Go Back   > > >
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 6, 10, 9:16 am   #46
  
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: SEA/YVR/BLI
Programs: UA "Lifetime" Gold and Silver Wings, AS MVPG75K, HH Diamond, IC Plat Amb, Marriott Gold, Hertz 5*
Posts: 8,928
Quote:
Originally Posted by InkUnderNails View Post
But, can see the tape or get a copy after my screening?
An obvious and possibly rhetorical question arises: In whose interests - for whose benefit - for what purposes - are the cameras installed?
Fredd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 10, 9:22 am   #47
  
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Nashville, TN
Programs: WN A w/CP, Hilton Gold
Posts: 7,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredd View Post
An obvious and possibly rhetorical question arises: In whose interests - for whose benefit - for what purposes - are the cameras installed?
  1. It is for the sole protection of the TSA and is unavailable for public viewing, even by the person being screened.
  2. It is for protection of the traveling public and as such should be open to the person that has been screened.
  3. It is of dual use depending on circumstances that is equally accessible by either the TSA to document their actions or to the traveler to document his.

The correct answer will determine the purpose.
InkUnderNails is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 10, 10:41 am   #48
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
  
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: AS, B6, HH, MR elite. Fly AA/WN/B6. BA, VX, Hyatt too. 18-year UA/CO elite, UA now strong avoid.
Posts: 17,630
Quote:
Originally Posted by RosemaryT View Post
...in 2004, I got pulled aside by TSA for additional screening and was taken into a private area and was thoroughly frisked by a male agent. I was horrified at him feeling up my inner thighs (and took his time doing so), and my buttocks and the small of my back and even my breasts.

From 2002 - 2004, I was in airports all the time and I was constantly getting pulled aside for extra screening. (It's the lily-white skin and light blue eyes that did it, I'm sure...)
TSOs have a long, if anecdotal, history of showing extra interest in attractive women. At dual-device checkpoints I have seen TSOs urging teenage girls and young women into the Nude-o-Scope while middle-aged men like me were allowed to use the conventional mag without complaint. This is de facto profiling, of course, but not in the name of air security.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RosemaryT
By 2004, I was sufficiently mentally beaten down by the TSA and their antics that I didn't even question it when a male TSA felt me up and patted me down.
That's exactly what they want -- to subjugate the public and make us less prone to question forced sexual humiliation. It is up to you and every American to resist. It's line-in-the-sand time.

Last edited by BearX220; Nov 6, 10 at 11:11 am Reason: Fix typo that bdschobel caught for me :)
BearX220 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 10, 10:53 am   #49
Moderator: Marriott Rewards forum & Travel with Children
  
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Sunrise, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Platinum Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,446
Quote:
Originally Posted by BearX220 View Post
TSOs have a long, if anecdotal, history of showing extra interest in attractive women. At dual-device checkpoints I have seen TSOs urging teenage girls and young women into the Nude-o-Scope while middle-aged men like me were allowed to use the conventional mag without complaint. This is de facto profiling, of course, but not in the name of air security.
I agree with this statement. I'll never forget one evening at Ft. Lauderdale Airport, when a group of TSA thugs appeared at my gate to do "gate screening" (which is absurdly unnecessary, but that's another topic). They looked around the gate area and almost immediately "selected" the two most attractive young women there -- who were perhaps late teens and truly beautiful -- and took them aside to be searched and patted down, in front of everybody there. I was appalled -- and posted the story here on Flyertalk. Events like that should outrage any thinking person. It was as clear as day that the selection process had nothing at all to do with "security."

Bruce
bdschobel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 10, 12:39 pm   #50
  
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: CLT
Programs: Choice Hotels/FFOCUS
Posts: 7,239
Quote:
Originally Posted by BearX220 View Post
TSOs have a long, if anecdotal, history of showing extra interest in attractive women. At dual-device checkpoints I have seen TSOs urging teenage girls and young women into the Nude-o-Scope while middle-aged men like me were allowed to use the conventional mag without complaint. This is de facto profiling, of course, but not in the name of air security.


This is exactly what I saw here a couple weeks ago & I let them have it at the risk of getting in trouble myself.
coachrowsey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 10, 12:43 pm   #51
  
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Colorado
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog View Post
TSA did just that in other cases. The mom who said TSA took her child. The sippy-cup-gate incident and I believe there was one other.

TSA, show us the video!
Those are old AND the videos were posted AND the TSA was exonerated

Quote:
Originally Posted by RosemaryT View Post
No chance? How can you make such a pronouncement unless you're omniscient and omnipresent?

If the need arose, I would gladly swear under oath that I endured a thorough frisking at the hands of a male TSA. He was a tall, thin black man with very closely-cropped hair and he escorted me to an area that was petitioned off and that's where the frisk began.

I don't remember when (late 2004 if I had to guess), but I do remember that I told a lawyer friend about this afterward, and he was aghast. He said that I should file a complaint. I did not file a complaint. I was so terrified of being put on a no-fly list that I decided to just chalk it up to a lesson learned and move along.

At the time, I was a single woman with limited resources and a modest income and if I hadn't been able to fly, my small business would have died.

Rose
6 years ago? Your testimony is doubtful unless you took notes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jkhuggins View Post
Because, of course, there's absolutely no possibility that the TSOs on duty would ever do anything in violation of SOP, because every TSO is fully informed on SOPs and always executes them exactly as written. Right?
I supervise officers daily and what you say is pretty much the case. This interviewee talks about a gross departure from the standard. That is why it should be subject to review.

Last edited by Kiwi Flyer; Nov 9, 10 at 1:50 am Reason: merge consecutive posts
eyecue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 10, 12:53 pm   #52
Moderator: Marriott Rewards forum & Travel with Children
  
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Sunrise, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Platinum Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,446
At the risk of seeming to have completely lost my bearings -- or raising suspicions that my Flyertalk handle has been hijacked -- I also listened to that woman's account with serious skepticism. I don't doubt that male screeners have patted down females; I've seen it myself. But the notion that any woman would allow a total stranger to do to her what that woman described -- or even that a Federally employed screener would do that, knowing the risk that he could be charged with sexual assault and fired -- makes the scenario unlikely at best. I suspect that she was at least exaggerating the circumstances. But none of us was there, so we'll just have to rely on our own judgment as to what likely happened. It was very convenient that one of Alex Jones's employees just happened to have such a hideous experience and was willing to recount it on his radio show. Very convenient indeed.

Bruce

Quote:
Originally Posted by eyecue View Post
6 years ago? Your testimony is doubtful unless you took notes.
That's pretty silly. People remember extreme events like that. They don't need notes.

Bruce

Last edited by Kiwi Flyer; Nov 9, 10 at 1:50 am Reason: merge consecutive posts
bdschobel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 10, 2:00 pm   #53
  
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: here and there
Programs: EB*G, UA ex1K
Posts: 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyecue View Post
6 years ago? Your testimony is doubtful unless you took notes.
It varies by state, but the statute of limitations for sexual assault is generally between five and ten years (it can be longer if there is DNA evidence).

Even if the suggestion that a woman's report of a sexual assault is "doubtful" because it is 6 years old was not disgusting of itself (it is), it is false -- in some states it would still be valid testimony under law.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bdschobel View Post
At the risk of seeming to have completely lost my bearings -- or raising suspicions that my Flyertalk handle has been hijacked -- I also listened to that woman's account with serious skepticism. I don't doubt that male screeners have patted down females; I've seen it myself. But the notion that any woman would allow a total stranger to do to her what that woman described -- or even that a Federally employed screener would do that, knowing the risk that he could be charged with sexual assault and fired -- makes the scenario unlikely at best. I suspect that she was at least exaggerating the circumstances. But none of us was there, so we'll just have to rely on our own judgment as to what likely happened. It was very convenient that one of Alex Jones's employees just happened to have such a hideous experience and was willing to recount it on his radio show. Very convenient indeed.

Bruce
I tend to agree that this seems exaggerated and the association with infowars does not reinforce confidence of the highest standards of journalistic probity (is that enough fancy words to be lawyer-proof

But it is definitely the that case male screeners do physical searches of female passengers and that the TSA does not have a policy absolutely forbidding this.

Moreover, casual sexual harassment of young women -- selecting young women for the strip-search machine, male screeners oggling the girl-on-girl pat-down, (non-)random gate searches -- is a serious ongoing problem.

Last edited by Kiwi Flyer; Nov 9, 10 at 1:51 am Reason: merge consecutive posts
neko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 10, 2:27 pm   #54
  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: California. USA
Posts: 1,400
All this is crap and a lie that TSO cant and will not touch someone form the opposite sex,.

TSORon said on another tread to me that is an small airport and no female TSO aroung ( this is if you are an female) then it is tuff luck that ypou have the choice of being pat-down by a male or walk away.

Is that even fair or legal?
So dont tell me that male TSO will not or cant touch females.
They are.
tanja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 10, 3:31 pm   #55
FlyerTalk Evangelist
  
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 11,910
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyecue View Post
Those are old AND the videos were posted AND the TSA was exonerated
So where is the video in this latest case?

Oh, still waiting for your evidence that the screening didn't happen as described.
Boggie Dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 10, 4:48 pm   #56
  
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Colorado
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,745
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdschobel View Post
That's pretty silly. People remember extreme events like that. They don't need notes.

Bruce
Umm no I disagree for several reasons:
1. My 14 year old daughter was killled in a car crash in 2007 and when the trial came up just 6 months later, even the people in the truck with her could not remember details.

2. The use of a written statement is widely recognised in courts to refresh memory.
3.The prosecution in my daughters vehicular homicide trial had a field day with the defense witnesses over a 6 month time.

The impeachability of the witness is very high.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neko View Post
It varies by state, but the statute of limitations for sexual assault is generally between five and ten years (it can be longer if there is DNA evidence).

Even if the suggestion that a woman's report of a sexual assault is "doubtful" because it is 6 years old was not disgusting of itself (it is), it is false -- in some states it would still be valid testimony under law.
Nothing about the statute of limitations. I am speaking to the integrity of the witnesses memory after that long.

Last edited by Kiwi Flyer; Nov 9, 10 at 1:52 am Reason: merge consecutive posts
eyecue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 10, 5:11 pm   #57
  
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: North of DFW
Programs: AA PLT, HH Gold, TSA Disparager Gold, going for Platnium
Posts: 1,532
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyecue View Post
Umm no I disagree for several reasons:
1. My 14 year old daughter was killled in a car crash in 2007 and when the trial came up just 6 months later, even the people in the truck with her could not remember details.

2. The use of a written statement is widely recognised in courts to refresh memory.
3.The prosecution in my daughters vehicular homicide trial had a field day with the defense witnesses over a 6 month time.

The impeachability of the witness is very high.
This is why a incident must be documented very well so that if asked in the future they will remember. "If you didnt write it, it didnt happen" anyone who has been around healthcare and been to court knows this as your best defense is a well written record and or video/audio as the video/audio doesnt lie.

This is why people should either record or film there interactions with TSA, so TSA cant pull there famous stunts when they get caught red handed. just make sure the state your in is only a one party state or you have the appropriate wording on your person.
Scubatooth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 10, 5:14 pm   #58
  
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Colorado
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scubatooth View Post
This is why a incident must be documented very well so that if asked in the future they will remember. "If you didnt write it, it didnt happen" anyone who has been around healthcare and been to court knows this as your best defense is a well written record and or video/audio as the video/audio doesnt lie.

This is why people should either record or film there interactions with TSA, so TSA cant pull there famous stunts when they get caught red handed. just make sure the state your in is only a one party state or you have the appropriate wording on your person.
Exactly..
eyecue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 10, 6:35 pm   #59
LAX
  
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA; Philadelphia, PA
Programs: OZ Diamond
Posts: 4,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scubatooth View Post
This is why a incident must be documented very well so that if asked in the future they will remember. "If you didnt write it, it didnt happen" anyone who has been around healthcare and been to court knows this as your best defense is a well written record and or video/audio as the video/audio doesnt lie.

This is why people should either record or film there interactions with TSA, so TSA cant pull there famous stunts when they get caught red handed. just make sure the state your in is only a one party state or you have the appropriate wording on your person.
If traveling with a companion, are we allowed to ask the companion to videotape the pat-down? Perhaps this would at least remind the TSO not to do anything outside of guideline because it's going to be all recorded. BTW, I am reading conflicting info with regards to contacts with private parts. Are TSO allowed to even get close to them? If so, is it back of the hand or palm?

LAX
LAX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 10, 6:52 pm   #60
Original Member
  
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Costa Mesa, CA, USA
Programs: AA (Life Plat), Starwood (Plat) and every other US program
Posts: 4,447
What is the basis for the assumption that there is a problem with opposite sex patdown? What if the screener openly preferred same sex contact? Would that mean that such screener: a) should only patdown the opposite sex; or, b) should not patdown anyone?

And, if your answer is what I think is correct (the sexual preference of the screener is irrelevant) then why the "same sex" rules?
sbrower is offline   Reply With Quote
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Thread Tools
Search Thread
Go to Top
Forum Jump
Contact Us - FlyerTalk - Archive - Top