Originally Posted by SpatialD

Thanks, I needed a good belly laugh to lighten the mood.

ALPA is a political lobby that supports ALPA. They've had this static page up on their web site for a long time now, and every once in a while they put out an email to remind us that they're working diligently on this very important issue that we would be helpless to deal with apart from them.

I am making them aware of the situation, but I have zero expectations of any meaningful response.



But I did exercise my right to choose not to pass through the scanner. Are you suggesting we should be made to go through it by force?

BIG THANKS to all for the encouraging replies. My in-boxes are stuffed, so be patient if you've emailed me or left a voice mail or text, but by all means still feel free to contact me.

Several have asked how they might help/support me in this. Folks, this is about something much bigger than me or my career or you and your air travel privileges. Let's remember that our children are going to have to live in whatever world we leave them in. Let's resolve now - this week - to leave them with an honorable legacy, and to honor our own forebears who sacrificed far more than their careers or convenience for the cause of liberty.

I apologize for the copy and paste replies to so many of your emails - I wish I could respond in a more personal way to everyone. But here's what I have to say to every one of you:

I didn't refuse the TSA's abuse because I thought it would change the way they do business - I did it because I didn't want them to put their hands on me! But if we are going to stop this tyrannical assault on our essential freedoms and national identity, then we must stop looking to our labor unions, our congressmen, the media, some .org, or or anyone else to fight our battles for us. We must say our own "no" whenever we are confronted with such decisions, just like Rosa Parks and so many others whose conscientious resolve simply would not allow them to bow to the idolatrous altar of totalitarianism. Risk is inherent in life, and freedom has a cost. But that cost only compounds when we defer it in favor of our immediate comfort and convenience.

I hope you'll join me in refusing to be a part of this present madness by doing exactly what I've done. And remember that money talks. There may be little value in writing your congressman - he's probably in bed with big business and not too worried about what you think. But the airlines are big business, and when their source of revenue speaks, they will listen. So flood their in-boxes. Chances are, the human beings behind the corporation receiving your message will agree that these measures are outrageous.

Tell them you're not okay with being abused for the privilege of purchasing their services.

Tell them you are eager to fly again when this invasive threat has been contained.

Tell them to bring their full weight to bear in lobbying for the rights and liberty of their customers.

And please help others to recognize what's happening out there. Many people still show up to the airport without any clue as to what they're in for. Even worse, I'm afraid the sort of despotism that is advancing upon the air transportation system may soon spill out into the streets if we don't wake up and stop giving away our rights and freedom. We must resist - actively, not just passively - those who are actively advancing against our way of life.

Thanks again, everyone.

-m.

Originally Posted by Boggie Dog

What profit?

This Patriot may have just taken the first step in a long legal challenge.

Originally Posted by IslandBased

The barkers at TSA could care less about privacy, honor or respect. To them, civil disobedience is just taken personally as disrespect.

Originally Posted by Combat Medic

OK, let us explore this then.

Rosa Parks saw a government sanctioned activity that she knew in her heart was wrong.
Michael Roberts saw a government sanctioned activity that he knew in her heart was wrong.

Rosa Parks took peaceful actions against the above activity.
Michael Roberts took peaceful actions against the above activity.

Rosa Parks knew and accepted the repercussions of her actions.
Michael Roberts knew and accepted the repercussions of his actions.

So....where's the disconnect here?

Originally Posted by PhoenixRev

He is an American citizen at an American airport.

Your attempts to deflect the issue is desperate.

Originally Posted by PhoenixRev

The word seems pretty applicable here.

Originally Posted by Carnage

So let me get this correct in my mind.

Person needs access to secure area of airport for work.
Person refuses to undergo the required level of screening.
Person refused access to secure area.
Person goes home.
Person suspended.
Person posts on internet
Profit?

Originally Posted by 2089x5449

IANAL, but it may be quite relevant. In order to lawfully infringe upon a fundamental right--such as the right to privacy--a government action must meet three conditions:

1. It must advance an important governmental interest,

2. the intrusion must significantly further that interest, and

3. the intrusion must be necessary to further that interest.

If the WBI really contributes so little to airline safety that you can write off its results as irrelevant, then it does not significantly further any governmental interest. That makes them unconstitutional. No American should be punished for disobeying an unconstitutional law or order. They should be awarded a Medal of Freedom by the President.

Lest the government or its agents play the national security card, it should be remembered that judicial deference to national security only goes so far. The Department of Defense recently learned that the Courts will not uphold intrusive, pointless laws. The Department of Homeland Security will eventually learn this lesson, too.

Originally Posted by Global_Hi_Flyer

Sir, you are a patriot.

Perhaps the day will come where pilots or flgiht crew take the approach that workers take in France: stage a one-day (or multiple one-day) strikes. Passengers can do that, too, but the likelihood of all the sheeple going along is slim to none. Heck, most FT'ers will take the cheaper fares

And before someone says it, I don't consider TSA employees to be patriots. Not at all. To be a patriot, one needs to take a stand, at considerable personal risk, to stand up for the ideals that founded this country.

Originally Posted by star_world

The disconnect is so vast that it's disturbing you see this as any form of a comparison. Deciding that you don't want a pat-down on that particular day when you showed up for work, just like every other day,

Originally Posted by star_world

The disconnect is so vast that it's disturbing you see this as any form of a comparison. Deciding that you don't want a pat-down on that particular day when you showed up for work, just like every other day, knowing that was the documented, repeated process does not form the basis for a civil rights movement. How can the OP ever possibly have a legitimate case that says a straightforward pat-down is a violation of anything? Sure they're annoying - that's why WBIs were invented ^. But this is a ridiculous situation created on the basis of - acting on a whim?

Originally Posted by tanja

People are not talking here about the old fashion pat-downs.

They are talking about the NEW ENHANCED pat-downs.

The old way was jus ta "normal" pat-down.

The new one includes breasts and genitals. And I dont get why people have to be violated to be able to travel.

Some people dont care if they get touched in their privates. Just cause that will make them feel secure.

But a lot of people INCLUDING ME dont want the new pat-down.
I am a very private person who now are told to share my female parts with secutiry. And that is for making my fligth safe.!!!!That is if I want to fly. And fly I have to do if I want to go to Sweden.

I wonder what the next step is going to be.

Originally Posted by Combat Medic

Ignoring the fact that the OP said that this was the first time he was subject to an 'Enhanced Patdown'...do you think that the famous time that Rosa Parks refused to go to the back of the bus was the first time that she ever got on a bus?

Originally Posted by RichardKenner

Nope. The OP was quite clear that this was the first time this happened.

Originally Posted by janey

I agree with everything you say, tanja, but personally I'm offended by any pat-down I've received (and it's happened more often than not).

Originally Posted by MikeMpls

"Frisk", not "enhanced patdown". The latter is merely a euphemism to divert attention from what they are actually doing.

Originally Posted by star_world

They are performing a manual version of what would otherwise be done hands-free using a WBI device. Where is the attention being diverted?

Originally Posted by star_world

The first time he had encountered a WBI at this airport, not the first time he had received a pat-down, unless you know otherwise.

Originally Posted by MikeMpls

If you can't (or refuse to) see how "enhanced patdown" is a euphemism for "frisk", I can't help you much.

For that matter, "whole body imaging" is a euphemism for "strip search". People need to call them what they really are.

Originally Posted by mozgytog

They shouldn't be doing either of those things. Strip searches and gropings should not be perpetrated against those who have done nothing more suspicious than express a desire to travel by air.

Originally Posted by mozgytog

I think he was pretty clear that he had not been in a position where anyone attempted to touch him before.



Considering the number of people I see getting felt up after going through a strip-search machine, this advice is at best wrong and at worst deliberately misleading.



They shouldn't be doing either of those things. Strip searches and gropings should not be perpetrated against those who have done nothing more suspicious than express a desire to travel by air.