Listening to your overseas phone calls?- WRONG! Fondling your balls?- OKAY!

Dixie said:
One could argue that CIA monitoring overseas phone conversations of suspected terrorists, is not a violation of the 4th Amendment. At the very least, it is not a "direct" violation, you have to establish that monitoring a phone call amounts to an "illegal search" and that is somewhat of a stretch. In the case of what the TSA has been ordered to do (it never was approved by Congress), it is a DIRECT and OBVIOUS violation of the 4th Amendment, in about the most blatant and egregious way it can be violated. It is an OUTRIGHT illegal search without any justification or provocation. So, in one instance, at least there is a tenable argument to be made, regardless of whether you think warrantless wiretaps are, or are not, a violation of the 4th, and in the other instance, a violation that any 6th-grader should recognize.
Click to expand...

that may be a very good point. again, not to take the thread off topic, but what about the argument of 'implied consent'. Do we automatically accept the loss of a right or rights because we choose a specific form of travel?
 
Ice Dancer said:
I will not do a pat down...that's just plain creepy. I think we all need to google petitions to sign in order to apply neccesary pressure to stop this invasive stupidity. I am sure they exist.
Click to expand...
I can tell you from personal experience that an online petition means squat to a politician or government entity.

Ice Dancer said:
How about we send a security team to Israel for 6 months to study how they operate what is called the best airport security in the world...and then adopt it?
Click to expand...
the government will ask you why they should do that if you're going to accept their current practices for the 6 months they are in Israel?
 
Dixie said:
Here is what I think should happen... One of these TV lawyers who are always trying to round up clients who've been exposed to asbestos, or taken some drug, or used Polygrip... Needs to start a campaign... If you've been subjected to TSA screenings, you have rights! Call 1-800-NO-GROPE now! File a multi-billion dollar class action lawsuit against the TSA, and Napalitano, and put a stop to this kind of shit once and for all.

I just can't believe someone, somewhere, in our government, didn't step up and say... Hey, wait a minute... we can't do this! I mean, is this how utterly arrogant this administration is?
Click to expand...

the way of the judiciary is going to fall on the side of the government. These judges will fly on commercial airliners also, but their status will exempt them somehow from these searches, but they will make damn sure your ordinary ass goes through it.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
that may be a very good point. again, not to take the thread off topic, but what about the argument of 'implied consent'. Do we automatically accept the loss of a right or rights because we choose a specific form of travel?
Click to expand...

I don't think so. And the 4th prohibits "unreasonable" search and seizure, not "reasonable" ones.... that's another consideration. But I think performing enhanced pat-downs is unreasonable without a warrant, just as many think listening to a phone conversation is unreasonable.
 
Dixie said:
I don't think so. And the 4th prohibits "unreasonable" search and seizure, not "reasonable" ones.... that's another consideration. But I think performing enhanced pat-downs is unreasonable without a warrant, just as many think listening to a phone conversation is unreasonable.
Click to expand...

so you are saying that 'implied consent' is legalese argument that does not remove a fundamental right?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
I can tell you from personal experience that an online petition means squat to a politician or government entity.


the government will ask you why they should do that if you're going to accept their current practices for the 6 months they are in Israel?
Click to expand...

You're right that in and of themselves they don't accomplish much. They do however create a base of educated voters...never a bad thing.

If the government gets behind a study in order to implement a new procedure chances are the explanation would be on them not then implementing it...not me.

Anyway...I am a solution based complainer and have thrown a few out there.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
so you are saying that 'implied consent' is legalese argument that does not remove a fundamental right?
Click to expand...

That's not what I said at all. I don't think "implied consent" can be applied in this circumstance. Purchasing a ticket from a commercial airliner, does not imply your consent to a third-party invading your privacy with an unreasonable search.
 
Damocles said:
Every adult should demand the pat down, then tell their offender how much they enjoy being touched by them and ask for their phone number.
Click to expand...

I can see (hear) it now:
As the pat down begins, start saying the following in a very loud voice.
Hopefully the place will be packed and there will be a lot of "witnesses".

YES
YES
TOUCH ME AGAIN
THERE
TOUCH ME THERE
HARDER
HARDER
GRAB A HANDFULL, YOU BITCH
I'MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM CUMMMMMMMMMMMMING

I wonder now many times it would take; before even those doing the patdowns would start refusing?
 
Dixie said:
Here is what I think should happen... One of these TV lawyers who are always trying to round up clients who've been exposed to asbestos, or taken some drug, or used Polygrip... Needs to start a campaign... If you've been subjected to TSA screenings, you have rights! Call 1-800-NO-GROPE now! File a multi-billion dollar class action lawsuit against the TSA, and Napalitano, and put a stop to this kind of shit once and for all.

I just can't believe someone, somewhere, in our government, didn't step up and say... Hey, wait a minute... we can't do this! I mean, is this how utterly arrogant this administration is?
Click to expand...

I can already visualize the court proceedings:

Attny: Mr Jones. Using this anatomically correct doll, please show us where the TSA man touched you.
Mr. Jones: Do I really have to. It makes me feel so dirty.
Attny: I'm sorry Mr. Jones; but the jury really needs to understand this and rest assaured that no one here holds you responsible for what happened.

The rest I'll leave to your individual imaginations. :palm:
 
Ice Dancer said:
Of possible interest read this.
Click to expand...

I wonder how many airlines are willing to accept the consequeces from this statement:

However, TSA added, those passengers who refuse the security measures "will not be permitted to fly."

Maybe a big loss of revenue will create a different attitude.
 
Response from Senator Bennet:

Thank you for contacting me regarding whole-body imaging. I appreciate hearing from you.

I understand your concerns regarding privacy at airports. I am committed to ensuring that the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has the resources it needs to keep our airports secure. With that said, we must not unnecessarily surrender our individual right to privacy.

As part of TSA's overall approach to improving the detection of explosives and nonmetallic weapons at passenger screening checkpoints, it is currently exploring the use of whole-body imaging technologies for detecting concealed items carried by passengers. Whole-body imaging solutions offer an integrated approach to passenger screening insofar as these technologies can reveal concealed items carried on a person, including traditional metallic weapons, non-metallic weapons and explosive devices.

As a result of the privacy concerns associated with this device, Representative Jason Chaffetz introduced an amendment to the Transportation Security Administration Authorization Act (H.AMDT.172 to H.R.2200) prohibiting the TSA from using whole-body imaging machines for primary screening at airports. The amendment requires the TSA to give passengers the option of a pat-down search in lieu of going through a whole-body imaging machine. It also prohibits TSA from storing, transferring, or copying any images resulting from going through a whole-body imaging machine. The amendment was agreed to and the Transportation Security Administration Authorization Act passed the House of Representative on June 8, 2009.

The Transportation Security Administration Authorization Act is currently under consideration by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. I am not a member of this Committee, but I will watch this issue closely. I will keep your concerns in mind as opportunities to discuss this issue come before the full Senate.

I value the input of fellow Coloradans in considering the wide variety of important issues and legislative initiatives that come before the Senate. I hope you will continue to inform me of your thoughts and concerns.

For more information about my priorities as a U.S. Senator, I invite you to visit my website at http://bennet.senate.gov/. Again, thank you for contacting me.


Sincerely,

Michael Bennet
United States Senator
Click to expand...
 
and the lawsuits begin

The TSA has been hit with a number of lawsuits as the revolt against Big Sis, naked body scanners, and invasive groping measures explodes, with one case involving a woman who had her blouse pulled down in full public view by TSA goons who then proceeded to laugh and joke about her exposed breasts.
Click to expand...

every lawsuit filed is one more jab at the TSA. sweet!!!!!!!!
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
I can see (hear) it now:
As the pat down begins, start saying the following in a very loud voice.
Hopefully the place will be packed and there will be a lot of "witnesses".

YES
YES
TOUCH ME AGAIN
THERE
TOUCH ME THERE
HARDER
HARDER
GRAB A HANDFULL, YOU BITCH
I'MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM CUMMMMMMMMMMMMING

I wonder now many times it would take; before even those doing the patdowns would start refusing?
Click to expand...
Well though I fully appreciate said comments are protected free speech one should always be careful what one says to a person holding their nutsack.
 
Mott, I still don't get it...

How can it be, when a Republican president okays the CIA to listen in on overseas phone conversations from suspected terrorists, that gets your panties all in a bunch, and you are so mad you can spit.... BUT... When a Democrat president okays the TSA to fondle your balls and molest your 14-year-old daughter, that's a big joke to you, something to laugh about and make light of?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top