I was actually confirming your statement that some people will lie.

You work for some regular liars.

The only 'defense' available for that is to call the man a liar or to say that what happened to him was an accident, incidental to the actual search (like accidentally :rolleyes: having one's penis touched by someone running their hand along the gracilis muscle.) But, whatever happened, rest assured that proper procedures were followed, and the TSA holds its employees to the highest ethical standards and treats all passengers with dignity and respect.

So this thread brings up a question that's been in the back of my mind for a bit: When the TSA tells you "come with us," (to a private area, out of public view) what are your options and what are their potential responses?

My instinctual response would be: "Anything I'll consent to can be done right here in public" and if I get any push-back, then request both a supervisor and law enforcement.

Is there anything they can do other than keep you from flying? And can they really do that, or do they have to respect your wish to have any screening done in public?

Finally, do they actually have any legal authority to detain you (that's what it is at that point), or if they attempt to force you against your will are they both overstepping their legislated authority and breaking state laws in whatever jurisdiction you are in?

And of course it now comes out that it must have been the fault of the passenger for this to occur. This from at least two people in similar physical situations. I wondered here awhile back why there wasn't more outrage from special needs groups about this, but it appears that many of them don't see anything that much wrong with how TSA operates.

Or to paraphrase someone here, they have had to deal with it for years and the public didn't care, so why should they care now when the rest of the public is having to deal with it?

It's not so much that I fully believe the guys story - like you pointed out, he's just another guy on the Internet. I take it with a grain of salt. The root of the problem is this: I have no reason *not* to believe the guys story in light of what I already know of, and have experienced with the TSA. Outrageous behavior is often reported and confirmed yet employees continue to act as if they have qualified immunity for whatever actions they wish to take (in the name of "security"). As a regular flier I've seen the yelling, the threats, the arrogance, the genital twisting and of course plenty of people just doing their jobs in a totally professional manner. However, a traveler never knows what he's going to get. Your organization got something of a reputation in the beginning having women drink their own breastmilk, but instead of recovering from those dark days it's continued to have gotten worse.

I have no particular political leanings and typically ignore biased or crackpot stories from certain websites sometimes linked from here, but when I hear someone reporting they were abused by TSOs I have no reason to suspect they weren't. I know that it happens, and I know there is no recourse or accountability.

So you give an example of one veteran who lied about being mistreated by TSA, and extrapolate that every veteran who claims to have been mistreated by TSA is also lying? Some women have lied about being raped; does that mean that no woman has ever been raped? Some businesses defraud insurance companies for fire damage; does that mean that everyone who makes a claim to the insurance company for fire damage is lying? Please. :rolleyes:

As for why the gentleman was not patted down in private before getting to a strip search, who knows? Perhaps they didn't follow SOP. It happens. He said he had been patted down once and had alarmed the ETD; if there are traces of explosives (or hand lotion :rolleyes:) on his clothes, what is a second pat down going to show? Are you willing to accept that maybe it actually happened the way he said, rather than being an inaccuracy in the way he describes the incident?

I don't believe every anti-TSA story "out there." Am I absolutely certain that this veteran was treated as he says? No. But I'm absolutely certain that Stacey Armato, Thomas Sawyer, Sharon Cissna, Rolando Negrin, the flight attendant who had to remove her prosthetic breast, the woman whose shirt was pulled down, and others were mistreated by TSA. And that makes this story of the veteran at MCO at least plausible.

He returned and posted an update and thread was locked. He has gone through official channels to make a complaint, said that he is not seeking media publicity, but will pursue legal action.

Best of luck to him.

For someone as educated and intelligent as you, that was a foolish thing to say. No where did I imply or say that. As I said, things in this guys story simply do not add up.

You and I do not agree on things, obviously, but your comment was beyond silly. I sort of expected better from you, RG.

Then you agree, this man lied? Thanks. ^

People have ask this question, and the answer has been post more than a few times, however, to state again, a procedure that must be done in private can only be done in private. But if you insist, ask, and go higher than a STSO, those people have the authority to allow such.

And no, TSA can not detain you. This has been post repeatedly, too. If any TSA employee physically tries to detain you, if you decide to press charges, you will be successful, most likely (not sure if some of the airport LEOs will do anything about it, to be honest).

But also note this, if you just up and leave during the screening process, without permission, that is a violation of various laws and regulations. You can be fined by TSA, the FAA, and face possible state/city/county charges.

With that said, it is important to note the elderly woman whos daughter had her remove her diaper. The screeners could not screen part of her body, thus she was not finished with screening. They gave the family the option to leave the checkpoint, with screening not finished. Yes, our courts have ruled that once started screening must stop, but there is some discretion allowed, and if your really upset about what is happening, and simply want to leave the checkpoint, you will most likely be allowed to do so.

So what you're saying is that if I'm told to go into the "back room" I could face a fine for simply saying "no, under no circumstances will I go with you into a non-public area of the airport"? Are you telling me that the choice is to either go in private with someone I do not trust, for an undisclosed reason or face penalties beyond missing my flight? That's worse than the penalties (none, technically) for refusing to go with a LEO for questioning when not placed under arrest.

And as far as city/state/county charges; unless you can state a specific statute, I'm going to call BS on this one. I also question what the FAA regulations are on this, as I've never heard them mentioned through all the talk of potential penalties for leaving a screening checkpoint. What's more, if you've reclaimed your ID (or never gave it up in the first place), I don't know how TSA intends to fine you as they won't know who you are and have no authority to demand you identify yourself if you don't intend to board a plane. They can involve LEO, but as you stated, whose side they'll fall on is a bit up in the air.

What do you mean?

Doesn't being taken "to a room" imply that, whatever was done, it was done in private? Perhaps he skipped the paddown part.

Please read again what I said. I actually didn't say that. So please read what I said carefully.

Ok, I'm going to bed. Happy reading.

Well, if I refuse to go, then apparently screening can't be completed, right?

And if screening can't be completed I can't leave until I get permission, right?

And if permission isn't granted then I could face the fine for not allowing TSA to complete screening, right?

What did I miss from your post?

Don't be patronizing. You said you doubted the guy's story, said it wouldn't be the first time a veteran had lied, then told a story about another veteran lying. What is the point of your story if not to paint veterans, in general, as liars?

One of the following is true:
a) all veterans lie about their experience at airport security;
b) some veterans lie about their experience at airport security and some tell the truth;
c) all veterans tell the truth about their experience at airport security.

We all know that the answer is (b). Substitute "teachers" or "astronauts" or "drug addicts" for "veterans" and the answer is still (b). So I ask again, what does your "example of how even vets can lie" have to do with this man's story, unless it is to imply that all (or most, or many) veterans are liars?

You claim that we believe "every anti-TSA story". But you clearly believe everyone who claims to have been mistreated by the TSA is lying.