FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   Practical Travel Safety and Security Issues (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-security-issues-686/)
-   -   Before playing with my genitals, TSA should... (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-security-issues/1140468-before-playing-my-genitals-tsa-should.html)

Boggie Dog Oct 28, 2010 8:35 pm


Originally Posted by eyecue (Post 15034143)
The last two days at DEN have been very interesting in that respect. There has been a lot more LEO stand ups for patdowns. A lot more irate people. One person said that we need to be specific in our advisals and include the word balls. One today just said this is efing bs. So much so that he almost did not get to continue. It started at the AIT when his cold start met me head on and I asked if he wanted to opt out. I believe that it is only a matter of time before before this really escalates into something that no one wants.

Apparently TSA wants it, why else would TSA start this abusive screening?

edit to add: Eyecue, are you suggesting that the so-called TSA Leadership was not intelligent enough not see this train was going to derail?

Maybe that explains why TSA can't even teach its employees what ID's TSA has approved.

boiflyer Oct 28, 2010 8:40 pm


Originally Posted by eyecue (Post 15034143)
The last two days at DEN have been very interesting in that respect. There has been a lot more LEO stand ups for patdowns. A lot more irate people. One person said that we need to be specific in our advisals and include the word balls. One today just said this is efing bs. So much so that he almost did not get to continue. It started at the AIT when his cold start met me head on and I asked if he wanted to opt out. I believe that it is only a matter of time before before this really escalates into something that no one wants.

What's a "LEO standup for a patdown"?

Regarding the bolded statement, it's already there. I don't imagine anyone who has gone through it is something anyone wants. I really, really, really hope this blows up in TSA's face...as it should. Sick and disgusting.

Scubatooth Oct 28, 2010 9:01 pm


Originally Posted by eyecue (Post 15034143)
The last two days at DEN have been very interesting in that respect. There has been a lot more LEO stand ups for patdowns. A lot more irate people. One person said that we need to be specific in our advisals and include the word balls. One today just said this is efing bs. So much so that he almost did not get to continue. It started at the AIT when his cold start met me head on and I asked if he wanted to opt out. I believe that it is only a matter of time before before this really escalates into something that no one wants.


Good maybe a few clerks having the tar beaten out of them landing them in the ICU will get pissys attention that sexual assault and violations to the constitution will not be tolerated, and will change the policy.

Superguy Oct 28, 2010 9:32 pm


Originally Posted by boiflyer (Post 15034189)
What's a "LEO standup for a patdown"?

Regarding the bolded statement, it's already there. I don't imagine anyone who has gone through it is something anyone wants. I really, really, really hope this blows up in TSA's face...as it should. Sick and disgusting.

And TSA has no one but itself to blame.

If this is the initial reaction of the kettles, this is a big ^!

DevilDog438 Oct 28, 2010 9:38 pm


Originally Posted by eyecue (Post 15034143)
The last two days at DEN have been very interesting in that respect. There has been a lot more LEO stand ups for patdowns. A lot more irate people. One person said that we need to be specific in our advisals and include the word balls. One today just said this is efing bs. So much so that he almost did not get to continue. It started at the AIT when his cold start met me head on and I asked if he wanted to opt out. I believe that it is only a matter of time before before this really escalates into something that no one wants.

Why would he not be allowed to continue for his vocalizations?

JSmith1969 Oct 28, 2010 9:38 pm


Originally Posted by eyecue (Post 15034143)
The last two days at DEN have been very interesting in that respect. There has been a lot more LEO stand ups for patdowns. A lot more irate people. One person said that we need to be specific in our advisals and include the word balls. One today just said this is efing bs. So much so that he almost did not get to continue. It started at the AIT when his cold start met me head on and I asked if he wanted to opt out. I believe that it is only a matter of time before before this really escalates into something that no one wants.

Gee, maybe you wouldn't get these reactions if you weren't sexually assaulting people for wanting to get on an airplane.

Wimpie Oct 28, 2010 9:55 pm


Originally Posted by eyecue (Post 15034143)
The last two days at DEN have been very interesting in that respect. There has been a lot more LEO stand ups for patdowns. A lot more irate people. One person said that we need to be specific in our advisals and include the word balls. One today just said this is efing bs. So much so that he almost did not get to continue. It started at the AIT when his cold start met me head on and I asked if he wanted to opt out. I believe that it is only a matter of time before before this really escalates into something that no one wants.

Thanks, eyecue, for revealing this SSI. I expect you might get scolded for releasing this damning information on the initial backlash of the literal ball busting by TSA. I hope they keep it up until critical mass is reached, which will happen shortly after next Tuesday.

The buzz on the net about TSA has been 100 times higher than ever before, including the nude-o-scope introductions. TSA has never gotten this much press is any 48 hours in its history, all of which is negative. NOBODY has said anything positive about this new development.

This will bring serious attention to the ethics of the whole operation.
Screeners will get decked, maybe tomorrow. I'll be watching the news.
Passengers will back out and create a scene.
Airlines will file formal complaints on behalf of their passengers.
Hockey fights for sure.

TSA will lose.
Congress will drop the 2011 nude-o-scope budget.
The threat level will magically drop a notch, and we will return to normal,
intrusive 2008-2009 levels.
EPIC will beat DHS in court.
Nude-o-scopes will be resigned to voluntary, secondary screening.
I hope.
I hope for this Country.

coachrowsey Oct 28, 2010 10:08 pm


Originally Posted by Scubatooth (Post 15034318)
Good maybe a few clerks having the tar beaten out of them landing them in the ICU will get pissys attention that sexual assault and violations to the constitution will not be tolerated, and will change the policy.

Better yet maybe(not holding my breath) some of the clerks will actually get tired of feeling up people & walk off the job &tell TSA where to go. If enough of this would happen maybe things would change

flapping arms Oct 28, 2010 10:15 pm


Originally Posted by coachrowsey (Post 15034624)
Better yet maybe(not holding my breath) some of the clerks will actually get tired of feeling up people & walk off the job &tell TSA where to go. If enough of this would happen maybe things would change

^

A 100 percent turnover rate at TSA would be a nice goal, starting with the smurfs/clerks^


Originally Posted by eyecue (Post 15034143)
I believe that it is only a matter of time before before this really escalates into something that no one wants.

I certainly agree with you on this.

Its only a matter of time before one of your collegues gets their teeth or testicles fed to them by some irate passenger who gets molested or has watched his wife/daughter/son/mother/grandmother be molested by one of your coworkers:mad:

I would be among the first to contribute to the defendants legal fund.


Originally Posted by trvlr64 (Post 15015091)
What does the sexual preference of the screener have to do with anything? I'm GAY and I don't necessarily want another GAY MAN touching me if I don't feel comfortable with it.

Personally give me a STRAIGHT screener and watch the fun insue as I have fun with him as he's touching certain areas of my groin

;)

:D

@:-)

Please PLEASE have a traveling companion record this!


Originally Posted by Global_Hi_Flyer (Post 15036834)
Silly. As the TSA 2-striper at IAD said to a passenger in front of me "You have no rights at the checkpoint, especially first amendment rights. I will call a cop to detain you to make sure you miss your flight".

IANAL, but that sounds to me like grounds to complain about threat of unlawful arrest, unlawful detainment, and unprofessional conduct in violation of TSA's values. And rudeness as well.

N965VJ Oct 28, 2010 11:17 pm


Originally Posted by eyecue (Post 15034143)
One person said that we need to be specific in our advisals and include the word balls.

How could this be? :confused:


Originally Posted by SATTSO (Post 15014895)
Let's not forget the fact that there will be no grabbing of genitalia in any TSA procedure. Period.





Originally Posted by eyecue (Post 15034143)
I believe that it is only a matter of time before before this really escalates into something that no one wants.

Unfortunately, I agree. :(

JakiChan Oct 29, 2010 3:43 am

I keep debating how I will respond. I would want my response to cause as much psychological stress as possible for the screener - I want it to be equal or exceed the stress they're causing me.

My favorite idea so far is to express sexual arousal during the pat down and politely inform the "officer" *cough* that I will be fantasizing about him later while having super freaky mansex. Of course, this will be the method of choice if the gaydar suggests that the screener is straight (the straighter the better).

FliesWay2Much Oct 29, 2010 7:11 am


Originally Posted by coachrowsey (Post 15034624)
Better yet maybe(not holding my breath) some of the clerks will actually get tired of feeling up people & walk off the job &tell TSA where to go. If enough of this would happen maybe things would change

This is one time where a union would REALLY help.

InkUnderNails Oct 29, 2010 7:24 am


Originally Posted by RoadVeteran (Post 15034648)
^

A 100 percent turnover rate at TSA would be a nice goal, starting with the smurfs/clerks^

This may not be a good thing. The replacements would definitely be selected based on whether they minded, or even looked forward to, the screening processes they would be doing. It may end up purging the ones that agree with us.:td:

FliesWay2Much Oct 29, 2010 7:33 am


Originally Posted by eyecue (Post 15034143)
The last two days at DEN have been very interesting in that respect. There has been a lot more LEO stand ups for patdowns. A lot more irate people. One person said that we need to be specific in our advisals and include the word balls. One today just said this is efing bs. So much so that he almost did not get to continue. It started at the AIT when his cold start met me head on and I asked if he wanted to opt out. I believe that it is only a matter of time before before this really escalates into something that no one wants.

Rolando is only the first -- at least the first public incident we know about. More cops will get involved, followed by the first passenger cold-cocking of a screener, followed by arrests, followed by taser attacks, followed by someone getting shot by a cop.

Pissy and/or Nappy will get on the news channels to remind us that compliance is required and that protest will not be tolerated. The passenger who was shot by a cop at a checkpoint (and presumably killed) will be front & center as an example of what could happen to the rest of the citizenry. They will pit compliant citizen against protesting citizen as a means of population self-control, and those who assist the TSA will be rewarded.

I spent 4 days' leave in Berlin last week and visited a lot of the museums dealing with life in East Germany under the Stasi. (...a natural curiosity because of my long tenure in the "business" and a desire to confirm or deny what I had long been taught through our documents...). The above scenario is not too far removed from how the Stasi assured order and compliance.

Virtually all -- no, absolutely zero -- of any of this has anything to do with securing the country's civil aviation transportation sector. The TSA has placed itself into the position of not protecting airports from terrorists. Officially as of today, the TSA is now in the position of protecting themselves from the citizenry.

The good news is that, eventually, even the Stasi couldn't hold the people back.

Boggie Dog Oct 29, 2010 7:33 am


Originally Posted by InkUnderNails (Post 15036108)
This may not be a good thing. The replacements would definitely be selected based on whether they minded, or even looked forward to, the screening processes they would be doing. It may end up purging the ones that agree with us.:td:

TSA is already scraping the bottom of the employee pool barrel. Whats left, going under the barrel?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 5:30 pm.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.