The latest TSA ridiculousness thread
 

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201...rch-rape.shtml

The TSA officially apologized to her and gave their agent additional instruction on proper pat-down technique. Ha! Ha! No they didn't, and the TSA agent has filed a threatening lawsuit in order to demand $500,000.

I'd like to see this one go to court. The respondent's attorney claims rhetorical hyperbole is protected speech; however, what I have previously read on the subject is that alleged defamation involving a person's means of earning a living is considered quite differently from the cited case studies. Judges may be more inclined to side with plaintiffs against respondents who used inflated language to exaggerate claims. Respondents are required to be in better control of their emotional displays when they're attacking someone's livelihood. Otherwise, there would be no such thing as defamation: everyone could just say "Well, that person really upset ME; so, I can say whatever I want.

I'd love to see it go to court, to emphasise to the public just how outrageous the situation is. The TSA has set itself up as a bunch of untouchable (SWIDT?) bullies beyond the law, I hope that gets ended.

And she might win. To prove rape as a crime, she needs to prove beyond reasonable doubt. To prove rape as a civil claim she only needs balance of probability. To defend against defamation claims, she only needs to prove her statements were "reasonable" to balance of probability. That is very doable.

Now all she needs is an unbiased court of law and an honest judge...

Not bloody likely. The judge in the town has bloodstains on his handssssssssssssss...

how is this possible? what kind of vagina does this woman have? W-I-I-I-D-E?

Her bagina is not of this earth.

Plus, she probably had on her travelin' clothes: stained baggy holey sweatsuit.

While the article doesn't mention the alleged victim considering a civil suit after being told criminal charges were not a viable option, it seems unlikely that course of action wasn't discussed and also rejected which is why she ended up only writing about her grievances.

When the alleged victim writes "This woman, and all of those who support this system deserve no less than this sort of unpleasant experience, and from all of us." [bold mine], she damages her own credibility by inferring the end justifies the means of her retaliation against a system she opposes. That makes the veracity of her every claim suspect.

I don't think the judicial system here will allow anyone to subvert TSA security procedures through extortion via threat of defamation. If she could get away with that, so could enemies such as terrorists. Her position is weak.

If you check out her blog she comes off as an attention lady of the night.

My personal guess is she really means between her labia, not into her vagina itself.

I feel like an actor on "The Good Wife" but, here goes; all she needs are the 3 words "in my opinion" proceeding her so called, protected free speech

Her attorney seems to have recognized that and attempted damage control by cleverly saying "vulva" instead of "external genitalia." The former word starts with the letter "V" as does the word "vagina" and the difference may be lost at a glance. The term "external genitalia" (the definition of vulva), which wasn't used, would have clearly denoted the lack of penetration into the vagina. For many people that would mean the difference between use of the word "rape" versus "molestation." They've taken advantage of the fact that the word "rape" CAN be used to mean ANY sexual assault. I found the alleged victim's statement "stuck the side of her gloved hand INTO my vagina" [sic] not only likely to be inaccurate; but, in conjunction other untoward language seemingly fraudulent.

The TSA at Houston's IAH (Bush) airport now has all of the ID/BP screeners ask each passenger to pronounce their name out loud. I did some research and found that it is a test program at a few busy airports and is in response to the slip up this summer at JFK where a passenger was cleared at the checkpoint after presenting an expired ID and some other passenger's used boarding pass. I contacted TSA national customer relations and was told it was a voluntary program and was also contacted by our local TSA man in charge of customer relations who also told me I could decline but it may cause a delay in clearing security but in no way would prohibit me from flying.

So my wife and I challenged it because we both travel a lot and are so tired of the TSAs security theater approach to feel good type of security (Feel good in the sens of everything is so much safer). On a recent trip to NY, when we were asked our names we both refused to comply. They were dumbfounded and called over 2 supervisors who wanted to know why we would not comply and I told them that it was my Constitutional right as an American to remain silent. I further told them my right was further secured by 2 Supreme Court rulings, Miranda v Arizona and Berghuis v. Thompkins.

My wife took a different approach and told them she feared for her personal safety and the chance of ID theft and would not say her name out loud when in public.

I questioned the supervisor about the fact that the TSA national office and local office told me that it was voluntary and also pointed out that it is not listed as a security procedure at the TSA website where they list all the required details on types of ID, screening procedures and the fact that one can Opt Out of the Xray image nudeoscopes. She looked me in the eye and told me that they can make up the rules as they go and also told me that my Constitutional rights are invalid in the screening area, both of which I really take issue with. She took our Id's (passports) made a few phone calls and made copies of them and gave them back and told us we could continue but it might keep us from flying in the future if we do not comply!

We have created the TSA and a heightened level of authority for Homeland Security and it is really scary!

Now at Boston's Logan airport passengers are asked questions like "where are you going, who are you seeing, what is the nature of your trip and when will you return" as part of a new Behavior Detection screening. "None of your GD business" I would say! The TSA falsely claims that this program is based on Israel's BDO program but in Israel they actually use security personnel who are college educated, have served in the military and also are well trained, not the flunkies that the TSA hires.

Call me fed up! :mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2:

I forgot to add a point. The TSA claims that by asking passengers to pronounce their names out loud they might catch would be terrorists who are using a fake ID pr BP and haven't taken the time to learn their assumed name. OH PLEASE!!!! The guys who crashed the jets on 9/11 carried out their missions like top trained commandos, you think they would not have learned their names?

The truth is that checking IDs and BPs all day is a boring job so people like Olajide Olwaseun Noibi (the man who slipped by the TSA) can get by. And just how in the hell do you pronounce Olajide Olwaseun Noibi??? And how would the TSA agent know if it was correct or not.

Furthermore if a passenger gets on the a flight that he or she is not supposed to isn't that more of an airline's profit or loss issue? That's your BP and ID are screened at the baggage check in area for each airline and why your BP is checked as you board the plane and that is why the flight attendant gets involved when you try to sit down and someone is in you seat saying it is their seat (usually one of the passengers doesn't understand which side of the plane they belong on even though it is listed just above each row.