answer.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - harbingerofdoom (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 1:14pm
    
    Re: Re:
    dont forget ted kaczynski, george metesky, eric rudolph and several militant groups in the 60's and 70's that were 100% homegrown membership.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 11:47am

WAAAAAAAA....!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mojo, 28 Apr 2011 @ 2:17pm

ugh
I'm so sick of this already... it's one thing to disagree with the procedures, but it's entirely something else to accuse the TSA agents of being a gang of perverted, gay thugs who enjoy groping total strangers.

Do you have any idea how outrageous that sort of allegation sounds coming from a group of otherwise intelligent people (i.e. Mike and the other alarmist commenters).

Such finger pointing is baseless and without merit; if you read through all the "hate" comments here, the general conclusion seems to be that as long as it's POSSIBLE that any given TSA agent could be gay, perverted and sadistic, then we should treat all of them as if they ARE."

Very, very shameful.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Clark Cox (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 3:17pm
  
  Re: ugh
  I'm so sick of this already... it's one thing to disagree with the procedures, but it's entirely something else to accuse the TSA agents of being a gang of perverted, gay thugs who enjoy groping total strangers.
  
  Oh, so sexually assaulting a stranger is OK, as long as you're not perverted or gay, and you don't enjoy it?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 2:23pm

I can just imagine the pillow talk....

Brenda: Hey guess whose vag I got to fondle today?
Joanne: Who!?!?!
Brenda: Miss USA's!!!
Joanne: Wow you're so lucky...you have the best job in the world...
Brenda: I know right...now let me touch yours..
Joanne: Yippeee skip!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sam, 29 Apr 2011 @ 1:45am

I'm planning to do a road trip in America and fly back to where I started, but I think I'd rather drive the 28 hours again instead.

I guess if you try to stop them assaulting you they'll just shoot you. Boo America :(
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Apr 2011 @ 3:35am

The lubricious thing about the TSA search is a female friend was over in the US a month ago, and their agents felt her up when flying from New York to LA. When she got to her hotel in LA she realised in her carry on luggage she had 2 large sharp knives she bought as souvenirs. She thought they were in her checked luggage. Security feels the need to feel up everyone in a major way - what kind of stuff can you hide in you bra that requires them to grope boobs for 1-2 minutes including rubbing the nipple for 30 seconds? Yet they miss knives that can actually cause damage.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Frost, 29 Apr 2011 @ 4:38am

A proper search is much more invasive still
The problem I have with these searches isn't that they're invasive - it's that they are too invasive to be OK, but not nearly invasive enough to be effective. Nothing short of a cavity search is going to be truly effective, because anyone who really wants to smuggle something through will do so in a body cavity if they have any brains at all.

So a simple patdown is pointless, it doesn't catch much. An "enhanced patdown" is equally pointless, but it is also invasive and annoying. So logically, either cavity search every passenger (good luck with getting them to accept that) or stop the stupid searches entirely and just use a metal detector to catch big lumps of metal to do a coarse screening of stupid hicks carrying big handguns through.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not Flying, 29 Apr 2011 @ 9:00am

People don't want to fly...
This is one of the main reasons people no longer want to fly for vacations. Airlines lose paying customers, tourist locations lose out and business travelers have to make up the lost revenue for travel. Way to go TSA!

My fanily will vacation in our own state.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reasonable, 29 Apr 2011 @ 9:14am

And your doctor enjoys prostate exams too...
So you think all of the inspectors get up in the morning and cheer for another day of examining strangers? Given that two thirds of the country is overweight, and a third obese, I hardly think that's true. Some of you have a high opinion of yourselves; to think that you are so fine, that you can change the sexual orientation and pschye of these employees.

And what no one seems to have mentioned is that the scan is available. She didn't have to be "violated".

If we weren't such prudes, maybe we could look at this from a practical point of view and address real issues with security.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rwolf, 29 Apr 2011 @ 10:57am

TSA, Things Will Get Worse
DHS Scanners To Secretly Search Your Body, Vehicle and Home�X-ray Deaths Next?

Department Homeland Security and Police intend to use hundreds of new X-ray Back Scatter Vans and other scanners with long-distance capability to secretly scan and search lawful persons� bodies�when driving, walking and X-ray Citizens in their homes. DHS plans to mount X-ray scanners on buildings and utility poles to monitor groups of pedestrians. Citizens that drive or walk to work or lunch in monitored areas may be radiated several times a day.

There is nothing to stop government agencies and police repeatedly targeting (persons of interest) on the street and in their homes with X-ray scans that may cause cancer or induce other medical problems�including individuals afflicted by poor health. DHS new scanning will record eye and facial features of pedestrians, so subjects can be identified for covert X-ray scanning. Consequently some Americans may be X-ray scanned every time they set foot on the street.

How could anyone prove his or her cancer was caused by (accumulated radiation) from repeated government X-ray scans? Can you think of one U.S. Government agency you would trust to limit the number of times and duration secret Government scanners can penetrate a person�s body with X-ray radiation, when walking, driving; inside their home? Citizens driving or walking to work, that must pass DHS X-ray scanners on buildings and utility poles, could be exposed to radiation several times a day. The press recently reported that X-ray scanners now used at airports are 10-times greater that what U.S. Government told the American People.

Currently Citizens can purchase small sensitive radiation detectors on key chains that set off different sounding alarms for each radiation level detected. Key Chain radiation detectors sell for about $160.00 and some appear capable of detecting government X-ray scanners penetrating their home, or their body when walking or vehicle when driving. It should be expected more pedestrians might start carrying radiation key chain detectors to learn if X-ray scanners on buildings and utility poles are targeting their neighborhood, the streets they drive or walk. Radiated pedestrians and drivers should protest, especially if they are being hit everyday with X-ray scanners.

The U.S. can�t become a total Police State until the 4th Amendment is either terminated or so watered down it has no legal effect. That will be the result if government / police are allowed (without probable cause or warrants) to expose the public to covert X-ray scans and scans at airports; train and bus stops and other check points.

One can�t help wonder if today�s outspoken Americans that lawfully defend the Constitution, e.g., writers and bloggers will be deemed combatants by U.S. Government; constantly stopped, searched, and questioned by TSA and police; forced to endure no warrant searches of their car, body and forced cancer causing X-ray scans. The Nazi Military and Police repeatedly searched and delayed Citizens labeled politically undesirable boarding trains and buses and driving to work to cause targeted Citizens to lose their jobs. Citizens were placed on (Nazi do not hire lists) similar to the lists U.S. Homeland Security started in 2010.

See: TSA, DHS plan massive rollout of mobile surveillance vans with long-distance X-ray capability, eye movement tracking and more at: http://www.naturalnews.com/031603_surveillance_police_state.html#ixzz1GGDd24RG
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
herbert, 29 Apr 2011 @ 12:29pm

'Of course, the real issue is that (yet again) the record labels are more afraid of unauthorized copies than they are of trying to provide actual value to users'.

i disagree with the above statement. i think it should read 'Of course, the real issue is that the record labels are more afraid of LOSING CONTROL than they are of trying to provide actual value to users'.

it always has been and always will be about them being able to control what people do with what buy. their opinion seems to be more like nothing is bought anymore, it is either only rented or a license is bought which only lasts as long as the 'industries' want and you're only allowed to do with your 'purchase' what those industries say.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sean, 29 Apr 2011 @ 12:33pm

Everyone loves to post about boycotts and liberty...

But how about taking some actual action instead of posting on the Internet about the action you want everyone else to take? The civil rights movement happened without the Internet - let's remember that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Andreas, 29 Apr 2011 @ 9:40pm

Even Will Wheaton
Not even Will Wheaton is immune to getting his junk touched by the TSA. He wrote about the incident afterwards and said he felt violated. I am just glad I fly very little.

http://wilwheaton.typepad.com/wwdnbackup/2011/04/i-dont-feel-safe-i-feel-violated-humiliated-and -angry.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TekGadg, 29 Apr 2011 @ 11:59pm

...
TSA should really find a better way to ensure security of America. No one is happy when they're molested, and I'm sure TSA workers are not happy molesting people either.

http://www.tekgadg.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
cece (profile), 30 Apr 2011 @ 10:14am

tsa
I would like to boycott flying unfortunately I live on an island. (I am an American with a hip inplant) I don't feel any safter with TSA-I feel violated every time I fly. The guy in the video is a moron. In fact most of the employees of TSA are people who are unable to get jobs anywhere else. That alone makes me feel really safe----NOT>
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
JP, 1 May 2011 @ 6:46am

Obama's Rectum?
3:35 - 3:40

'So what happens when, you know, Obama, or somebody, a terrorist puts something up their rectum?'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maureen holland simpson, 23 Feb 2013 @ 11:33am

Air port security
I am a 75 year old.I also submitted to the machine and pat down.Iam widowed for last 18 years and have never appear naked except. With my husband. I was very humiliated and embarrest and frightened ,and alone,the guards behaved in a very hostile and cold indifferent manner.I shall never return to the u.s.a.again because of this experience never again!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
lopa (profile), 1 Dec 2019 @ 12:09pm

is a great opportunity for perverts to fondle not only adult women, but underage children. Why is anyone surprised? Once they bring up "National Security", the government feels that anything they want to do is perfectly allowable.

One wonders what kind of background check they do for TSA workers? Do they check for criminal records at all? do they care if they hire convicted molesters?

Not only does TSA molest people, they also riffle through your luggage and then steal items of value. It's a great opportunity for criminals.
https://www.fileshipposoftwares.com/shareit-for-pc-filehippo
[ link to this | view in chronology ]