TSA Strip Searches Boy in Full View of Public

November 21, 2010 @ 12:28AM

TSA Strip Searches Boy in Full View of Public

Incident caught on citizen video

Topics
News

Horrifying stories of passengers being humiliated by Transportation Security Administration officials have been surfacing daily since the introduction of the see-through body scanners this month, including a man who was left covered in his own urine and a woman who was forced to remove her prosthesis breast during a pat-down.

Now a video has emerged that shows TSA officials virtually strip-searching a young boy in full view of the public.

It is not clear where the incident took place, but the video was uploaded to Youtube today.

It shows a boy who appears to be less than ten years old with his shirt removed while a male TSA official runs his fingers up and down his legs as well as inside the waistband of his pants.

The child is eventually allowed to put his shirt back on and continue towards his flight and we are all safer because of it.

Or are we?

Most Americans seem to believe so, according to a recent CBS poll which indicates that 81 percent of Americans don't mind having their private parts recorded, displayed and scrutinized by TSA officials or at least have the option to have these same TSA officials fondle their privates.

These numbers are bound to change after the Thanksgiving weekend, especially November 24, the day before Thanksgiving when several groups are planning a National Opt Out Day.

Especially when they see their own children being strip searched for weapons of mass destruction.

Comments

Robert Seipp

1 year ago

The CBS POLL was done between NOV 7-10, BEFORE this hit the national radar.

Also, the question asked is ambiguous. "Should Airports Use Full-Body X-Ray Machines?"

Also 1,137 were polled by telephone.. That's a sample?? Give me a break!! FAIL, FAIL, and FAIL. So shame on you for spinning this. NO WAY that 81% of Americans support the nudie scanners on NOV 21 if asked the question correctly.

Please take 5 minutes next time and do a little digging, pixiq, before you publish!!

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20022876-503544.html

NAlexandreK

1 year ago

Well Robert.......if you were paying attention to any part of the article you would realize he wasn't stating the poll as fact. He was being sarcastic and if you read to the end of the article it entirely invalidates your entire post.

Have a good day.

Tim in SF

1 year ago

I don't know about "paying attention" to the article, but I think Robert *read* the article, as did I.

There is no indication the quote is referenced in a sarcastic way. It seems sincere and an integral part of the story.

You're a douche.

Luc

1 year ago

Tim, the "Or are we?" should have been the clue that Carlos Miller was being sarcastic.

NAlexandreK

1 year ago

TY Luc.......I'm glad someone has the ability to read "and" understand what they've read. It gives me some hope for the future. XD

Tim in SF

1 year ago

The "Or are we?" comment came right after "and we are all safer because of it." It was clearly in reference to that - in that we are NOT safer because a child was strip searched.

"Or are we?" appeared BEFORE the citation of the statistic, so it could not possibly be referring to it.

Take a fucking English class, Luc. And NAlexandreK, you're still a douche.

That said, I am not as critical of Carlos as Robert Seipp for citing the study - it's been all over the corporate media (Olbermann, for example, on Thursday night); nobody else seems to be reporting that it was conducted in early November before the current kerfuffle, why should Carlos be singled out for the oversight? I also disagree that 1100 is an insufficient sample size - it most certainly is, as long as the the margin of error is also correctly reported.

Jay Dog

1 year ago

@Tim in SF.
I agree wholeheartedly in your 'douche' assessments.
Mostly. I'd have add that Carlos is a douche for writing misleading information.

Steve Remington

1 year ago

Robert,

I agree with you about questions asked and timing of the survey, however, the survey organisation gets a PASS! PASS! PASS! on sample size.

If you recall from your Intro Statistics lecture on sample size it is not necessary to survey a large percentage of a population to get a sufficiently reliable answer.

If you go to this web site (http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm) and fill in the "Sample Confidence Interval" section with following values:

- Confidence Level: 99%
- Sample Size: 1137 (From the article)
- Population: 330,000,000 (a rough estimate of current US population)

You get the result of:

- Confidence Interval: 3% (i.e. real answer is 78-81%)

This matches with disclaimer in the article.

Rance

1 year ago

If I was the boys father, I would have told the TSA screener "If you touch my boy, both you and I are going to jail. I'll be in the back of a police car, and you'll be in the back of an ambulance." Enough of the "what ifs" though.

I think the time of the TSA is coming to an end, and most airlines will choose private security over the government.

Luc

1 year ago

If it's private or TSA the current rules are same. The government is out of control and needs to be stopped. Ron Paul Introduced HR 6416: The American Traveler Dignity Act.

The next step for TSA is random cavity searches. I'm sure that will make travelers feel safer. ;-)

You still have 4th amendment rights. Don't consent to the sex-ray machine or the sexual assault pat down, just say no. You will be threatened with arrest and a fine and not be allowed to fly, but you will have proudly asserted your rights.

Don't assault a TSA worker if you consented to the search, if you do you will be arrested jailed and fined.

Rance

1 year ago

I have no problem consenting to a search or normal screening procedures. Like I said in another article of Carlos's, I used to work for the TSA, and I know full well how to properly conduct a thorough search without alienating a passenger.

If anyone is going to "touch my junk" though, they need to buy me dinner first, or have blonde hair and double d's.

There is no reason a child should be subjected to a stranger touching every inch of their body, and making them half strip to conduct a thorough search. Like I said, if I were the father, I wouldn't have allowed this to have happened, and would gladly have taken jail as a consequence. There isn't a jury in the country that would deny a father's right to protect his child from unwarranted molestation.

If this country is going to have better security, Israel's model should be followed, and passengers should be profiled better. Fuck the political correctness.

Tom Jankowski

1 year ago

Let's see what John Walsh has to say about this. I'm sure he'd be more that a bit disgusted.

Carlos Miller -...

Pixiq Expert

1 year ago

It should have been obvious I was being sarcastic when referring to that poll when I stated how most Americans "don't mind having their private parts recorded, displayed and scrutinized by TSA officials or at least have the option to have these same TSA officials fondle their privates."

This obviously was not the way the pollsters framed their question, but we are seeing more and more this is exactly what they meant.

And yes, this is now hitting the national radar - but only among people who pay attention to these things.

The real test will be this Thanksgiving weekend when thousands of Kool-Aid drinking Americans will attempt to board their flights and discover the true price they are paying for "safety."

Mike Corkel

1 year ago

81% of Americans are either sheeple or morons.

Mike Corkel

1 year ago

We can stop terrorism by bringing all our troops home from the Middle East, and stop meddling in the internal affairs of other nations. Last time I checked, terrorists are not attacking Switzerland.

Rance

1 year ago

That has to be one of the most asinine comments I've read in ages. If you think that we can stop terrorism just by bringing our troops home, you're out of your mind! The Muslim religion calls for the conversion of ALL countries, and EVERYONE in them to convert to Islam, or face death according to Sharia Law. Muslims that claim that Islam is a religion of peace are full of shit. What we call "terrorism", is simply Muslims following their religion to the letter.

I urge you to watch this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ib9rofXQl6w

LJM

1 year ago

If Christians and Jews followed their religion "to the letter," people would be executed for working on the Sabbath.

Thankfully, most Christians and Jews, like most Muslims, don't follow their religion to the letter.

The terrorists have been very clear about why they are attacking us, and it has little to do with us not being Muslim, otherwise, we'd have been at war with them since the beginning of Islam.

And a task force created by Donald Rumsfeld disagrees with you. The rest of this post comes from Glenn Greenwald:

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/10/12/terrorism

In 2004, Donald Rumsfeld directed the Defense Science Board Task Force to review the impact which the administration's policies -- specifically the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan -- were having on Terrorism and Islamic radicalism.

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dod/dsb/commun.pdf

It concluded that, "Muslims do not 'hate our freedom,' but rather, they hate our policies": specifically, "American direct intervention in the Muslim world" through our "one sided support in favor of Israel"; support for Islamic tyrannies in places like Egypt and Saudi Arabia; and, most of all, "the American occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan."

Now, a new, comprehensive study from Robert Pape, a University of Chicago political science professor and former Air Force lecturer, substantiates what is (a) already bleedingly obvious and (b) known to the U.S. Government for many years: namely, that the prime cause of suicide bombings is not Hatred of Our Freedoms or Inherent Violence in Islamic Culture or a Desire for Worldwide Sharia Rule by Caliphate, but rather. . . . foreign military occupations. As summarized by Politico's Laura Rozen:

Pape. . . will present findings on Capitol Hill Tuesday that argue that the majority of suicide terrorism around the world since 1980 has had a common cause: military occupation.

Pape and his team of researchers draw on data produced by a six-year study of suicide terrorist attacks around the world that was partially funded by the Defense Department's Defense Threat Reduction Agency. They have compiled the terrorism statistics in a publicly available database comprised of some 10,000 records on some 2,200 suicide terrorism attacks, dating back to the first suicide terrorism attack of modern times - the 1983 truck bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed 241 U.S. Marines.

"We have lots of evidence now that when you put the foreign military presence in, it triggers suicide terrorism campaigns, ... and that when the foreign forces leave, it takes away almost 100% of the terrorist campaign," Pape said in an interview last week on his findings.

Pape said there has been a dramatic spike in suicide bombings in Afghanistan since U.S. forces began to expand their presence to the south and east of the country in 2006. . . . Deaths due to suicide attacks in Afghanistan have gone up by a third in the year since President Obama added another 30,000 U.S. troops. "It is not making it any better," Pape said.

Pape believes his findings have important implications even for countries where the U.S. does not have a significant direct military presence, but is perceived by the population to be indirectly occupying.

For instance, across the border from Afghanistan, suicide terrorism exploded in Pakistan in 2006 as the U.S. put pressure on then Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf "to divert 100,000 Pakistani army troops from their [perceived] main threat [India] to western Pakistan," Pape said.

Imagine that. Isn't Muslim culture just so bizarre, primitive, and inscrutable? As strange as it is, they actually seem to dislike it when foreign militaries bomb, invade and occupy their countries, and Western powers interfere in their internal affairs by overthrowing and covertly manipulating their governments, imposing sanctions that kill hundreds of thousands of Muslim children, and arming their enemies. Therefore (of course), the solution to Terrorism is to interfere more in their countries by continuing to occupy, bomb, invade, assassinate, lawlessly imprison and control them, because that's the only way we can Stay Safe. There are people over there who are angry at us for what we're doing in their world, so we need to do much more of it to eradicate the anger. That's the core logic of the War on Terror. How is that working out?

Tom Jannusch

1 year ago

Boy, are you in the wrong place...

Chris J.

1 year ago

That may be because the average Swiss citizen, thanks to their laws, has military training and a military-issue rifle in their closet. Not only that, but the government provides range time and ammunition free of charge. Terrorists would have to be nuts to try anything there.

Guy Fawkes

1 year ago

You just would not believe how many sheep I heard calling in talk radio not only saying they have no problem consenting to this, but making fun of the dissenters. What a bunch of useless conformist pussies. I agree with Luc on what the next step with this is going to be if people don't wake up. You are in line for the orgakatron full body scan machine. Suddenly the song "Macho Man" starts playing as a disco ball drops down illuminated by pink and baby blue lights. A loud voice will announce in a volume everyone at the airport can hear "Congratulations! You've been selected for the fisting couch, the latest in tsa's efforts to improve security for everyone! Refusal is NOT allowed, you're just going to have to bend over and take it!!!"
Sad to say, even if this were implemented, there would still be plenty of sheep bleating about how it was necessary for security.

Fred Sands

1 year ago

Just to add a little fuel to this fire:

Friday we were instructed to severely limit our employees' travel because the company attorneys are worried that we could be hit with a sexual harassment lawsuit if someone gets "groped" during a search.

IOW, ordering someone to fly, when it requires them to be touched in a way they don't want to be touched, creates a "hostile work environment".

Elliott

1 year ago

First, I can't see myself NOT getting arrested if they did this to either of my girls. Boyfriends are lucky to survive, what kind of chance do you think some dude at the airport screen has..

I think that the company lawyers have an interesting point, either screen is outragaeous..

Just another example of the government making it harder for the rest of us with no return on our investment.

I will not fly if I have ANY other options. I didn't like the hand searches of bags or the taking my shoes off, at least the hand search might have readily found something, this pornoscan or gropefest is hardly a choice.

When all members of congress are subject to this over and over will anything change.. Oh and how about they get the same healthcare the rest of us do, we'll see how much they like it then, but I digress..

Vinny

1 year ago

From the youTube comments:

"Lets get the facts straight first. Before the video started the boy went through a metal detector and didn't set it off but was selected for a pat down. The boy was shy so the TSA couldn't complete the full pat on the young boy. The father tried several times to just hold the boys arms out for the TSA agent but i guess it didn't end up being enough for the guy. I was about 30 ft away so i couldn't hear their conversation if there was any. The enraged father pulled his son shirt off and gave it to the TSA agent to search, thats when this video begins.

******* THIS VIDEO OCCURRED AT SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ON NOVEMBER 19TH AT AROUND THE TIME OF 12:00 PM **********"

Vinny

1 year ago

Has anyone brought up the Fourth Amendment of the Bill of Rights which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures?

Oranges

1 year ago

(1) This is security theater (for example, I could put a weapon or bomb materials in my rectum or vagina and it won't be discovered). INDEPENDENT security professionals will confirm this is security theater not real security.
(2) Political correctness has us wasting resources on the fantasy that everyone is equally likely to be a terrorist.
(3) The TSA has never prevented a terrorist from boarding a plane(protestations that they can't release details on their successes are TOTALLY unverifiable and not to be relied on). There are also questions about conflicts of interest between former Homeland Security officials and purchasing these machines which should be invested by DOJ.
(4) If a terrorist has made it to the security line the game is already lost. I wonder how we will react the first time they explode a bomb in or near the security apparatus (these seems like and obvious point of attack).
(5) The people "trained" to work for the TSA are low-paid and unskilled. In Israel where they practice actual security and have not had a breach in many years; the job is respected and paid accordingly. They don't use useless scanners; they do behavioral analysis. They seek to prevent the wrong types getting anywhere near the security line.
(6) There are legitimate issues concerning the safety of the scanners. And our Govt, God Bless It, has a horrendous track record when it comes to being forthright about safety issues.
(7) The health risk may be very small (tell it to a pregnant women or her young kids or other people more at risk). Guess what. So is the risk of a terrorist boarding, let alone taking down a plane -- very small. The risk approaches zero for any particular traveller.
(8) A terrorist has an infinite list of other targets that can create as much fear and negative economic consequences as blowing up a plane or an airport line for that matter. We need to concentrate on investigative work and catching people; not on humiliating, potentially dangerous and ineffective airport security. There is nothing magical about the airport.
(9) If 81% support these procedures then Americans are a very, very scared bunch and I wonder how we beat the Nazis and the Soviets.
(10) That 81% poll figure is not credible. Americans are treated like children by their Govt and so a proper discussion of costs and benefits is never presented.
(11) Even if in theory we could reduce the risk of terrorism to zero most sane people would not want to live in a society where that is done. I'm sure North Korea does not worry about terrorist attacks.
(12) I can't imagine a parent explaining to, say, a ten year old girl or boy that a stranger will be touching their vagina or penis, respectively. It's sick. And absurd. See previous points.

Michael Kerney

1 year ago

When we (or at least the authoritarians among us) do this to ourselves?

That's when the terrorists have become successful in making us terrorize *ourselves.*

DaveB

1 year ago

The boy's father took off the kids' shirt to facilitate the search...

Tom Jannusch

1 year ago

That only shows how some people are intimidated into handing over their rights. I cannot imagine doing that to my son.

canadaboy

1 year ago

It puzzles me to no end that Americans will put up with this level of invasion of personal freedom and rights, indeed, willingly embrace it in the name of 'security, yet are deathly afraid of socialized medicine.

If an airplane goes down, a few hundred lives are lost. How many lives are lost daily because people can't afford or don't have access to health care?

Think about it.

Sheesh.

Tom Jannusch

1 year ago

Good point. Look at Arizona refusing lifesaving surgeries…the first real "death panel". By the way, wouldn't it be interesting if they took away the Federal health care benefit from all elected Federal officials. Only then would the health care crisis be addressed in an honest way.

Tom Jannusch

1 year ago

Hazza

1 year ago

The USA has enemies that hate it so much that your govt seriously considers that they will use their own children as a weapon of terror?

You have 2 options:
1. Subject your citizens children to groping by strangers.. (for their own protection of course.)
2. Examine your foreign policy's.

We have to grope and fondle your child.
Why?
Terrorists might use them as a weapon.
Why?
They hate America.
Why?
ummm... they just do.
No really why do they hate us so much they would do such a thing?
Just strip your kid to their underpants ok... sheesh you have no idea how hard my job is... it's for your protection... no really it is.... hey hey... don't look at that guy whacking off to the girls team going through the scanner look at me and strip your kid.

encyclopediabotanica

9 months ago

Lucky the boy wasn't "searched" by a CATHOLIC PREIST! Canadaboy and Oranges seem to be the only voices of reason in this thread.
Hazza, have you ever thought what it must be like living in a country that has been attacked by the US? What would you think about a government that makes up a lie like weapons of mass destruction to bomb the crap out of a country! Do you think that is fair?