Amy Alkon writes about her TSA experience....

wsuffa

wsuffa

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
23,615
Location
DC Suburbs
Display Name
Display name:
Bill S.
This alone makes the case for using GA instead of the airlines.

http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/04/26/make_it_tough_t.html

Nearing the end of this violation, I sobbed even louder as the woman, FOUR TIMES, stuck the side of her gloved hand INTO my ******, through my pants. Between my *****. She really got up there. Four times. Back right and left, and front right and left. In my ******. Between my *****. I was shocked -- utterly unprepared for how she got the side of her hand up there. It was government-sanctioned sexual assault.
Click to expand...

You think she'll want to fly again?
 
Did you actually read her post?

In it she actually admits to deliberately making a scene/spectacle of the event.

I am not a fan of the TSA goons, but I can't say that I feel too sorry for her.
 
I do. America is supposed to be the land of freedom. She expressed her views in accordance with her right to do so as stipulated by our laws. The TSA invaded her privacy in a warrantless search which should be against our laws, as it is contravened by the letter of the law as put forth in the Constitution.
 
I think Steingar volunteers to invasively search himself.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Did you actually read her post?

In it she actually admits to deliberately making a scene/spectacle of the event.

I am not a fan of the TSA goons, but I can't say that I feel too sorry for her.
Click to expand...
Yea, I read it.

"I let the tears come."

If that's not going out of the way to provoke, I don't know what is.:rolleyes2:
 
Fearless Tower said:
Did you actually read her post?

In it she actually admits to deliberately making a scene/spectacle of the event.

I am not a fan of the TSA goons, but I can't say that I feel too sorry for her.
Click to expand...
I feel sorry for her and everybody else who deals with this crap.
Our so called security has turned into a softcore porn petting zoo, and it's not okay for citizens to get their genitals prodded in the name of safety. Remember when those were "private parts?" Well, to some of us they still are.
Just remember that at the root of all of this crap is the War on Drugs. When the gross federal rent a cop is patting around my balls, he's not looking for a handgun, he's looking for a bag of weed that I might have strapped to my leg. So: all of this invasive, un-Constitutional crap for the endless War on Drugs.
If anything were ever protest-worthy, this would be it. Unfortunately, the protesting class of 2004-8 has gone into semi-retirement. Maybe they'll come back in 2012.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Yea, I read it.

"I let the tears come."

If that's not going out of the way to provoke, I don't know what is.:rolleyes2:
Click to expand...
Did you read what she said before that?

Basically, I felt it important to make a spectacle of what they are doing to us, to make it uncomfortable for them to violate us and our rights, so I let the tears come.
Click to expand...

To me that sounds pretty calculated. I agree that she probably had the right to make a spectacle but what you have a right to do isn't always smart, that is unless you have another agenda.

I was pulled out of line a couple weeks ago for extra screening. I was wondering what to expect but the screener just ran her hands lightly over my back from the waist up. It took about 5 seconds. It's obviously security theater since no one would be able to detect anything, oh well, at least I didn't cause a scene or miss my flight.
 
Everskyward said:
I was pulled out of line a couple weeks ago for extra screening. I was wondering what to expect but the screener just ran her hands lightly over my back from the waist up. It took about 5 seconds. It's obviously security theater since no one would be able to detect anything, oh well, at least I didn't cause a scene or miss my flight.
Click to expand...

The thing is, we all (including me) have a tendency to take the path of least resistance because it's more convenient. The problem is that, as you saw, it's security theater, and not actually productive, just like the body scanners - but the body scanners actually cause harm.

Which reminds me - did those finally go away or did everyone just stop complaining about them? Where I have to go through security never had them, so you're forced to get a pat-down if they're so inclined.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
The thing is, we all (including me) have a tendency to take the path of least resistance because it's more convenient. The problem is that, as you saw, it's security theater, and not actually productive, just like the body scanners - but the body scanners actually cause harm.

Which reminds me - did those finally go away or did everyone just stop complaining about them? Where I have to go through security never had them, so you're forced to get a pat-down if they're so inclined.
Click to expand...
I've only had the body scan once in probably 10 flights since they implemented it. I didn't see anyone refuse. That was probably 3 months ago. It seems that the scanners are set up for the people in the premium line, and I'm not so privileged. I haven't noticed them being used much in the cattle call line recently but I haven't been paying that much attention.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
The thing is, we all (including me) have a tendency to take the path of least resistance because it's more convenient. The problem is that, as you saw, it's security theater, and not actually productive, just like the body scanners - but the body scanners actually cause harm.

Which reminds me - did those finally go away or did everyone just stop complaining about them? Where I have to go through security never had them, so you're forced to get a pat-down if they're so inclined.
Click to expand...

The scanners are still in place and in use at many (most?) airports. Start your trip in a larger airport, like PIT, PHL, BWI, LAX, etc and you'll get volunteered to go through them.
 
Last edited:
Fearless Tower said:
Personally, as a pilot I am more concerned about crap like this:
http://www.us-aviator.com/EmailArticle.cfm?ContentBlockID=be254812-2f9d-4e71-b217-c544dbd0bf57
Click to expand...

"4.) A pilot must have in their possession - or readily available in the aircraft a valid Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) medical certificate.
5.) A pilot must have in their possession or readily accessible in the aircraft their pilot their pilot Logbook.'

I carry neither of these. (PP flying under SP rules)
 
And they can't even quote regulations correctly.

61.3(1)(h) is NOT at all what they claim it to be.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
"4.) A pilot must have in their possession - or readily available in the aircraft a valid Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) medical certificate.
5.) A pilot must have in their possession or readily accessible in the aircraft their pilot their pilot Logbook.'

I carry neither of these. (PP flying under SP rules)
Click to expand...

3.) A credential that authorizes unescorted access to a security identification display area at an airport regulated under Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 49 Subpart C Section 1542.207.

 This is relevant only to those airports that are required to implement it. Most are not required.
 
Fearless Tower said:
I do not feel sorry for someone who knows it is coming and intentionally stirs it up for a blog post.
Click to expand...
While I can see, in a way, that it's a good thing that there are some crusaders and people who are willing to fall on their sword, I don't feel sorry for them. I am especially unsympathetic to women who use tears as a weapon.
 
So, I guess you are saying she deserved to get raped? :eek:
 
Everskyward said:
Your definition of rape must be a lot different than mine.
Click to expand...

Rape is a type of sexual assault usually involving sexual intercourse, which is initiated by one or more persons against another person without that person's consent. The act may be carried out by force, under threat, or with a person who is incapable of valid consent. The term is most often defined in criminal law.

"Let me feel you up or get sued for $11,000" qualifies in my book as rape.
 
He said, she said. Or in this case, she said, she said.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Maybe it is my military experience of being the guy on the other side of the security process.

I do feel sorry for the little kid who was recently subjected to the full patdown. I do not feel sorry for someone who knows it is coming and intentionally stirs it up for a blog post.
Click to expand...

I was sick of this shiat the day it became obvious it had nothing to do with security. Yeah, she's an attention-whore. Still, it doesn't make it anymore "right" to have this useless shiat. Security theater is as worthless as it gets. I'm tired of sacrificing my dignity, that's what is driving me to get my PPL / IFR / Complex / HP and possibly ME ratings.

That still doesn't stop me from railing against it.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Regardless of what she screamed to the audience, she was not raped.
Click to expand...

If her allegations are true, she was indeed raped. If you did to a strange woman what she claims the TSA agent did to her, you would be charged with sexual assault.

I have doubts about the veracity of the woman's story. If this even approached normal practice the outcry would be far greater. I have no doubts about the utter uselessness of everything the TSA does.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Did you actually read her post?

In it she actually admits to deliberately making a scene/spectacle of the event.

I am not a fan of the TSA goons, but I can't say that I feel too sorry for her.
Click to expand...

In other words, "She wanted it to happen."

Also often worded as:

"Its her fault, if she hadn't (insert normal activity here), it would have never happened."

Or, the often used:

"She should have never put herself in the situation to begin with. What did she think was going to happen?"

Do you get where I'm going?
 
To anyone arguing it was not rape, reread the article....

There was actual penetration. I'm pretty sure we have not given the TSA permission to insert anything inside of us yet.

That is the difference between "it was just a little grope," and "it was rape." Magee Thedala is a rapist, who forcefully and without permission inserted her hand into a woman's private area, penetrating, under the false pretense of legality.

Its rape.

Also this way: If I go to TSA, make some snide remarks, and tell a person that they have a useless job, and they, during the course of their search, decide to ram a finger in my ass, despite my protestations, have I not been raped as well? Certainly, this would not be acceptable, right? Is it different because this is a woman?
 
Last edited:
SkyHog said:
To anyone arguing it was not rape, reread the article....

There was actual penetration. I'm pretty sure we have not given the TSA permission to insert anything inside of us yet.

That is the difference between "it was just a little grope," and "it was rape." Magee Thedala is a rapist, who forcefully and without permission inserted her hand into a woman's private area, penetrating, under the false pretense of legality.

Its rape.

Also this way: If I go to TSA, make some snide remarks, and tell a person that they have a useless job, and they, during the course of their search, decide to ram a finger in my ass, despite my protestations, have I not been raped as well? Certainly, this would not be acceptable, right? Is it different because this is a woman?
Click to expand...

All according to her, who admits that she went in there intending to make a scene. I hate the TSA as much as anybody, but this woman has no credibility.

Look, if you want to blast the TSA, blast away, but there are TONS better examples of them screwing with legitimate non-threatening folks than this case of someone who is deliberately trying to stir the pot.
 
Fearless Tower said:
All according to her, who admits that she went in there intending to make a scene. I hate the TSA as much as anybody, but this woman has no credibility.
Click to expand...

Why did she wear such a revealing shirt? If you dress that way, you're looking for something, right?
 
EdFred said:
...without that person's consent.

"Let me feel you up or get sued for $11,000" qualifies in my book as rape.
Click to expand...

She consented to the screening process when she purchased the airline ticket. She chose the pat down when she refused the "rapescan". She chose to be an A-hole during the process in an attempt to make some pointless point. Now she is ****ed because the TSA agent was better at making a point.

By the way, what has this woman done to her V to get it to accommodate a gloved hand through pants! :hairraise:
 
Everskyward said:
I've only had the body scan once in probably 10 flights since they implemented it. I didn't see anyone refuse. That was probably 3 months ago. It seems that the scanners are set up for the people in the premium line, and I'm not so privileged. I haven't noticed them being used much in the cattle call line recently but I haven't been paying that much attention.
Click to expand...

I've noticed that, too. Wonder why that is? Are the premium passengers more likely to be terrorists than folks in the cattle-call lines?
 
wsuffa said:
I've noticed that, too. Wonder why that is? Are the premium passengers more likely to be terrorists than folks in the cattle-call lines?
Click to expand...
I thought that was strange too and I don't have a theory other than the fact that there are less people in the premium line. Since the scanner takes a little longer than the metal detector they may figure the lines won't back up as much.

I think the whole security issue is way out of control too, but I'm irritated by the way people on both sides are using fear and emotion to get people on their side, as well as trying to get publicity for themselves and their book...
 
Well, I guess the next time I get pulled over and a cop decides to cram his fingers up my ass as part of a security pat down (to make sure I don't have any weapons with which I could threaten him), then it will be okay because in getting in my car that day I basically consented to the search.
You guys really think this is okay?
 
Everskyward said:
I thought that was strange too and I don't have a theory other than the fact that there are less people in the premium line. Since the scanner takes a little longer than the metal detector they may figure the lines won't back up as much.
Click to expand...

Or most premium passengers are business folks that travel a lot and therefore TSA thinks they're less likely to put up a fuss when they MUST fly that day.

On a strict risk-management basis, however, the folks that travel a lot on business (and therefore have access to the premium lines) should be far, far lower risk than cattle-call. After all, who is likely to be less risk - someone that has 3.5 million miles over a 20 year track-record of traveling (and may be willing to undergo a background check like crew does.... or someone that is an unknown quantity?

I think the whole security issue is way out of control too, but I'm irritated by the way people on both sides are using fear and emotion to get people on their side, as well as trying to get publicity for themselves and their book...
Click to expand...

While I agree that some folks take it over the top for publicity purposes (and they do not deserve retaliation), I do think that DHS/TSA (and the politicians that support them) have used fear and emotion ("9/11") to implement draconian screening processes. I also think there are plenty of folks that have legitimate concerns about the process - think about the guy who ended up covered in his own bodily waste because the TSA broke his ostomy bag - that have been abused or ignored.

I'd be much less concerned if the government were to implement sound, risk-management techniques instead of fear and emotion, while following the constitution (and also leaving the perception that they were ensuring constitutional protections)....
 
wsuffa said:
While I agree that some folks take it over the top for publicity purposes (and they do not deserve retaliation), I do think that DHS/TSA (and the politicians that support them) have used fear and emotion ("9/11") to implement draconian screening processes. I also think there are plenty of folks that have legitimate concerns about the process - think about the guy who ended up covered in his own bodily waste because the TSA broke his ostomy bag - that have been abused or ignored.

I'd be much less concerned if the government were to implement sound, risk-management techniques instead of fear and emotion, while following the constitution (and also leaving the perception that they were ensuring constitutional protections)....
Click to expand...
I agree and that's what I said, BOTH sides engage in this practice of trying to stir up the populace using fear and emotion. It's a technique that is used in almost every issue and it drives me nuts, probably because I tend to have a somewhat clinical way of looking at things rather than a emotional one.
 
BTW, here's another high-profile person that describes a similar experience. I don't see this one as just being out for publicity:

Link

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 ******! 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!
Click to expand...
 
Everskyward said:
I agree and that's what I said, BOTH sides engage in this practice of trying to stir up the populace using fear and emotion. It's a technique that is used in almost every issue and it drives me nuts, probably because I tend to have a somewhat clinical way of looking at things rather than a emotional one.
Click to expand...
I appreciate what you're saying here Mari, and I completely agree with it.

But if that is truly your view, I don't understand why you would also discount reasonable and undisputed scientific evidence (not fear mongering) that the nude scanners are dangerous.

There's no doubt that both sides engage in fear mongering, but I haven't seen a single reputable scientific source claim that ionizing radiation as emitted by the scanners isn't harmful. On the other hand, I have seen many scientists - including Nobel prize winners - point to clear scientific evidence that this radiation is harmful and _will_ cause cancer. Taken together with the fact that the scanner manufacturers have been granted immunity from prosecution (wonder why?), I can't quite understand your willingness to expose yourself to this AND at the same time claim that you are being reasonable.

No doubt that everybody is exaggerating here. But I think we need to be careful not to let that give us cause to just outright ignore every fact. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

-Felix
 
Last edited:
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
"4.) A pilot must have in their possession - or readily available in the aircraft a valid Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) medical certificate.
5.) A pilot must have in their possession or readily accessible in the aircraft their pilot their pilot Logbook.'

I carry neither of these. (PP flying under SP rules)
Click to expand...

I think very few pilots carry both, and no certificated pilot is required to carry both. SP's need the logbook but not the medical, and everyone else needs the medical but not the logbook.

The only people required to carry both medical and logbook are non-LSA student pilots, I think...
 
SkyHog said:
She was Miss USA in 2003. I am pretty sure that's why she's in Maxim.
Click to expand...

I didn't realize that posing for Maxim was a requirement of being Miss USA. I was implying that someone that endorses products and writes/promotes books will generally not miss the opportunity for free publicity, in my opinion.

Anyone that is shocked that the portion of a pat down involving the inner leg stops at the crotch is very naive. Do people think they are going to stop at the knee?

If people don't like the systems and controls that they asked their government for, stay out of airports. TSA is too big and involves too much money at this point for it to ever go away. This is the new normal. This is the price of security that we now have to pay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top