Tantric TSA: The art of foreplay
Sep 4, 2010, 5:38 am
#16
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 488
Correct me if I'm wrong, and I'm too tired at the moment to do the research, but given the screener's ostensibly nonsexual intent (and, yes, I am ignoring the OP's post when I say that 
), wouldn't it be a misdemeanor offense under California law, rather than a felony? Meaning a LEO can't make an arrest unless he actually sees it happen.
So your requests to opt out and for a LEO should probably be concurrent.
), wouldn't it be a misdemeanor offense under California law, rather than a felony? Meaning a LEO can't make an arrest unless he actually sees it happen.So your requests to opt out and for a LEO should probably be concurrent.
Sep 4, 2010, 7:03 am
#17
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,388
The more I think about it, the more I suspect that the aggressive body searches are part of a plan to force people to go through the strip-search machine.
Here's the logic:
1) many people end up complaining about the aggressive use of hands by the TSA screeners - sexual assault, whatever - and Congress or the courts slap down the TSA. This becomes more likely if the screeners cause bruising or other physical pain to a passenger.
2) TSA then imposes - forces - people to use the strip search machines by telling the courts/Congress that it has to be done for security, and since Congress/courts forced them to stop the physical assaults.... well, the machines are now mandatory.
Wouldn't be surprised if it's part of the plan at the higher levels of the agency. I mean, we do have a lawyer that relies on Google for supporting arguments....
Here's the logic:
1) many people end up complaining about the aggressive use of hands by the TSA screeners - sexual assault, whatever - and Congress or the courts slap down the TSA. This becomes more likely if the screeners cause bruising or other physical pain to a passenger.
2) TSA then imposes - forces - people to use the strip search machines by telling the courts/Congress that it has to be done for security, and since Congress/courts forced them to stop the physical assaults.... well, the machines are now mandatory.
Wouldn't be surprised if it's part of the plan at the higher levels of the agency. I mean, we do have a lawyer that relies on Google for supporting arguments....
Sep 4, 2010, 7:43 am
#18
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Salish Sea
Programs: DL,AC,HH,PC
Posts: 8,974
The TSA has been duped into thinking these machines are The Answer (while Chertoff lines his pockets), so they have to do everything possible to keep up the pretence. They simply can't afford another debacle like the ETP 'puffers'; although it's probably going to happen anyway.
I sincerely hope ^ .
Sep 4, 2010, 9:27 am
#19
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Programs: DL, US Air, AA, HH Diamond
Posts: 79
Great first post! 
I think the OP needs to consider a side gig writing for Harlequin.
I wish I was a Photoshop master... After reading this, I have this vision in my head of altering the cover of one of those trashy romance novels to a TSA agent groping a pax with a look of shock on their face.
I think the OP needs to consider a side gig writing for Harlequin. I wish I was a Photoshop master... After reading this, I have this vision in my head of altering the cover of one of those trashy romance novels to a TSA agent groping a pax with a look of shock on their face.
Sep 4, 2010, 9:46 am
#21
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: CLT
Programs: Choice Hotels/FFOCUS
Posts: 7,256
+1 the same on my end. You beat me to the post.
To the op, welcome to Flyertalk . I would've called for an leo very quickly.
Sep 4, 2010, 10:29 am
#22
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: MSP
Programs: Fallen Plats, ex-WN CP, DYKWIW; still a Hilton Diamond & Club Cholula™ R.I.P. Super Plats
Posts: 25,415
Here's the logic:
1) many people end up complaining about the aggressive use of hands by the TSA screeners - sexual assault, whatever - and Congress or the courts slap down the TSA. This becomes more likely if the screeners cause bruising or other physical pain to a passenger.
2) TSA then imposes - forces - people to use the strip search machines by telling the courts/Congress that it has to be done for security, and since Congress/courts forced them to stop the physical assaults.... well, the machines are now mandatory.
Wouldn't be surprised if it's part of the plan at the higher levels of the agency. I mean, we do have a lawyer that relies on Google for supporting arguments....
1) many people end up complaining about the aggressive use of hands by the TSA screeners - sexual assault, whatever - and Congress or the courts slap down the TSA. This becomes more likely if the screeners cause bruising or other physical pain to a passenger.
2) TSA then imposes - forces - people to use the strip search machines by telling the courts/Congress that it has to be done for security, and since Congress/courts forced them to stop the physical assaults.... well, the machines are now mandatory.
Wouldn't be surprised if it's part of the plan at the higher levels of the agency. I mean, we do have a lawyer that relies on Google for supporting arguments....
Sep 4, 2010, 10:34 am
#23
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: SEA/YVR/BLI
Programs: UA "Lifetime" Gold, AS MVPG100K, OW Emerald, HH Lifetime Diamond, IC Plat, Marriott Gold, Hertz Gold
Posts: 9,489
Sep 4, 2010, 11:16 am
#25
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
The more I think about it, the more I suspect that the aggressive body searches are part of a plan to force people to go through the strip-search machine.
Here's the logic:
1) many people end up complaining about the aggressive use of hands by the TSA screeners - sexual assault, whatever - and Congress or the courts slap down the TSA. This becomes more likely if the screeners cause bruising or other physical pain to a passenger.
2) TSA then imposes - forces - people to use the strip search machines by telling the courts/Congress that it has to be done for security, and since Congress/courts forced them to stop the physical assaults.... well, the machines are now mandatory.
Wouldn't be surprised if it's part of the plan at the higher levels of the agency. I mean, we do have a lawyer that relies on Google for supporting arguments....
Here's the logic:
1) many people end up complaining about the aggressive use of hands by the TSA screeners - sexual assault, whatever - and Congress or the courts slap down the TSA. This becomes more likely if the screeners cause bruising or other physical pain to a passenger.
2) TSA then imposes - forces - people to use the strip search machines by telling the courts/Congress that it has to be done for security, and since Congress/courts forced them to stop the physical assaults.... well, the machines are now mandatory.
Wouldn't be surprised if it's part of the plan at the higher levels of the agency. I mean, we do have a lawyer that relies on Google for supporting arguments....
I admit to being mystified by the reports of folks going through the scanner and getting a full grope. I understand resolving something that comes up on the scanner, but that shouldn't require a full grope.
As far as the grope being punishment for opting out - anyone who doubts that should explain why so often the opt-out grope is accompanied by a complete unpacking and swabbing of carry-ons that have cleared the x-ray.
No doubt in my mind that the WBI is here to stay, unfortunately. What's surprising to me is that we haven't heard of any TSOs being reluctant to do the grab. I'm no prude, but if I were a TSO, I couldn't do it (probably why I never went into medicine or law enforcement).
I wonder what happens if a TSO is confronted with a family member or neighbor to do a grope. Can the TSO recuse him/herself? Even if I were comfortable groping strangers, I'm sure I couldn't grope my family, my pastor, my neighbor, my kids' school teachers...not publicly or privately.
Sep 4, 2010, 12:05 pm
#26
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: MSP
Programs: Fallen Plats, ex-WN CP, DYKWIW; still a Hilton Diamond & Club Cholula™ R.I.P. Super Plats
Posts: 25,415
Correct me if I'm wrong, and I'm too tired at the moment to do the research, but given the screener's ostensibly nonsexual intent (and, yes, I am ignoring the OP's post when I say that ), wouldn't it be a misdemeanor offense under California law, rather than a felony? Meaning a LEO can't make an arrest unless he actually sees it happen.
So your requests to opt out and for a LEO should probably be concurrent.
), wouldn't it be a misdemeanor offense under California law, rather than a felony? Meaning a LEO can't make an arrest unless he actually sees it happen.So your requests to opt out and for a LEO should probably be concurrent.
Sep 4, 2010, 2:52 pm
#27
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,972
I wish it was so clear, but I don't think it is. A state law that has an effect of dictating where planes are allowed to fly would have that part of the law preempted by Federal law. A state law that had the effect of limiting what searches TSA can do might be equally prempted.
Sep 4, 2010, 3:18 pm
#28
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
I wish it was so clear, but I don't think it is. A state law that has an effect of dictating where planes are allowed to fly would have that part of the law preempted by Federal law. A state law that had the effect of limiting what searches TSA can do might be equally prempted.