6 Year Old Girl groped by New Orleans TSA.This Has To Stop...

So for those who believe that the TSA agent is just doing her job, by that count, it's okay for all officers to do something morally wrong because they are just doing their job? Because they are in a position of officer?

This officer in a train station shot an unarmed man on his knees execution style in front of everyone. Was he just doing his job then? It's not exactly the same thing, but it's the same logic you purport. By the way this officer only got 2 years in prison for murder.

Do you ever watch TRUtv channel I do. Infact one of my fav. shows is worlds dumbest and I'm always amazed to see mothers and fathers using their kids to shoplift. I even watched one show where a grandmother was using her 5 year old grandaughters toy stroller to hide the stuff in and having the kid push it out of the store for her. So it seems clear to me that we should search children everywhere they go.................

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! N O T !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Did they search any other child or just her. If it's a random thing then WHY this girl. No mater what the reason THIS IS WRONG

Originally posted by Tonosama

To all you "What-if" people

Let's examine that for a second; what if. What if that little girl was carrying a bomb; we had better check her. What if that TSA agent was in on it and made it LOOK like she was doing a good job just so she could help the little girl sneak the bomb on the plane. What if the little girl's mother was a secret terrorist who wanted to fly planes into buildings and was going to use the little girl's bomb as a way to scare the bajeezus out of the passengers, after being allowed on board by the conspiratorial TSA agent. What if the mother then flew the plane into your house and ended that one part of the gene-pool that felt it was OK to grope little girls because, "What if she had a bomb..."

*sigh*

edit on 11-4-2011 by Tonosama because: (no reason given)

Interesting that before these measures but in place by big sis and tsa, no one looked at a little girl at an airport and felt scared she might have a bomb strapped to her. All these years after 9/11 and now as a country we are willing to accept this as a necessary thing that must be done?

They have put into place a new normal for everyone to accept. If you don't accept it, then you will be noted as ridiculous and silly for questioning their ways to protect everyone. Don't accept the new normal. It's brainwashing and paranoia theater.

Remember people, they only do this because YOU allow them to do it.
If enough noise is made they will stop. Posting you anger on forums is not going to make enough noise.
Look for groups to campaign against this, if you can't find any then make a group of your own.
Many people with the same voice will be heard all over the world

that is pretty messed up, like some above posters said though there truly are some sicko's out their that will hide drugs and such on a child in order to acheive their goal.

Originally posted by Tonosama
As you say, a "reasonable level of security". There is nothing reasonable about this.

Why is there nothing reasonable about this?

I have young girls and watching this really p###ed me off. I would come unglued.

This is a simple emotional reaction to an otherwise rational topic. I am not point out what I think should happen, only the realities of the world and everyone is "coming unglued" with faux or misplaced outrage. Additionally I have 3 young boys and a young girl so I'm pretty confident in my ability to discern "molestation" or "groping" when I see it.

There is no reason anyone other than her parents or her doctor should ever be handling her in that way! Period! She is being abused and conditioned; plain and simple. This event has taught her that it is her place to take this abuse from these #'in idiots because no one, not even her parents, would stand up for her. Imagine if the cops on the street started doing this?!?

Well, first of all this is not on the public street. Most, if not all, airports are private property with private airlines that offer services you do not have to purchase. Personally I have not flown since before 9/11 and really don't plan to.

I also noticed that you called for security in other places. Where would you suggest? How about before you enter your local grocery? How about before you enter your local theater? How about before getting on a bus, a boat, a train, a roller coaster.

I don't recall calling for security anywhere. I'd be interested to find out when and where I did. What I am doing is pointing out the rational side of a debate that has attracted all sorts of irrational responses

removed some language insulting KJ that would get me in trouble with the moderators

Good to see you can control yourself. This topic is ridiculous and has truly followed the nature and tone of American politics, all emotion with zero logic. I'll say this again, I am a Libertarian. Quite a staunch one I might add so the less government the better more often than not and this is no exception.

So my question stands, what exactly would be different if we replaced the government with private companies?

reply to post by Caji316


I completely lost it watching this video!! This little girl was just taught that it is okay for a government agent to stick their fingers down her pants, and rub their hands on your back side because it makes us safe.

My sister just took my niece to the doctor for a check up. The doctor made sure to tell her, when he had her lay down on the table and had to lift up her shirt and look very quickly down her pants that it is never okay for anyone else to do that unless "your mommy is there and says it's okay." Now, kids are being taught that it doesn't matter if mommy wants it done or not, your going to have to let a government agent rub their hands all over you lift up your shirt, and stick their fingers in your pants.

I just can't effing get over this. I'm so enraged.

reply to post by KrazyJethro


Just because we don't agree with your point of view does not make us irrational and your claim that it is is, quite frankly, rhetorical. Are we emotional about it? Heck yeah. Does that automatically make us irrational? Of course not. It is not irrational to get up in arms when we see a government agent putting their hands all over a child because she is suspected of having a bomb or some sort of weapon on her just because she is getting on a plane. What is irrational is telling people they should put up with it, not bring up any concerns, and question the constitutionality of these search and seizures. Just because you have kids and don't care if this happened to them does not make your point more valid.

The TSA is a government agency on this private property, as you said. So it is not a black and white issue of either let them do this or don't fly. The airlines HAVE TO let the government agency do this to their customers. They have no choice in the matter. The government told the airlines, private companies, they had to let this happen to their customers.

In today's world, it is very hard to just not fly. People have to fly for business, to see family (I would never see my dad if I didn't fly), and to go see new and exciting places. Driving is simply not an option most of the time due to time constraints.

It is unreasonable to say that we should just put up with this when it restricts our right to freely travel. Not to mention, this is unwarranted search and seizure. Getting on a plane does not put you under reasonable suspicion for having bomb.

reply to post by Caji316


Really, so many people are angry over this? Terrorists are not ignorant. If they never did that with children, terrorists could sneak in weapons or drugs or anything through children. To discriminate against age would not make sense and would end up getting everyone killed

reply to post by Tonosama


What if cowards that are scared of your own shadows, stay the hell home? Oh wait no, a plane could crash into your house too in a freak accident! Might as well kill yourself and get it over with, once your dead, don't gotta worry about all the boogymen out there ya know.

Originally posted by lastbleedingvictim
reply to post by Caji316

 

Really, so many people are angry over this? Terrorists are not ignorant. If they never did that with children, terrorists could sneak in weapons or drugs or anything through children. To discriminate against age would not make sense and would end up getting everyone killed

or high lol

Originally posted by KrazyJethro

Originally posted by Tonosama
As you say, a "reasonable level of security". There is nothing reasonable about this.

Why is there nothing reasonable about this?

I have young girls and watching this really p###ed me off. I would come unglued.

This is a simple emotional reaction to an otherwise rational topic. I am not point out what I think should happen, only the realities of the world and everyone is "coming unglued" with faux or misplaced outrage. Additionally I have 3 young boys and a young girl so I'm pretty confident in my ability to discern "molestation" or "groping" when I see it.

There is no reason anyone other than her parents or her doctor should ever be handling her in that way! Period! She is being abused and conditioned; plain and simple. This event has taught her that it is her place to take this abuse from these #'in idiots because no one, not even her parents, would stand up for her. Imagine if the cops on the street started doing this?!?

Well, first of all this is not on the public street. Most, if not all, airports are private property with private airlines that offer services you do not have to purchase. Personally I have not flown since before 9/11 and really don't plan to.

I also noticed that you called for security in other places. Where would you suggest? How about before you enter your local grocery? How about before you enter your local theater? How about before getting on a bus, a boat, a train, a roller coaster.

I don't recall calling for security anywhere. I'd be interested to find out when and where I did. What I am doing is pointing out the rational side of a debate that has attracted all sorts of irrational responses

removed some language insulting KJ that would get me in trouble with the moderators

Good to see you can control yourself. This topic is ridiculous and has truly followed the nature and tone of American politics, all emotion with zero logic. I'll say this again, I am a Libertarian. Quite a staunch one I might add so the less government the better more often than not and this is no exception.

So my question stands, what exactly would be different if we replaced the government with private companies?

i am on mobile and won't be verbose.

However, you called for additional security here

reasonable level of security at airports among other places.

i wasn't attempting to answer any question as your question is from a different post.
That being said, yes, i think private companies would be better. The govt typically hires some of the worst possible employees so a private companywould undoubtedly do better. Additionally, like you said, it is private property. Why is the govt there in the first place? If i own an airport i should be able to do with it what i like in order to stay in business and as long as i am not breaking any laws. I don't recall any naked body scanner laws or invasive pat down laws.

So, in the absence of laws requiring these things, which no politician in their right mind would actually vote fo, these things wouldn't happen if the private companies who own these airports or airlines were able to hire their own private screeners.

As for reasonable, in the legal sense a law officer is required to make a judgement call before taking action against a person. The question basically asks, "would a reasonable person witnessing *action* believe that being*observed person * will carry it some action that will harm themselves or others." if the officer cannot answer that question with a solid yes they cannot stop that person because there is no probable cause. Because no reasonable person would infer that the observed person was up to no good. And i guarantee, no reasonable person would think that child had a bomb.

and yes. I am emotional about it, as we all should be. There is no rational argument for handling children in this way. Any time my children are being treated improperly i get emotional about it. It is entirely rational for a parent to be emotional about it. Arguing that doing nothing and accepting the abuse is the irrational response.

Originally posted by lastbleedingvictim
reply to post by Caji316

 

Really, so many people are angry over this? Terrorists are not ignorant. If they never did that with children, terrorists could sneak in weapons or drugs or anything through children. To discriminate against age would not make sense and would end up getting everyone killed

excellent point. Except that no terrorist has used children for such a thing. Now, drug dealers in the Us use kids to carry, or sell, drugs all the time bit we don't see cops randomly groping kids on their way to elementary school. Of they did the people wouldn't stand for it. But you accept it just because it is an airport and are afraid the terrorists will get you with an airplane without all this security theater

Originally posted by Sky watcher
Just like Cellente said its time to physically stop this evil government, period. The time for peace is over!!! They only understand force and when they see over a million people marching on D.C. maybe they will give up or run.

I fully agree with you but I don't think a protest will do anything, even a million man march. Riots they know how to deal with, protests they can handle as well. We need to start our own underground movement which can surface in the future when ready to tackle bigger issues. Combine that with organized protests in major cities going on simultaneously and you may have something.

We need to have lawyers who are willing to help out, leaders of small groups throughout the country working on a similar cause. Politicians need to be impeached and put on trial; the same goes with Wall Street, bankers, CEOs and so on. The greed and corruption is too wide spread and it is in every government branch, every wallet, every police district, every court district, it is everywhere. And we cannot just remove a 10th of those in power, or a quarter, third or half of them. As long as some of them remain, it will spread again. We need to figure out a way how to remove the entire government, reform the entire banking system and put on the stand ALL those who are/were involved - there has to be accountability for the many crimes perpetrated.

Now, if someone told me how this would be feasible, I'd be all thumbs up and would provide support without a doubt. Until then, I'm mostly hopeless.

Khar

Originally posted by THEDUDE86
I think this video needs to be played for Obama.

Are you kidding me? He would probably start jacking off to it. This whole government BS is getting REEEAAAALLLLLLYYYYYYYYY sickening, and the less people actually do about it the sicker it gets.

What do you think Boys Town and Girls town were founded for and do you know who they are funded by? Warren "the petophile" Buffet. Go figure!!

I have a 2 year old daughter and while I don't make it a habit of taking planes anywhere, If I ever had to and they tried to do this to my daughter, I would kick some a$$. They would NOT put their hands on my daughter like that. Little kids that young do not understand what they are doing to them. Think about the emotional trauma that probably inflicted on that poor little girl. It makes me sick.

reply to post by Frogs


ding ding ding

we have a winner.

anyone who can't see this is truly blind............it will take a generation to acclimatize the children, then it will seem as normal as waiting in line at the bank...............my stomach is churning.

Originally posted by nunya13
Just because we don't agree with your point of view does not make us irrational and your claim that it is is, quite frankly, rhetorical. Are we emotional about it? Heck yeah. Does that automatically make us irrational? Of course not. It is not irrational to get up in arms when we see a government agent putting their hands all over a child because she is suspected of having a bomb or some sort of weapon on her just because she is getting on a plane. What is irrational is telling people they should put up with it, not bring up any concerns, and question the constitutionality of these search and seizures. Just because you have kids and don't care if this happened to them does not make your point more valid.

As with many in this thread, you have not taken the time to see the point I have made time and time again. I have not said disagreement equates irrationality, but rather that emotional responses elicit irrationality whether they are right or wrong. That isn't really a debatable point in my mind and I feel I've made it quite clear, so I'll move on.

I have not told people that they should put up with it or to not bring up concerns or question the legality of this. The legality of the entire TSA is highly suspect, but this sort of thing is part and parcel of the government these days.

I never said I didn't care if this happened to my children, so if we could get away from the wild and unfounded attributions to my point, that would be great. Try reading, not to be rude, but it helps.

The TSA is a government agency on this private property, as you said. So it is not a black and white issue of either let them do this or don't fly. The airlines HAVE TO let the government agency do this to their customers. They have no choice in the matter. The government told the airlines, private companies, they had to let this happen to their customers.

I understand the government has required it, the point is whether or not things would be much better if the security was private or not since the ability of airlines or private airports to require contracts (wavers) is certainly within their rights.

In today's world, it is very hard to just not fly. People have to fly for business, to see family (I would never see my dad if I didn't fly), and to go see new and exciting places. Driving is simply not an option most of the time due to time constraints.

It's not hard not to fly, at all. This is a non-issue.

It is unreasonable to say that we should just put up with this when it restricts our right to freely travel. Not to mention, this is unwarranted search and seizure. Getting on a plane does not put you under reasonable suspicion for having bomb.

I don't disagree that getting on a place does not include suspicion that you might have a bomb or weapon or even malevolent intent. The liability, however, could be gigantic and this is also not a terribly debatable fact.

I'm under the impression you have no idea what I'm talking about so you filled in the gaps with your own ideas of what the opposition would say. Needless to say you've landed far from the mark.

Originally posted by shenanigans
reply to post by 31Bravo

 

Although, I would think if your child's elementary school or something like that, would say they needed to feel your daughter's body a bit before they let her inside, most people would have MAJOR issues.

It's not a question of if they were fondling your child, but the fact that a grown adult stranger is putting their hands on areas of children that would never be permitted in any other place in society!!

"oh theyre using the back of their hands so its OK for them to feel the inside of my 6 year olds thighs" yeaaaaahhhh......

Ok I see your point.. but I'm pretty sure it would be kind of hard for someone, male or female, to get wierd with my child with me standing there.. and that's my point the mother was RIGHT there as she was explaining everything to her about what she was going to do. If someone took my child to another area, or room yes there would be a huge problem.

Originally posted by Tonosama
i am on mobile and won't be verbose.

However, you called for additional security here

reasonable level of security at airports among other places.

Ah, gotcha. I wasn't calling for more security than I was saying that it is obvious that there has to be some level of security at airports. There are other places where security is obvious, the border, federal/state buildings, power plants, shipping ports, etc. Perhaps it was a misunderstanding.

That being said, yes, i think private companies would be better. The govt typically hires some of the worst possible employees so a private companywould undoubtedly do better.

Mmm, I don't know. I think it really depends on a lot of factors but it certainly is possible. I think in reality it could go either way, especially with how thin many business' profit margins are.

Additionally, like you said, it is private property. Why is the govt there in the first place? If i own an airport i should be able to do with it what i like in order to stay in business and as long as i am not breaking any laws. I don't recall any naked body scanner laws or invasive pat down laws.

I don't disagree. Personally I'd prefer to have private companies as well, one less stupid government agency to deal with. However, I feel like we need to go towards these things intelligently rather than going off half cocked like most tend to do with crazy outbursts of anger (general statement). Private companies are absolutely capable of doing the same thing. Take Xe (formerly Black Water) for instance, how far would you trust them?

Me? Not one whit.

So, in the absence of laws requiring these things, which no politician in their right mind would actually vote fo, these things wouldn't happen if the private companies who own these airports or airlines were able to hire their own private screeners.

This could happen, however who would we get to insure these airports? Lawsuits against an airport and airliner should another serious security error happen would put them out of business, or at the least cripple them. It's a very real possibility that either the airports could go way overboard trying to cover their butts or that they could get sued into oblivion (crippling our transportation network).

These are real problems that must be addressed.

And i guarantee, no reasonable person would think that child had a bomb.

I could introduce some cops and former service members (of which I am one) that would disagree.

There is no rational argument for handling children in this way. Any time my children are being treated improperly i get emotional about it. It is entirely rational for a parent to be emotional about it. Arguing that doing nothing and accepting the abuse is the irrational response.

edit on 11-4-2011 by Tonosama because: (no reason given)

I am not saying do nothing. As a matter of fact I haven't really given my opinion on the matter aside from in defense against people misapplying my points.

This has been blown out of proportion and is not as sick as it's being made out to be. It's pretty ridiculous to the large majority of Americans because we live in a relatively safe and sane nation (key work relatively). I don't trust the parties of god as far as I can throw them, so using kids certainly isn't abnormal for them.