85-year-old says she was strip searched at JFK

[freeatlast]

:BangHead: :BangHead:

I have had enought of all this nonesense. You all complain about loosing (so-called) rights.

Other than complaining what else are you doing.

My suggestion - run for public office and change the laws

Until you all do that -

I am flying off into the sunset......

There is nothing so called about them. The fact that you feel safe by stripping away another rights is not only not constitutional it is not American.

 

[targus]

There is nothing so called about them. The fact that you feel safe by stripping away another rights is not only not constitutional it is not American.

This coming from the guy who supports the government killing U.S. citzens by sniper fire or drone bombs without even being charged with a crime let alone going on trial. :laugh:

 

[Don]

Interesting...all legal challenges to the searches, including the ones by the ACLU, were centered on the 4th Amendment, and were subsequently dropped or dismissed when TSA was required to emphasize security and to not perform duties pertaining to law enforcement (i.e., one case mentioned that TSA stopped a man because he was carrying a large amount of cash; they claimed suspicion of drug-running, and held him for local law enforcement. Turned out he was a financial manager for Ron Paul's campaign, and was carrying the funds in compliance with his duties. The subsequent court case resulted in the TSA requirement to not act as law enforcement).

No one has challenged this on the 10th and/or 14th amendment infringements.

 

[freeatlast]

Interesting...all legal challenges to the searches, including the ones by the ACLU, were centered on the 4th Amendment, and were subsequently dropped or dismissed when TSA was required to emphasize security and to not perform duties pertaining to law enforcement (i.e., one case mentioned that TSA stopped a man because he was carrying a large amount of cash; they claimed suspicion of drug-running, and held him for local law enforcement. Turned out he was a financial manager for Ron Paul's campaign, and was carrying the funds in compliance with his duties. The subsequent court case resulted in the TSA requirement to not act as law enforcement).

No one has challenged this on the 10th and/or 14th amendment infringements.

Interesting information.
Any suspicions why this has not been challenged on those two amendments?

 

[Don]

Probably because it's hard to argue that anyone has been prevented from traveling, rather than simply inhibited.

 

[freeatlast]

Probably because it's hard to argue that anyone has been prevented from traveling, rather than simply inhibited.

Perhaps I would think just the threat of the search and the fact it happens should be enough reason. My guess is there is another reason such as politics.

 

[mandym]

I saw this lady interviewed by the news. She did not seem credible and TSA is denying that the search ever occurred.

 

[Don]

I saw this lady interviewed by the news. She did not seem credible and TSA is denying that the search ever occurred.

If it were just her, I'd be inclined to agree with you; but there were two others that also came forward. Plus, we have plenty of stories of TSA groping young children, and performing such searches on other elderly personnel.

It may not have happened specifically with her; but it happens.

 

[TCassidy]

I saw this lady interviewed by the news. She did not seem credible and TSA is denying that the search ever occurred.

I saw her interviewed too. She was very credible. So were the other two elderly women who related similar incidents.

What WASN'T the least big credible was the TSA's statement "We didn't do it. And if we did do it it was a rogue agent." Or words to that effect.

And, of course, the abuses of TSA screeners are will documented, on audio and video.

An acquaintance of mine did not want to go through the whole body scanner. He was told he had to. He said he would rather be searched with the wand/pat down. The screener refused and told him he had to go through the whole body scanner. He politely declined and picked up his carry on and started to leave the airport intending to drive to his destination. The screener told him he could not leave. A uniformed police officer then arrested him for refusing to be searched.

After contacting his attorney the Police Department offered him $40,000 for his "inconvenience."

They would not have made the settlement offer if they thought they were in the right! They KNOW what they are doing is wrong!