|
Originally Posted by Hedwigkin
(Post 15080534)
Now this can be interpreted a few different ways. Could you define: “problem”?
|
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 15081193)
SATTSO, TSORon, eyecue, TSA1Dude or any other TSA employee; the link I am posting includes a first person interview of a person TSA screened.
After listening to the interview tell us if you think the person is being dishonest. http://www.infowars.com/tsa-fondles-...body-scanners/ |
[QUOTE=Boggie Dog;15081193]Let say the media does have the pat down controversy blown out of proportion. I agree that is a possibility.
SATTSO, TSORon, eyecue, TSA1Dude or any other TSA employee; the link I am posting includes a first person interview of a person TSA screened. After listening to the interview tell us if you think the person is being dishonest. Google Alex Jones and add the word "hoax" |
Originally Posted by DevilDog438
(Post 15081494)
I may have missed it, but has anyone seen any of our lovely TSO members answer the question, which has been posted multiple times in this thread alone and several times in most of the other WBI-related threads, about whether a passenger receiving the Alarm Resolution is forced into a private room by TSA? If so, how does TSA justify this violation, since they do not have the power to detain anyone?
That being said, the APA just recommended that all pilots say they want private screening in all instances involving their people. |
Originally Posted by eyecue
(Post 15084184)
In order to complete the resolution pat down IT HAS TO BE DONE in private. If the passenger declines to move to private screening then the process cannot be completed and the passenger cannot enter the boarding area.
That being said, the APA just recommended that all pilots say they want private screening in all instances involving their people. I am not being a smart aleck. I really, really want to avoid it. If I can know what will set it off, I can proactively avoid it. Help us out here. This is serious. Do the best you can. It is very unfair to ask passengers to be ready to submit to a procedure for which they have no idea what they submitting. Especially one that seems to be so bad that we have to hide to do it. Final question, also serious. Do I get a witness and can they photograph? If no, then why not? It is my pat down and I should be able to give permission. |
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
(Post 15073835)
There were other documents -- I think it was the TSA workplace violence program (another one the IG nailed the TSA for never establishing) -- which expanded penalties and administrative/criminal punishments to TSA screener interactions with passengers and other members of the public.
The sexual harassment scope of a similar nature is found in the OPM directives. If I dig hard enough, I can find the policy and a training briefing or two. The bottom line is that an act of sexual harassment performed by a screener against a member of the public is just as bad as a screener commiting an act of sexual harassment against another screener. I gotta' ask: You (personally and your screener coworkers) have had this training, right??? (both initial and annual refreshers) |
TSORon said in post #100:
“What’s to stop putting things inside of bodies, either cavities or otherwise?” In part, there is not enough space in any particular body cavity to put all the components necessary and the amount of explosive necessary to cause catastrophic damage to an aircraft. And in any case, the body itself will absorb a great deal of the energy released by any device small enough to pack in there. As for surgically implanted devices, science fiction.
Originally Posted by TSORon
(Post 15083116)
Yeah, I already saw that one. “Dishonest” is the most innocuous term I would apply. “Openly hostile” towards the TSA and its procedures is a bit more accurate. This “person” is hardly an objective observer. About as partisan as Nancy Pelosi, and just about as honest as well.
They reported a first person occurrence.
Originally Posted by eyecue
(Post 15084184)
In order to complete the resolution pat down IT HAS TO BE DONE in private. If the passenger declines to move to private screening then the process cannot be completed and the passenger cannot enter the boarding area.
That being said, the APA just recommended that all pilots say they want private screening in all instances involving their people. |
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 15084370)
What is done during this "Resolution Pat Down" that TSA is afraid of the public seeing?
|
Originally Posted by Global_Hi_Flyer
(Post 15084601)
SOunds like it's a REAL strip search. Or they don't want the public to see just how invasive they are.
Fully cooperating and submitting to the search, just not in a hidden location. Nothing TSA does to a citizen should have to be done in out of public sight. |
Originally Posted by TSORon
(Post 15083063)
“What’s to stop putting things inside of bodies, either cavities or otherwise?” In part, there is not enough space in any particular body cavity to put all the components necessary and the amount of explosive necessary to cause catastrophic damage to an aircraft. And in any case, the body itself will absorb a great deal of the energy released by any device small enough to pack in there. As for surgically implanted devices, science fiction.
are you sure about your assumption? the volume that can be stored in the GI track is considerable.The stomach of the average adult can hold 2 liters of fluid. The large intestine in a adult has enough room to store over 2 ft3 of material. If you took any AnP courses you would know that. This incident was on the ground but in a pressurized capsule the outcome would be different. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...n5347847.shtml as for your last sentence, you are the one that needs to lay off the sci-fi movies. A little google search would go along way so you dont insert your toes/foot/ankle/shin/knee/ thigh in your mouth with a healthy dose of crow. |
Originally Posted by SATTSO
(Post 15080573)
I you think so. All I will say is your answer should include more ;)
|
Originally Posted by TSORon
(Post 15083063)
If passing through the TSA checkpoint is causing you grief then how much grief do you feel when you get stopped by the police? As for “human rights”, well lets just say that the vast majority of the folks posting to venues like this have a very tenuous grasp of what those rights are. For many it seems to be “whatever I think they are”, and they are comfortable with that. At least until it is explained to them how wrong they are.
I don't mean to attack you, but your attitude is condescending and somewhat disturbing. :( |
Originally Posted by TSORon
(Post 15083063)
In part, there is not enough space in any particular body cavity to put all the components necessary and the amount of explosive necessary to cause catastrophic damage to an aircraft.
I still keep in touch and still get invited to various events. A demonstration can be arranged. EDIT: Just did some math using good ole high school geometry. Took the volume of an object of a known size and figured out the internal volume could hold 55 fluid ounces. For one gal, this was her "warm up" for the production. |
Suppose...
...you demand a LEO and when the LEO appears point to the TSA agent who did the groping and say "I am making a citizens arrest of this person".
|
Originally Posted by eyecue
(Post 15084184)
In order to complete the resolution pat down IT HAS TO BE DONE in private. If the passenger declines to move to private screening then the process cannot be completed and the passenger cannot enter the boarding area.
That being said, the APA just recommended that all pilots say they want private screening in all instances involving their people. This gets more disgusting every time they open their mouths. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 8:44 am. |
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.