TSA Officer Charged with Child Pornography

Michael Scott Wilson
Image: Baltimore County Police Department

The Transportation Security Administration has done it again. This time, 41-year-old TSA officer, Michael Scott Wilson of Redwing Drive in Perry Hall, Maryland was arrested on September 27, 2011 with possession and distribution of child pornography.

Just remember, the next time the TSA agent has his hands all over your child, he may be having the time of his life. If a guy likes looking at child porn, he probably gets a real charge out of feeling up an actual child while his parents stand by and watch helplessly. These child molesters are sick, and they love, power, submission, and access.

Michael Wilson may not be a representation of all TSA agents, but there certainly must be more like him in the TSA who have not yet been caught. This is exactly why people normally do not let strangers come up and paw their children. Some strangers are good, and some strangers terrible. Since parents cannot always tell who is good and bad, parents usually just do not let any strangers touch their children. Oddly, one of the very few places were strangers get to grope children with impunity is the TSA.

Pat-Downs to Be Enhanced at NFL Games

One of the worst effects of the Transportation Security Administration's practice of pat-downs is that it has conditioned innocent people to easily and willingly surrender their dignity and privacy to authority figures--even in the private sector. The private-sector invasions of personal space have become most severe at sporting events.

If you have been attending sporting events during the last few years, you may have noticed a gradual increase in the aggression from the security guards and their increasingly intrusive pat-downs. Now, the NFL is recommending all game attendees be patted-down from the ankles to the knees and the waist up. Now, if you attend a lot of games, you have probably already had more intrusive pat-downs than that. You have probably had a security guard's hands way up near your crotch. Procedures must vary from stadium to stadium or perhaps some security guards are more frisky than others.

What is bad about the NFL pushing more aggressive pat-downs is that this measure will eventually lead to future requirements that could be even more intrusive. It would not be surprising to see aggressive acts of molestation happening at sporting events in a couple of years. We're talking a stranger's hand way up in your crotch and all over your genitals just half an hour before you are in the stadium singing the National Anthem. (How ironic is that?)

What is happening here is our rights are eroding. Or sense of dignity is vanishing. Sadly, the NFL has every right to conduct whatever searches they want. They are a business, and the fans are customers. If fans do not want to be molested, they do not have to go to games.

The football fans should rebel against these insulting pat-downs and boycott the games. If people stopped paying to see the games until the pat-downs stopped, the NFL would end the pat-downs immediately.

The problem is, the football fans are not going to stand up for their dignity. For a decade, they have been conditioned to surrender their pride and privacy by the TSA's intrusive searches. Since becoming felt-up by uniformed strangers is now commonplace in America, people have little trouble bowing to the NFL and allowing their bodies to be violated.

This NFL pat-down move should be a lesson to all. If you surrender your freedoms in one place, you will eventually lose them elsewhere until, someday, you find you have no more freedoms left to lose.

Shoshana Hebshi Strip-Searched After Sitting Next to Suspicious Men on Plane

Shoshana Hebshi

Shoshana Hebshi, a half-Jewish and half-Arabic woman, was strip-searched after sitting next to two Indian men who were accused of acting suspicious on a Frontier Airlines flight from Denver to Detroit on September 11, 2011. The flight crew reported the two men for spending too much time in the bathroom.

Upon landing at Detroit Metropolitan Airport, the plane was isolated and stormed by heavily armed police. The police handcuffed Hebshi and the two suspicious men and removed them from the plane. Hebshi was patted down and placed in the back of a police car. She was then taken to a holding cell and forced to remove her clothes for a strip-search.

Guess what they found on Hebshi. They found nothing. Shoshana Hebshi is not a terrorist. She is a mom who just happened to look a little too Middle-Eastern and just happened to sit next to some Indian men who went to the bathroom too often for some people to accept. By the way, the Indian men did not even know each other, and they were never in the bathroom together. One of the men was sick, and the other man probably had some other good reason to visit the bathroom. They were not terrorists either. There were no weapons. There were no bombs. There was no plot. There was nothing. All three people were innocent.

What happened here is three perfectly innocent people were bullied and harassed for looking a little too ethnic. It is ridiculous that Indian people are not allowed to visit the bathroom more than an average number of times without setting off some national security emergency. It is even more ridiculous a woman was singled out just because she was sitting in the wrong seat near such Indian men.

Shoshana Hebshi was robbed of her dignity for absolutely no good reason, and she--along with the Indian men--need to sue Frontier Airlines, the Detroit Metropolitan Airport Police, the FBI, and ever other bungling institution that was involved in this incredibly humiliating overreaction.

You can read the whole story on Shoshana Hebshi's blog.

TSA Agent, Thedala Magee Threatens to Sue Passenger over Rape Accusation

Airline passenger, Amy Alkon is accusing, Transportation Security Administration Agent, Thedala Magee of what amounts to sexual assault. On March 31, 2011, Amy Alkon was passing through security at LAX in Los Angeles and wound up getting the dreaded pat-down. During the pat-down, Amy Alkon claims Thedala Magee pressed the side of her hand into Alkon's vagina, between her labia, four times. During and after the pat-down, Amy Alkon made quite a scene by crying and then accusing the TSA agent of rape.

Now, rape is a very serious word, but pressing ones hand into a vagina, even through clothing, is a very serious act. The act of pressing a hand between labia through clothing may not exactly qualify as rape under many legal definitions, but it certainly is a hostile violation of one's personal space and would absolutely be considered a crime in just about any situation. For some reason, TSA workers are allowed to commit these sexual offenses on innocent people without probable cause. They get to do it, and they do it with impunity.

Of course, people are now attacking Amy Alkon and questioning her truthfulness, but is that really fair? If Alkon's story is true, this poor woman was sexually assaulted by a government worker. It does not really matter if the sexual assault is legally sanctioned by the federal government or not. If unwanted sexual contact takes place, it is sexual assault. How can we, in good conscience, doubt Amy Alkon's story? When a person claims to have been sexually assaulted, do we not owe it to the victim to offer the benefit of the doubt?

Sure, Alkon could be exaggerating a story for publicity. It is a sensational story. Her story, however, has a lot of credibility. TSA workers are constantly jamming their hands into people's crotches and poking around in there. Is it really crazy to think Alkon's vagina may have been violated in some way during this interaction? Thedala Magee certainly had access to Alkon's vagina and had the opportunity to push her hand between Alkon's labia if she wanted to do so. Should we not assume Alkon to be the ultimate authority on whether or not her vagina was compromised?

Well, Amy Alkon decided to fight back against the TSA agent using her right to free of speech. She recounted her alleged assault on the Internet in a post titled "Don't Give the TSA an Easy Time of Violating Your Rights." She even identified the accused by name: Thedala Magee.

Thedala Magee did not like her name being published on the Internet by the alleged victim. Magee has hired attorney, Vicki Roberts, and she is now threatening to sue Alkon for defamation. She has even offered to settle out-of-court for $500,000. Is that not just adorable? A woman claims sexual assault, and even though there is likely to be a full-color video of the accused with her hand in the victim's crotch, the accused has the nerve to threaten a lawsuit and offer to make it go away for some quick cash.

Thedala Magee was probably informed by the TSA she has every right to sexually violate people, and Magee probably thought she would never have to answer for her actions. These TSA buffoons, put on their uniforms, and they feel they can go to work and do whatever they wish to people because they are acting under the authority of the government. Some people just believe that, if the government does it, it cannot be wrong. Even worse, some people think, "I was just following orders," is a completely adequate excuse for all sorts of terrible behavior.

Well, fortunately, we have the Internet for things like this. Thedala Magee may be able to force Amy Alkon to remove her accusations from the her Web site.  Magee may even be able to squeeze some money out of Alkon, but one thing Thedala Magee will never be able to do is escape the shame that is going to be associated with her name all over the Internet from now on. And, you know what? Magee deserves to be shamed.

These TSA workers may just be going around following orders, but they volunteered for the job, and they are getting paid to routinely terrorize innocent people who simply want to get on a plane and go somewhere. Yes, the federal government is instructing them to violate people, but these TSA workers do not have to take these jobs. If they choose to be willing participants in an ongoing assault on the civil liberties of innocent people, then these TSA workers deserve whatever shame comes their way, even if that means they get publicly exposed by name as the sex offenders they are.

If there were more gutsy people like Amy Alkon who would have the courage to stand up to these sanctioned sexual assaults, fewer people would want to become TSA agents and those who continue to do the job might be more likely to be a little more respectful of people's privacy, rights, and human dignity. We should sympathize with Amy Alkon in her pain and applaud her for her bravery.

Tit-for-Tat As Passenger Gropes TSA Agent

On July 14, 2011, Yukari Mihamae, a sixty-one-year-old Longmont, Colorado woman, contacted the left breast of a female TSA agent at the Sky Harbor International Airport in Phoenix. Yukari Mihamae grabbed and squeezed the TSA agent's breast. Mihamae has been charged with a felony count of sexual abuse.

Ironically, if the TSA agent had grabbed and squeezed Yukari Mihamae's breast, the TSA agent would have faced not much more than having a meaningless complaint filed against her. It is quite possible nothing would have happened to the TSA agent. To keep out of trouble when you go to the airport, remember the TSA has the same policy as strippers: You can't touch them, but they can touch you.

Rumsfeld's TSA Pat-Down Displays More TSA Stupidity

Transportation Security Administration has managed to save the skies from another dangerous senior citizen. On July 13, 2011, TSA screeners at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport stopped, former Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld. Apparently, Rumsfeld's titanium hips and a titanium shoulder set off the metal detectors, and this is when the TSA saw a chance to get frisky with a powerful older gentleman. The got out the gloves and gave Rumsfeld the friendly TSA treatment. (Ironically, his former boss, George W Bush, is largely responsible for the TSA we know and love today.)

This TSA pat-down on Rumsfeld demonstrates how stupid TSA procedures are. Donald Rumsfeld is seventy-nine years-old. He is an old man with artificial joints. He also happens to be one of the most recognizable old men in the nation.

Certainly, Rumsfeld should be subject to the same laws as everyone else, but why could the TSA not manage to recognize that an old man who was recently one of the highest ranking people in the Executive Branch might not pose a significant threat to a commercial jetliner? While these TSA goons were feeling up the former Secretary of Defense, who knows what sort of threatening people and weapons could have slipped through the checkpoint. At least the guy who got to pat-down Rumsfeld got to go back to the break room and brag to his buddies about how he got to touch the former Secretary of Defense's junk.

TSA Makes Life Harder for Handicapped

TSA Handicapped Groping Zone Sign

Jason and Jennifer Steitler of New Port Richey, Florida are the latest people to fall victim to the Transportation Security Administration's heavy handed and intrusive screening methods. They are also a perfect example of how the TSA is grossly unfair in its treatment of disabled people.

On July 6, 2011, Jason Steitler and, his wife, Jennifer were going through TSA screening at the Greater Rochester International Airport in New York. Both Jason and Jennifer Steitler are in wheelchairs. The sharks at the TSA must have sensed weakness, so they pounced on the Steitlers and subjected them to a humiliating and intrusive search.

In what Jennifer Steitler calls "search rape," the TSA had their hands all over the handicapped couple's bodies and even managed to get their hands uncomfortably close to Jennifer Steitler's crotch. They had Jason Steitler push against his wheelchair's arm rests with his arms, so they could get up under his backside. The couple felt embarrassed and violated. Oh, and by the way, neither Jason Steitler nor Jennifer Steitler turned out to be terrorists planning to blow up or forcibly take over a commercial jetliner.

TSA Fails to Stop Stun Gun from Getting onto Plane

The latest event to be added to the growing list of Transportation Security Administration's failures involves a stun gun. A cleaning crew (not the TSA) found a stun gun onboard JetBlue Flight 1179 from Boston to Newark. This is alarming, because a stun gun could conceivably be used to hijack a plane. The stun gun's ability to intimidate and incapacitate people could be very desirable to someone wishing to take over a plane. The 9/11 hijackers even considered trying to use stun guns in their attack but later decided box cutters would be more practical.

Given the dangers stun guns could pose in the wrong hands on an airplane, it seems the TSA's primary function would be to keep weapons like stun guns off of planes, but they do not seem to be performing that function very well. The TSA, however, has shown incredible skill at molesting small children, harassing wounded veterans, humiliating handicapped people, and running hot chicks through full-body scanners.

On the topic of stun guns, why are the flight crews not armed with stun guns? A stun gun could be a very effective weapon against a hijacker. If the pilots and some flight attendants had stun guns on 9/11, all or most of the hijackers could have been stopped. Given the morbid incompetence of the TSA these days, the flight crews definitely need to be armed to fight against all of the terrorists and weapons the TSA allows on the planes.

TSA Searches Black Woman's "Poofy" Hair

Now the Transportation Security Administration is concerned with your hair, especially if it "poofs from the body." Actually, the TSA's official policy is apparently now to "examine anything that poofs from the body."

When Laura Adiele, a Black woman, attempted to board a flight at Sea-Tac Airport in Washington, she went through the TSA's full-body scanner. After accepting that dose of radiation, Laura Adiele was pulled aside for a pat-down. The TSA was not comfortable with her hairstyle (or perhaps they found it arousing) and they wanted to run their fingers through it.

Laura Adiele objected at first, but the TSA was not going to let her on her flight until they got to feel-up her hair, so she eventually complied. The TSA then spent some time rifling through the woman's hair. Of course, they found absolutely nothing, and Adiele got to board the flight and arrive at her destination with tussled hair.

So, even with all of their metal detectors, cameras, full-body scanners, explosive sniffers etc., the TSA cannot determine if a woman's hair is a threat to public safety or not without actually running their fingers through it. In reality, the TSA could have easily used their devices to rule out the woman's hair as a threat. When the TSA does stuff like this, they do not do it because they have to. The TSA does this because they can.

While the TSA was busy messing around in this unfortunate Black woman's threatening poofy hair, how many foreign nationals do you suppose walked right through TSA security wearing Muslim head-coverings?

TSA Misleading Public About Adult Diaper Incident

Feeling the heat from the public backlash against the embarrassingly invasive search on June 18, 2011 of a 95-year-old leukemia patient who has to wear a diaper and can barely get around without a wheelchair, the Transportation Security Administration is now attempting to spin the story by saying they never ordered the leukemia patient to remove her diaper.

The official statement from the TSA is, "We have reviewed the circumstances involving this screening and determined that our officers acted professionally, according to proper procedure and did not require this passenger to remove an adult diaper."

While that statement may be technically accurate, it is deliberately misleading. The TSA may have not actually demanded the woman remove the diaper, but Jean Weber, the daughter of the woman, said the TSA agents made it clear the woman was not getting on the plane unless they were able to inspect the diaper (or perhaps have it discarded). Jean Weber decided to remove the diaper.

This is all semantics. The old woman was trying to get on a flight. The TSA would not let her get on the flight until someone removed the diaper. There is not much of a difference here. The TSA can say, "Take off that diaper or else you are not getting on your flight."

Alternatively, the TSA can say, "You are not getting on your flight with that diaper."

There is a difference in those two positions, but the effect is essentially the same. This poor old woman was going to have to take off her diaper or miss her flight.

This is how the TSA operates. The TSA knows they have a tremendous advantage over you at the airport, because they have the power to make you miss the flight for which you paid hundreds of dollars and cause an extraordinary amount of inconvenience as you attempt to arrive in time to make connecting flights, check into hotels, pick up rental cars, etc. The TSA knows they have the ability to dramatically inconvenience you and effectively take away your right to travel freely about the country by air, and they will hold it over your head to get you to comply with all of their disgusting invasions of your privacy.

The TSA can say, "Let us squeeze your testicles and let us rub our hands around your anus, or we will not let you on your flight."

Alternatively, the TSA can say, "You cannot get on that flight unless you voluntarily let us squeeze your testicles and rub our hands around your anus."

The nuances of the differing statements do not really matter much. Essentially, the TSA wants to molest you, and they are going to use the ability to restrict your right to travel to make that happen.

The most ridiculous aspect of this whole adult diaper situation is how we are now engaged in a big public discussion over whether the old woman's diaper was removed by order or voluntarily as a condition of boarding a flight. The real problem here is the federal government is now in our pants. One of the last free places we had in this country was our pants, and now the government feels the need to look around in there too. When the federal government is looking around in the pants and up the dresses of innocent citizens, things have gone terribly wrong.

By the way, if you are taking solace in thinking, if the government is in your pants, at least there is nowhere else for them to invade, do not be so sure. Terrorist, Abdullah Hassan al-Asiri, has already successfully detonated a bomb concealed in his rectum. Do not be so sure the federal government will not want to peek in there someday too. Sure, it sounds like a crazy thought now, but ten years ago, did you ever imagine the federal government would be touching your genitals and taking naked images of you at the airport? You never thought that would happen, but it has been going on the entire time you have been reading this article. We should be absolutely ashamed of ourselves for letting the terrorists win like this. We have played right into their hands by choosing to live in a constant state of fear where privacy, dignity, and freedom mean nothing.

TSA Mischaracterizing Safety of Full-Body Scanners

Don't act surprised. The TSA has not been forthcoming about the safety of their radiation-emitting full-body scanners. Steve Watson of Inforwars is reporting on newly released documents that prove the TSA has been mischaracterizing the safety of the full-body scanners.

"New Documents Prove TSA “Mischaracterized” Safety Aspects of Full-Body Scanners"

One of the most interesting aspects of the article relates to the cancer risk of the full-body scanners. Some TSA workers are developing cancers and questioning whether the scanners are the cause. There is also a quote from Michael Love at Johns Hopkins where he stated “statistically someone is going to get skin cancer from these X-rays.” Even more troubling is the apparent effort to hide from the public that no one really knows how dangerous these full-body scanners may actually be.

Anyone with any sense can see that these full-body scanners have the potential for causing cancer. What we do not know at this point is just how high the risk actually is. Unfortunately, we will not know the actual risk until some credible organization actually conducts a proper safety study of these devises. It is too bad the TSA is overwhelmed with searches of the handicapped ladies' diapers, taking toy hammers from mentally disabled people, grabbing breasts of actresses, patting-down babies, and poking around in the crotches of elementary school kids. The TSA just seems to be too busy to worry about whether or not people are going to get cancer from their scanners.

TSA Makes 95-Year-Old Leukemia Patient Remove Soiled Diaper for Search

Jean Weber of Destin, Florida is angry with the TSA. Her 95-year-old, 105-pound mother, who is battling with leukemia can barely walk. When the elderly leukemia patient went through a TSA checkpoint at the Northwest Florida Regional Airport on June 18, 2011 in a wheelchair, she was selected for an extensive search.

During the search, the TSA told Jean Weber to change her mother's diaper because it was soiled and impeding their search. Jean Weber did remove her mother's diaper, but did not have a fresh one to replace it. Presumably the elderly leukemia patient had to go without out a diaper until someone was able to locate a new one for her.

In all, the elderly, diaper-wearing leukemia patient was detained forty-five minutes. This is disgusting for so many reasons. This poor old woman is battling for her life. She can barely walk and probably has little life left in her. All she wanted to do was get on an airplane, but in order to exercise her right to travel, she had to be treated like a criminal, detained for an excessive amount of time, and humiliated by federal agents in front of her family.

This is the TSA. This is what they do. Do you feel safer?

TSA Harasses Severely Retarded Person in a Diaper over Plastic Hammer

The national disgrace we have come to know as the Transportation Security Administration has sunk to a new low. Not only did TSA screeners feel-up Drew Mandy, a person who is so mentally retarded he has to wear a diaper, they refused to allow him to take his treasured plastic hammer with him on a flight to Disneyland.

Well, you can go ahead and relax, the brave men and women of the TSA have diligently protected us from the greatest threat the skies have ever seen: mentally retarded people armed with plastic hammers. Wow, that was a close one.

"Dr. David Mandy: Special Needs Son Harassed by TSA at Detroit Metropolitan Airport"

TSA Harasses Wounded Veterans over Embedded Shrapnel

Prison Planet is running a story about how some wounded veterans whose imbedded shrapnel set off metal detectors and led to harsh TSA bullying and crotch grabbing.

Read the story here.
"TSA Thug Grabs Crotch of Wounded Vet"

How can we possibly ask these troops to put their lives and health on the line to defend our freedom and then treat them like common terrorists in their own country? We should be ashamed of ourselves for allowing our wounded veterans to be mistreated, especially when they have so much metal left in their bodies that they set off metal detectors. This is simply disgraceful.

Okay, Go Ahead and Mess with Texas

Apparently, the Texas Senate has an abundance of cowards. Already passed by the Texas House of Representatives, HB 1937 was going to make it a crime for a government worker to inappropriately touch a person without probable cause. HB 1937 would essentially bring an end to the most invasive aspects of TSA pat-downs.

In a clear demonstration that the Transportation Security Administration's power has reached much too far, John Murphy, the U.S. District Attorney for Western Texas, essentially warned the Texas Senate that Texas' ban on TSA groping could lead to a ban on flights in the state. Of course, this spooked the wimps in the Texas Senate, and HB 1937 has been effectively blocked.

What's wrong with these sissy Texas Senators? Texas had a real opportunity to exert its state's rights here. The TSA probably could have grounded all flights out of Texas. If they had done that, it would have created a spectacular setting for Texas to stand for her freedom. This could have been a watershed moment for American freedom. Instead, it is just another example of how governments disregard the people for the sake of ease.

Two parties need to be ashamed in this confrontation. The United States federal government should be ashamed for bullying a state. The Senators in Texas should be ashamed for allowing themselves to be bullied so easily. When Texans start backing down from a fight, times have truly gotten bad.

TSA Pat-Down on Baby

TSA Performing Pat-Down on Baby

You may sleep well tonight knowing the TSA is doing all it can to protect you from the terrifying surge of baby bombs. Some of us have read about the horrible practice of babies being used in exploding booby traps during the Vietnam War to injure American soldiers, so we cannot be too careful, right? What will happen if an al-Qaeda operative finds a book in a library and gets inspired to hide a bomb in a baby's diaper? Apparently, that is a tremendous threat, so the TSA is feeling up the babies now.

Take a long hard look at this photo. This is what it looks like when freedom begins to die.

Don't Mess with Texas' Junk - TSA Pat-Downs Could Be Criminalized



Texas Flag


Texas State Representative David Simpson is sponsoring a bill in Texas (HB 1937) that would make it a felony for a security officer who grants access to public buildings and public transportation to touch a person's anus, sex organ, or breasts (under or over clothes) without probable cause. The bill also criminalizes any touching by a security guard that would be offensive to a reasonable person. This could effectively end the intrusive portions of TSA pat-downs in Texas.

Also, Rep. David Simpson is sponsoring HB 1938, which would outlaw full-body scanners in Texas. This legislation would impose fines of up to $1,000 per day on those who operate scanner that allow government workers to look at people's virtually naked bodies.

Finally, a politician is standing up for the basic human dignity of innocent people. Is it any wonder that Texas is the pioneer in this effort?

All of the sissies out there are going to start peeing down their legs and crying, "Oh, no! The terrorists are going to find out about this lapse in security and flood into the Texas airports. They are going to be hijacking planes out of Texas every week!"

If you have ever met a Texan, the last thing you would think to do is hijack a plane full of them. Texans are tough people and will not sit passively in their seats while someone tries to bring down their plane. If you ever visit Texas, you will learn that "Don't Mess with Texas" is not just a motto. It is a way of life.

Gay TSA Screeners and Same-Gender Pat-Downs: A Touch of Confusion

TSA Pink Triangle Badge

The Transportation Security Administration proudly proclaims there is nothing sexual about their pat-downs, which happen to include significant contact with breasts, butts, inner thighs, and sometimes even genitals. The TSA claims to ensure the intrusive pat-downs are completely platonic by matching up the passengers with screeners of the same gender. This begs the question: What does the TSA do about the homosexual TSA screeners?

There are plenty of homosexual members of American society. They have jobs in every industry. Clearly homosexual people work for the government, and it just seems obvious that there must be some homosexual people working for the TSA. Are these homosexual TSA employees allowed to conduct pat-downs on airline passengers?

This is a legitimate question, because the TSA pat-downs do involve intimate contact. In fact, the contact during these pat-downs is so intimate that TSA screeners should be (and may be at some point in the future) tried for sexual assault. We have federal employees fondling people's genitals in airports all over the country right now. In almost any other situation, if one person fondles another person's genitals in an unwelcome fashion, the offender will get arrested.

The TSA seems to think it is important to gender-match passengers and the TSA screeners conducting the pat-downs; therefore, the TSA must see the obvious potential for a pat-down turning into a sexually charged encounter. Certainly, we can all see the potential problem with a heterosexual man patting down an attractive woman. Allowing a heterosexual man to rub his hands all over the breasts and crotch of a woman may very well take on an unwanted sexual element. The man may abuse the opportunity to get in a little extra touching for his own sexual gratification, and the woman will be left feeling understandably violated. This could also apply if a straight woman were to pat-down a male passenger.

Since the TSA seems to understand the pat-downs could become sexually charged, how is the TSA handling the issue of homosexual TSA screeners and homosexual airline passengers? If the pat-downs are too sexual for straight men to pat-down heterosexual women and vice versa, then the pat-downs must also be too sexual for other combinations where sexual tensions and attractions could exist. Here are a few examples.

• a heterosexual man pats down a gay man
• a gay man pats down a heterosexual man
• a gay man pats down a gay man
• a heterosexual woman pats down a lesbian
• a lesbian pats down a heterosexual woman
• a lesbian pats down a lesbian

In all of these scenarios, at least one person could be made to feel uncomfortable. In the scenarios where the TSA screener could potentially be sexually attracted to the passenger, there is a clear opportunity for sexual violations. What is the TSA doing to protect the employees and passengers from this?

It would not be fair to bar homosexuals from being TSA screeners; however, there are few scenarios where a homosexual TSA screener can conduct a pat-down on a passenger without creating some sort of potential for trouble. If a gay man pats down a heterosexual man, the heterosexual man may get violated. If a gay man pats down a gay passenger, the gay passenger may get violated. If a gay man pats-down a heterosexual woman, the woman may feel uncomfortable being touched by a man. It works the same way in reverse with lesbian TSA screeners.

Homosexuals cannot conduct pat-downs without upsetting just about every group of people. The only scenario that might work is to restrict gay men to conducting pat-downs on lesbian passengers. Perhaps the lesbian passengers could identify themselves as homosexuals and request gay male TSA screeners for their pat-downs. That way everything can remain platonic. Conversely, maybe the lesbian TSA screeners could be restricted to conducting pat-downs on only gay men who wish to declare their sexual orientation to the TSA. Maybe, to keep the confusion to a minimum, all of the homosexuals could wear inverted pink triangles on their shirts. That way, the screeners and the passengers could find an even greater sense of security in knowing the sexual orientation of everyone passing through the TSA checkpoints. Hopefully, by now, you are seeing how ridiculous this is.

If things are not ridiculous enough for you yet, ask yourself how the TSA should be handling transgender employees and transgender airline passengers. The issue gets even crazier when you consider that some TSA screeners and airline passengers may not be clearly classified as either male or female. Some people are going through gender changes that take years. Other people were born hermaphrodites and have no choice. Should people who are not obviously one gender or another be expected to choose a gender when approached by the TSA at an airport? This gender-bending stuff is going to get way too confusing, so let's just skip this and get back to the main issue: how the TSA addresses the concerns of homosexual screeners and passengers.

A fact of life is that some men are attracted to other men, and some women are attracted to other women. We cannot expect the homosexual men and women who work for the TSA to officially declare their sexuality and recuse themselves from same-gender pat-downs. We also cannot expect homosexual passengers to declare their sexuality to the TSA to avoid same-gender pat-downs.

By now, hopefully the absurdity of this article has exposed the true problem. The problem here is not gender or sexual orientation. The problem is the pat-downs. The pat-downs are far too intrusive, and they are violating common human dignity. The questions should not be about whether or not the TSA screeners might find the pat-downs sexually gratifying or whether or not the passengers might find the pat-downs to be sexual. The question should be this: Should government workers be permitted to stick their hands in the sexually sensitive areas of innocent people's bodies without probable cause?

People are straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, etc. People just have different lifestyles. Even though these groups all have their differences, they are human beings and deserve basic human dignities. When a law-abiding citizen goes to the airport, that person deserves the respect of not being treated like a criminal. At the very least, people should be able to travel freely in America without the overwhelming fear of being molested by a government employee.

Miss USA, Susie Castillo, Sexually Molested by TSA Screener

Susie Castillo - Miss USA 2003

www.susiecastillo.net

The latest addition to an ever-growing list of people sexually molested by the Transportation Security Administration happens to be a celebrity. Susie Castillo, Miss USA 2003, recently went through a TSA pat-down in the Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, and a TSA screener touched her breasts, butt, and thighs. She even touched Castillo's genital area four times. Susie Castillo is an incredibly attractive Latina woman, so the TSA screener probably got a little too excited by Castillo's exotic attractiveness and decided to get a nice feel of the beauty queen's vagina.

People are going to come to the TSA's defense and say a woman conducted the pat-down, so there could not have been anything sexual about the touching. Do these people honestly believe that none of the female TSA screeners are lesbian or bisexual? There are plenty of lesbian and bisexual women in other careers, why would there not be at least a small percentage working for the TSA? It is just a fact of life that some women are sexually attracted to other women. Even more women are sexually attracted to unusually gorgeous women.

Who is to say, this TSA agent did not abuse her power to grope Susie Castillo? Susie Castillo says her vagina was touched by this TSA agent, and the TSA seems to be encouraging this sort of touching. Susie Castillo's story is very believable.  She plans to file a complaint with the TSA.

Castillo should not expect too much to come of her complaint, however. If she was molested by the TSA screener (and she probably was), Castillo needs to contact the local police, have the TSA screener arrested, and see that she is brought up on charges for sexual assault.

When you grab a woman's vagina against her wishes, that is sexual assault, right? The laws have not changed, have they? Just because a person is wearing a federal uniform, this does not mean they automatically get to go around grabbing vaginas all day. Hmm, well, actually that is the case right now, but that doesn't mean it is right. If a woman does not want someone touching her vagina, nobody should touch it.  Is that such a difficult concept? Even if this sort of molestation is making people feel a little safer, we cannot live in a society where the federal government can just start rubbing people's crotches whenever there might be some sort of security threat.

Susie Castillo is understandably quite upset about this experience. Read more about it on her blog.

The TSA's Roundtrip Ticket to Your Anus

Abdullah Hassan al-Asiri, the Butt Bomber

In Jeddah, Saudi Arabia on August 27, 2009, al-Qaeda terrorist, Abdullah Hassan al-Asiri, attempted to kill Prince Mohammed Bin Nayef, the Saudi Deputy Interior Minister in charge of Counter-Terrorism. Al-Asiri tricked the prince into believing he was a terrorist who wished to surrender and help the Saudi government fight terrorism. Using this ploy, al-Asiri managed to get within feet of the prince--in the prince's home--and detonate a bomb.

You might be wondering how an admitted terrorist was able to get a bomb within feet of a prominent public official in his own home. He did so by concealing the bomb in his rectum. Fortunately for the prince, al-Asiri's body deflected much of the blast away from the prince, and the prince did not suffer any serious injuries. A better-constructed bomb, however, could have easily killed everyone in the room.

Of course, this brings up the issue of airline security. If a known terrorist can use his rectum to get a bomb into a public official's home, what is keeping a terrorist from using his rectum to sneak a bomb past the dolts working the TSA airport security checkpoints?

How long will it be before the Transportation Security Administration decides rectum bombs are a legitimate threat to airplanes? What is in store for us then? Will the TSA have us dropping our pants, bending over tables, and sticking their fingers into our anuses to probe our rectums? How else will they know whether or not we have bombs up there? Those full-body scanners might not be able to detect certain explosives with densities similar to human tissue.

You know, if man can hide a bomb in his rectum, a woman could hide a bomb in her rectum and another bomb in her vagina. How long before the TSA wants to probe around inside of vaginas looking for bombs?

Here the worst part. The TSA is currently defending its intrusive pat-downs of small children on the grounds that no class of passenger can be treated differently from the others. The concept is that, if the TSA does not pat-down children aggressively, the terrorists will begin to use children in their suicide attacks. Based on this logic, the TSA will want to inspect the anuses and vaginas of small children who wish to fly.

By this point, hopefully you are seeing how ridiculous airport security has become. Is our security really worth all of this humiliation? At some point, the precautions become worse than the threat.