Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three or more times is enemy action.  Well I don't believe in coincidence and at this point it no longer matters.

Yesterday another elderly woman came forward saying she received the same type of treatment as the 85 year old grandmother.

Ruth Sherman, 88, of Sunrise, Fla., told WCBS television ( http://cbsloc.al/sD3xsS ) that agents were suspicious about her colostomy bag and asked her to pull down the waist of her pants so they could see it on Nov. 28.

So that's twice.  Today a third woman has come forward describing the same type of treatment, this time over a glucose monitor.

Kallish's troubles began because of the glucose monitor and insulin pump she wears because of her diabetes. After she set off the metal detector she was sent to a private room and, she says, told to take her pants off. She says the officer didn't touch her. "So I took my pants off and showed [the glucose monitor] to her," Kallish said. "She just looked at it and said, 'Have a nice trip.'"

That's three.  The TSA claimed on Friday that strip searches as the above are not procedure.  However in all three instances there was an underlying medical condition that the officers exploited to abuse their power.

At what point do people finally say enough is enough.  How much abuse do the public have to take before someone finally wises up that while the TSA may claim that something is not policy or procedure doesn't mean that it doesn't happen.  TSA agents don't follow normal policy or procedures regarding the use of equipment that make use of radio active equipment, why does anyone think they would magically follow their own rule book?

This is like playing Monopoly with a kid who is making up his own rules and constantly changing them.  Except this kid can throw you in jail when you point out he's breaking the rules.  How do you deal with a spoiled brat who harasses and intimidates anyone who dares challenge their Authoritah.  Not to mention when you tell their parents about their kids misbehaving they just pat them on the back and say stop that.  Even when one of the parents is hassled.

My father-in-law was told not only to remove his prosthetic leg, but they wanted him to disassemble it.  There's no cosmesis, and the leg requires special tools to assemble and disassemble.  If you've ever seen a bare prosthetic there is no room to put anything in it.  The TSA claims that type of behavior would never happen yet it does. 

This is what happens when you create a job program for the lowest common denominator who cant even graduate high school and give them more power than they know what to do with.  Then the parent who gave them that power says that there's no accountability.

What happened next was unnecessary and out of line; instead of just running his fingers along the waistband, he pulled out, at which point my button ripped out of the shorts, and the zipper came all the way down, exposing my underwear down to the crotch. Horror. I quickly zipped my shorts up. What the hell? I can understand there might have be a possibility that the thread or fabric near the button had been weakened over time, but even then, my zipper should not have unzipped down to the bottom if he was only feeling the waistband. Obviously my frustration showed, but did the TSA agent offer a solution for my broken button? or say anything besides “oops. I’m Sorry”? No. He just continued over to the machine to wipe his gloves down looking for residue, and then put wipe into machine.

I’m reasonably sure the only reason they escorted him to the back room is to ensure there would be no witnesses to the attack.  Yes this was an attack because it resulted in damage to property.  Not only that but the agents actions were nothing more than an attempt at sexual humiliation.

I don’t wish ill or harm on anyone, but frankly my opinion is starting to change regarding TSA agents.  Even if agent A isn’t responsible, he still covers for agent B.  They're nothing but predators who cover for each other.

The TSA has so many issues it shall remain in this post by itself. 

When they found Rice wasn’t home, they asked an obliging employee of the complex to open up the apartment without her consent. Once inside, they raided the gun rack, making off with 13 firearms worth around $15,000. The only problem: They had no apparent reason to.

This woman had broken no laws.  The weapons were legally owned.  The police confiscated them without warrant.  Then when she requested they be returned, they demanded there be a court order.  May Mrs. Rice’s attorney  send the city of Lakewood into receivership.

This isn’t the first time that police have gone shopping for new firearms using someone’s personal property as the store.

State Sponsored Criminal Count: 49

Because really being a cop just allows you to shop through other peoples property.  The law is just for everyone else to follow.

H/t Dave Hardy

If ye love wealth better than liberty,
the tranquility of servitude
better than the animating contest of freedom,
go home from us in peace.
We ask not your counsels or your arms.
Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you.
May your chains set lightly upon you,
and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

-Samuel Adams, August 1, 1776: Philadelphia State House

[I was reminded of this quote while writing a response to Ubu bad mouthing my suggestion to start turning up the heat on TSA employees over at Joe’s place.  Joe has obviously spent some time in contemplation of the subject.

I modified her closing remark into the following, striking out her original words:

I can't think of anything more useless than a plot to verbally disrespect people to condone sexual assault, molestation, and humiliation of the law abiding under the guise of "security" and think it is going to accomplish something actually make us safer.