Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate
Reload this Page >

Cancer Patients Abused by TSA [merged threads]

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Cancer Patients Abused by TSA [merged threads]

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Oct 7, 2011, 9:00 pm
  #31  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,090
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog

What laws are those that TSA operates under? I would like to read them, especially the part that says TSA can assault people without any reason.
Originally Posted by TSORon

We have discussed them before, and I won’t play that game with you again. That also may be the reason that Blogger Bob rarely engages you anymore, because your line never changes no matter what information we provide for you.
Very telling that you can't articulate any of the law you claim that TSA operates under.
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Oct 8, 2011, 12:43 am
  #32  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Programs: AC.SE
Posts: 2,578
Originally Posted by TSORon
The switch is there, you only need move it for the light to come on.
Strange comment from someone who prefers that his mind remain unilluminated.
ylwae is offline  
Old Oct 8, 2011, 6:00 am
  #33  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: BOS and vicinity
Programs: Former UA 1P
Posts: 3,725
Originally Posted by TSORon
Having cancer is a “disadvantage”? Not in my book, I call it a disease, but that’s just me.

“The disadvantaged” is a misnomer, and an inaccurate description designed to make us feel better about ourselves and a means of belittling them. They are people, that’s all. They may be required to make adjustments to how they do the same things that you and I do and achieve the desired results, but that does not make them “disadvantaged”. It’s a rancid term used by the politically correct to make them less than normal.
Wow. You seem to either have something against cancer survivors or feel you are defending them by insisting they are no different from anyone else.

First of all, I said "disadvantaged and most vulnerable." If you don't consider a woman who has a physically sensitive recent surgical scar with artificial/temporary tissue expanders more "vulnerable" than a perfectly healthy person, there's not much I can do. See previous comment about TSA culture being beyond repair. Now, 11 years ago that vulnerability would have been irrelevant at an airport because the security process would not expose it, but your colleagues and management have changed that.

As for being "disadvantaged," TSA's treatment of people with medical issues, specifically sending them through the NoS which "alarms" on medical items that would not trigger the WTMD and are not WEI, and then insisting on "resolving" those alarms with painful and invasive searches, is the disadvantage. Because of people like you, being a cancer survivor or person with another medical issue is a vulnerability and disadvantage at the airport.

At a very basic level, if she has to arrive at the airport 30 minutes before me because of what TSA insists on doing for her, that's a disadvantage.

And I've never been accused of being PC before, so that's kind of funny. I'm very conservative and very not PC.

Talk to congress, not me or the others here. We didn’t make the laws, congress did. Point your finger where it should be pointed. @:-)
Every time you go to work, you enforce TSA's policy. There's plenty of fingers to point. History shows that both the Politburo and the clerks will be judged.
studentff is offline  
Old Oct 8, 2011, 6:06 am
  #34  
Suspended
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,953
Originally Posted by ylwae
Strange comment from someone who prefers that his mind remain unilluminated.
^^
doober is offline  
Old Oct 8, 2011, 6:17 am
  #35  
Suspended
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,953
Originally Posted by TSORon
What makes you think that I don’t have “a horrible cancer” or some other life threatening disease.
I knew you'd come back with a comment like that!

"Anything you can do, I can do better. I can do anything better than you."

For those who have not been following this source of great entertainment, he plays the one upmanship game and is very predictable in doing so.
doober is offline  
Old Oct 8, 2011, 6:19 am
  #36  
Suspended
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,953
Originally Posted by Drince88
If the imaging machines can't see below the skin, and she had tissue expanders (which would not be above the skin), how could the imaging machine detect an anomaly in her chest area that required resolution?
Perhaps it picked up surgical scars or drains or the lack of a nipple in the breast area.
doober is offline  
Old Oct 9, 2012, 11:12 am
  #37  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,120
Cancer patients abused by TSA

Two more women have come forward with awful TSA experiences. One is dying of leukemia and the other is a breast cancer survivor.

http://www.kctv5.com/story/19771864/...ancer-survivor
.."Deitrick said the TSA agent asked if she was wearing something on her chest. She soon realized it was her scars the TSA screener took issue with

The employee radioed in "an anomaly," something outside the norm, and told Deitrick she need to check her manually...
"I don't think that the TSA agents across the country are being uniformly and properly trained to be able to know what to look at and what to look for and what to expect when a breast cancer survivor comes through a body scanner," she said.

As a breast cancer survivor, Deitrick's profile may not fit the majority, but as one of 2.9 million in the United States, she is also far from rare.

"I'm not an anomaly. I'm the reality of breast cancer just like those other 2.9 million women are, and I think that we deserve better when we go through airport screening. We deserve to have TSA screeners who know what they're looking at," she said..."


http://www.kboi2.com/news/local/173291181.html
"...A machine couldn't get a reading on her saline bags, so a TSA agent forced one open, contaminating the fluid she needs to survive.

She says agents also made her lift up her shirt and pull back the bandages holding feeding tubes in place. Dunaj needs those tubes because of organ failure...

However, Dunaj says her request for a private screening was denied, and she does not want others with special needs to run into the same problem..."
mules is offline  
Old Oct 9, 2012, 12:48 pm
  #38  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: FLL - Nice and Warm
Programs: TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 1,025
The comments on the site:
http://www.kctv5.com/story/19771864/...ancer-survivor
make me want to barf!

Please vote and add comments from our side.^
Wimpie is offline  
Old Oct 9, 2012, 12:53 pm
  #39  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Boston, USA
Programs: AA Platinum Pro, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 232
Words fail me. I despair for humanity.
scolbath is offline  
Old Oct 9, 2012, 1:45 pm
  #40  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Salish Sea
Programs: DL,AC,HH,PC
Posts: 8,974
Originally Posted by Wimpie
Please vote and add comments from our side.^
Wouldn't seem to be much point:
A number of comments that did NOT violate our TOS had been removed from the site because they had been repeatedly flagged apparently by those who disagreed with the criticism of TSA.
Wally Bird is offline  
Old Oct 9, 2012, 1:47 pm
  #41  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: FLL
Posts: 393
Anyone taking bets on Blogger Bob's response to each of these incidents? Will it be "Proper procedures were followed", "We have reviewed the incident(s) and determined that it (they) did not occur the passenger(s) described", or both?

Edited to clarify. Wish it hadn't already been quoted.

Last edited by wildcatlh; Oct 9, 2012 at 2:52 pm
wildcatlh is offline  
Old Oct 9, 2012, 2:17 pm
  #42  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 616
Originally Posted by wildcatlh
Anyone taking bets on Blogger Bob's response to each of these incidents? Will it be "Proper procedures were followed", "We have reviewed the incident(s) and determined that it (they) did not occur was not as the passenger(s) described", or both?
I think he will say both. Another question is, will the videotape be inconclusive, blurry, or missing?
spd476 is offline  
Old Oct 9, 2012, 2:33 pm
  #43  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
Originally Posted by Wally Bird
Wouldn't seem to be much point:
I commented and it was gone within 10 minutes.
petaluma1 is offline  
Old Oct 9, 2012, 2:59 pm
  #44  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: LAS - where you can get married and divorced in the same 24 hour period. Perfect for the woman who's saving herself for marriage and the man who wants a one night stand.
Programs: DL DM, Hilton Diamond, IHG Diamond, Marriott Platinum, UA, AA, AS, WN kettle, Hertz PC
Posts: 1,613
Loss of freedom doesn't come quickly -

"When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out. .

- Martin Niemöller, 1946
puddinhead is offline  
Old Oct 9, 2012, 4:33 pm
  #45  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,967
The airport in the first story was Kansas City, MO, correct, which is MCI?

Isn't that airport still managed by a contract security firm? I met with management from that firm there in 2011 in regards to an encounter I had with a screener at the checkpoint which left me unable to step away from the screening area without risking exposing myself, and also in pain.

I will give credit to the manager for the way he handled the situation, but if this is in fact the same airport I am extremely disappointed that they apparently have not improved when it comes to dealing with passengers with out of ordinary situations.

The airport in the second story is SEA. I have heard many bad stories about SEA but did report my own experience was relatively positive the last time I flew from there. However I may have been lucky as the reports about several female TSOs there are not so positive.

Last edited by exbayern; Oct 9, 2012 at 4:39 pm
exbayern is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.