Former Governer Jesse Ventura now refusing to fly commercial airlines

This is my first attempt at starting a thread, so I hope this is done correctly and in the right place. If it's not, mods please feel free to move it to the correct location!

Yes, I know that this is from Infowars, but Ventura broke the news on AJ today. He will no longer fly commercial airlines since he has hip issues that set off the detectors and he will not submit to the patdowns. Good to see another political/high profile figure on board with the anti-patdown groundswell.

Source

reply to post by ProvehitoInAltum

Jesse Ventura is a true leader. Others need to see that even strong, macho men, can stand up for their freedom & diginity without worrying about the "social" consequences.

I already have tickets (no refundable), plans, etc., to fly this X-mas (can't drive, too far, not enough time), but after that trip, I'm not flying until this nonsense stops.

I just hope I don't get asked to be groped. It'll be a long drive home.

reply to post by harrytuttle


What I really appreciate is the fact he is well aware that this may end his career and his show. I've seen a lot of talk here on some ATS threads where some posters allege that he's only in it 'for the money' that he's making off his Conspiracy Theory show. This would seem to at least, in part, negate that argument.

I will say, I think my 'dream ticket' in 2012 would be a Paul/Ventura ticket, or a Ventura/Paul ticket. Either would work for me!

ETA: I hope your travel goes smoothly. I was lucky last time I had to fly (which was right after the new measures rolled in) I was not directed to the Rapiscans and only asked to go through the regular metal detector.

What a "hero"! End his career? LOL!
Here's what will happen; TruTV will pick up the tab for a private plane. This was a well timed power play by this ego maniac.

Does anybody know that ex-homeland security director,Micheal Chertoff and George Soros have invested heavily in the company that makes the scannig machines?

Originally posted by NoArmsJames
What a "hero"! End his career? LOL!
Here's what will happen; TruTV will pick up the tab for a private plane. This was a well timed power play by this ego maniac.

I must respectfully disagree. While yes, it's entirely possible that Tru may put out for a private plane, I have never gotten the sense that Ventura is an ego maniac. Of course, it's likely that we will have to agree to disagree.

I can understand where he is coming from though. With his hip surgery he always sets off the metal detector. It would be very tiring indeed to have to go through the 'enhanced' proceedures multiple times a week.

reply to post by ProvehitoInAltum


You're welcome to disagree but I would suggest you do some digging into his past; you'll find many people who also say he is an ego maniac.

reply to post by NoArmsJames


How do you get that he is an ego maniac? If I could opt out of dangerous and intrusive assaults on my person and privacy I would. Wouldn't you? Besides I think the guy has earned it.

Originally posted by NoArmsJames
reply to post by ProvehitoInAltum

 

You're welcome to disagree but I would suggest you do some digging into his past; you'll find many people who also say he is an ego maniac.

I will definitely do some searching, unfortunately I do not have the years upon years of research behind me that many posters here have, having just 'woke up' two years ago.

No matter what though, I will always be grateful to him on a personal level. It's because of Ventura that I woke up when I stumbled across that 2008 interview with him conducted on 9/11 where all he did was ask questions of the interview. It made me think, research, and begin to see the large web of consipiracies gripping our world.

Nobody is asking or forcing Ventura to fly, so he can't refuse to fly. Rather, he chooses not to fly. For those thinking the security measures at airports is a violation of your rights, think again. It is merely a condition you must accept if you want the benefit of faster means of travel. Don't like TSA's terms of flight, then do as Ventura is doing: Choose to walk, drive, take a train ride or a boat. 80% of Americans favor the airport security measures and the other 20% are just looking for something to complain about.

reply to post by Aggie Man


Do you have a link for your statistics? Your correct that we who do not appreciate the violations of our person by TSA can certainly not fly. How far would you let the TSA go in order to search you?

Originally posted by Aggie Man
Nobody is asking or forcing Ventura to fly, so he can't refuse to fly. Rather, he chooses not to fly. For those thinking the security measures at airports is a violation of your rights, think again. It is merely a condition you must accept if you want the benefit of faster means of travel. Don't like TSA's terms of flight, then do as Ventura is doing: Choose to walk, drive, take a train ride or a boat. 80% of Americans favor the airport security measures and the other 20% are just looking for something to complain about.

On the flipside, however, members of the New Jersey State Legislature recently held a press conferences and one of the first things that was stated was that no one gives up their Constitutional rights to board an aircraft, despite what some TSA officials have alleged. It will be interesting to watch how this plays out, and if any other states follow suit.

Originally posted by ProvehitoInAltum
On the flipside, however, members of the New Jersey State Legislature recently held a press conferences and one of the first things that was stated was that no one gives up their Constitutional rights to board an aircraft, despite what some TSA officials have alleged. It will be interesting to watch how this plays out, and if any other states follow suit.

edit on 19-11-2010 by ProvehitoInAltum because: (no reason given)

I would like to know which part of the constitution discusses rights to board airplanes?

Originally posted by Witness2008
reply to post by Aggie Man

 

Do you have a link for your statistics? Your correct that we who do not appreciate the violations of our person by TSA can certainly not fly. How far would you let the TSA go in order to search you?

Here you go:

The ramped up use of pat-downs and full-body scanning is needed to stop non-metallic threats including weapons and explosives from getting aboard planes, the Transportation Security Administration says. And it appears that most Americans agree. In a recent CBS News poll, 4 out of 5 Americans supported the use of full-body scans.

www.cnn.com...
www.cbsnews.com...

I think the new scanning technology is sufficiently "far" enough. But if fears rise and it calls for more extreme measures to calm the majority of the public, then I am content with whatever search tactic calms the masses and make them feel safe when flying.

Originally posted by Aggie Man

Originally posted by ProvehitoInAltum
On the flipside, however, members of the New Jersey State Legislature recently held a press conferences and one of the first things that was stated was that no one gives up their Constitutional rights to board an aircraft, despite what some TSA officials have alleged. It will be interesting to watch how this plays out, and if any other states follow suit.

edit on 19-11-2010 by ProvehitoInAltum because: (no reason given)

I would like to know which part of the constitution discusses rights to board airplanes?

That is completely arguing semantics!

Perhaps if I restate it: What they are in essence stating is that statements from TSA supervisors that one 'gives up some of their rights when they buy a plane ticket' is erroneous and false. We give up none of our Constitutional rights when we purchase the ticket, and are still guaranteed those rights when we undergo the security procedure.

Originally posted by ProvehitoInAltum
Perhaps if I restate it: What they are in essence stating is that statements from TSA supervisors that one 'gives up some of their rights when they buy a plane ticket' is erroneous and false. We give up none of our Constitutional rights when we purchase the ticket, and are still guaranteed those rights when we undergo the security procedure.

Of course you keep all of your constitutional rights at ALL times as a free citizen. However, there is nothing unconstitutional about the security procedure. I'm sure that these TSA supervisors would love an opportunity to reword that statement. However, that's all semantics too.

Originally posted by NoArmsJames
reply to post by ProvehitoInAltum

 

You're welcome to disagree but I would suggest you do some digging into his past; you'll find many people who also say he is an ego maniac.

You would have to be a bit of an ego-maniac to have done the jobs he has done, and done them well have you looked at his resume?Hes been a Navy seal,a very successful wrestler,a governor I mean it comes with doing the job.

reply to post by NoArmsJames


Exactly, this guy has lied all his life in his careers, lol.

Do you people believe him.

reply to post by Aggie Man


I believe the intent was that the NJ State legislature is that they feel that there are violations of the 4th ammendment taking place with the new procedures. Unfortunately I have as yet been able to sucessfully embed something

Video of the press conference

Originally posted by ProvehitoInAltum
reply to post by Aggie Man

 

I believe the intent was that the NJ State legislature is that they feel that there are violations of the 4th ammendment taking place with the new procedures. Unfortunately I have as yet been able to sucessfully embed something

Video of the press conference

edit on 19-11-2010 by ProvehitoInAltum because: (no reason given)

Yes, I'm certain they are arguing that is violates the 4th amendment (unreasonable search and seizure); however, I don't see it as unreasonable. 80% of America doesn't see it as unreasonable. I don't think these NJ state legislatures have much of an argument here. Only time will tell.