TSA at SMALL AIRPORTS, Detaining Senators in Small PRIVATE PLANES

[Pilot]

:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:REMEMBER WHEN FLYING WAS FREEDOM DEFINED? The Hijacked Government HATES our freedom.

TSA Harasses Ron Paul and His Wife in Florida At SMALL AIRPORT at PRIVATE PLANE (http://www.infowars.com/tsa-harasses-ron-paul-and-his-wife-in-florida/) On departing the RNC in Tampa , A group of TSA agents attempted to stop Texas Congressman Ron Paul and his family from boarding their private plane at a small airport

(These are criminal Thugs and now They do whatever they want to do. It will take EAA, AOPA, and more to get rid of them TIME IS SHORT, If people don't wake up its gonna be too late)

TSA Caught In Huge Power Grab (http://www.infowars.com/tsa-caught-in-huge-power-grab/)This is nothing but a power grab, as the public are conditioned to put up with any command no matter how mindless.


Video Shows TSA’s Bizarre New Security Policy (http://www.infowars.com/video-shows-tsas-bizarre-new-security-policy/) Federal agency tests drinks purchased inside airport.


Whistleblower: TSA Deliberately Hiring Psychopathic Criminals (http://www.infowars.com/whistleblower-tsa-deliberately-hiring-psychopathic-criminals/)

Our airports look like prisons - Air Facts Journal (http://airfactsjournal.com/2012/08/our-airports-look-like-prisons/) Here's a frightening suggestion for your next cross-country flight: compare a federal prison and an airport from 3,000 feet and see if you can tell a difference.

[Pilot]

You have a better chance of dying..............FROM A BEE.... than being killed by a TERRORIST. Look that up if you are okay with TSA coming to your airport with minimum wage morons to grab your teen girl's genitals and take photos of your wife naked. and put their hands down your pants, and swab your drink.

[VanDervort]

This was at a county airport?? Was there a TFR in place?

And FYI most body scanners are fully automated now,

They do need stopped.

[Bill Greenwood]

Your headline may be slightly off, ie "senators", "planes" , whereas when I read it was one senator in one plane, if the report is true.
I used Google to look this up and could only find reports from very right wing small origanizations, which have an obvious bias.
I saw nothing on CNN , NBC, etc.
Do you have any source from a mainstream newspaper or tv outlet?

I like some of the things Ron Paul says, and I am no fan of TSA. What an incredible and unfocused waste of taxpayer money.
I flew the airline round trip this weekend, and I don't go through their x ray machines either. I think it is wrong to be taking naked pictures of people, especially teenage girls, but most of all I don't trust their claim that the machines are not harmful. I used to know a man who worked at TSA and he told me they don't go through the machines and don't stand right near them when they are on.
Who knows if a few years down the road it is found out that they are harmful?

[Joe LaMantia]

Yes this is what happens when we let fear and emotion take over the thought process. The reality of the 9/11 attack was to whip-up public support for a bill that reduced the very liberties we value. History will not treat the "Patriot Act" kindly. As a country we took pride in taking the high road regarding POW's, it was always the bad guys who beat and abused prisoners, no longer the case these days. The TSA, like most Federal Agencies started out with a needed purpose, but a decade has passed and it takes on a life of its' own. Like most ideas, if taken to the extreme becomes absurd. Remember when we had a leader who said "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself"? Getting angry isn't going to fix this, go to your congressmen's town meeting and let him know how you feel. The Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street both started out through anger and both have been co-opted by the political parties. Individual politicians will take note if confronted eye-to-eye by their voters. Don't get mad, participate in the democratic process!

Joe

[Bill Greenwood]

Joe, it doesn't hurt to go to a meeting and express your view to a Congressman, but the fact is that most of them couldn't care less what the average person thinks.
Money talks, if fact it screams in politics.
If you have a big reelection donation or a potential business connection, then they might listen to you.

[Pilot]

Your headline may be slightly off, ie "senators", "planes" , whereas when I read it was one senator in one plane, if the report is true.
I used Google to look this up and could only find reports from very right wing small origanizations, which have an obvious bias.
I saw nothing on CNN , NBC, etc.
Do you have any source from a mainstream newspaper or tv outlet?

Is the Washington Times mainstream enough? The story came from Paul's former chief of staff.
http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/political-potpourri/2012/aug/30/tsa-detains-interrogates-ron-pauls-family-and-aids/

Bill, I'm having a tough time trying to edit that headline in the system. Sorry I didn't know it was a "Headline" that's the way I have heard people talk
"Look what the TSA is doing - Now they are hassling old Congressmen in their own airplanes at tiny airports." Just a colloquailism.
I will be more clear next time.

[Pilot]

This was at a county airport?? Was there a TFR in place?

And FYI most body scanners are fully automated now,

They do need stopped.

According to Air Nav the City owns it not the County


Ownership:
Publicly-owned


Owner:
CITY OF CLEARWATER
P.O. BOX 4748, ATTN; MARINE DEPARTMENT
CLEARWATER, FL 33758-4748
Phone 727-462-6954
CONTACT PERSON: WILLIAM MORRIS 727-462-6954



I don't understand what you mean by FYI most body scanners are fully automated.
Did they used to be hand-cranked or something?

[rwanttaja]

[QUOTE=Bill Greenwood;22305]Is the Washington Times mainstream enough?

It would be... IF the story came from the Washington Times. It apparently did not. Note this disclaimer on the web page that you linked to:

"This is the Communities at WashingtonTimes.com. Individual contributors are responsible for their content, which is not edited by The Washington Times ." (emphasis added)

Ron Wanttaja

[Bill Greenwood]

I would not consider the Washington Times a mainstream news source, from what I know about it. I think it is more slanted and has more of an ax to grind than even Fox news.
Just looked up the Times for today and one of the headlines is "new Obama slogan has long ties to Marxism". Not exactly a rational view of news even if you don't like a candidate or a party.
And seeing that apparently this Paul report is not from a news source like the Associated Press, but really rather a press release from a political source which is Ron Paul's staff member.

We need to be very careful of the facts, when we take a position on something, or beleive some report or claim that seems a ways out of norm.

If this happened in Florida, where is the story from the Miami Herald or even the local Clearwater paper or wherever this was? How about a national source like USA Today or CNN or CBS?

And, by the way, I am no fan of TSA and with a little more confirmation I could beleive most anything about them.

[Joe LaMantia]

Bill,
Yes $$$ in our system is a big problem! Politicians only respond to ordinary citizens if their voices are loud enough, but unfortunately money buys a loud voice.

Ron,
Thanks for pointing out the nature of "facts" in the current "news" world. It would be nice to know the names and associations that fund the PAC's running negative ads this election year. What I find ironic is that the "conservative" movement spends a lot of time talking about the founding fathers values and the constitution, but when it comes time to actually fixing the problem they tell us money is free speech and corporations are people. There is a lot of junk "facts" in the news and on the internet, it's just a miss-information propaganda campaign to keep emotions running high and reason off the field.

Joe

[Bill Greenwood]

Joe, one ordinary person like you or I going to talk to a politician vs. someone like the Koch bothers giving millions of dollars is like the impact of a cat meowing vs. the barking of a pack of bloodhounds.

[Zack Baughman]

Okay fellas, you have completely strayed off the initial topic and into the realm of politics. If you want to talk about problems with the TSA and how to contact your representatives in Congress to voice your opinions - that's fine. But politics are a definite "NO NO" on these forums. You have been warned.

Zack

[Bill Greenwood]

Hey, Zack, Joe wrote about people, or pilots or voters going to a congressman's meeting to voice our opinion about TSA invading non airline airports and hassling private gen aviation. That is surely related and cogent to the scope of this forum. And I wrote about what Joe wrote.
Anyone, even nice guys who say only write about flying and not politics is like saying lets talk flying, but ignore air or gravity.
I don't write much about just politics, in example saying vote for Mr. A over Mr. B because A wants more or less gun control or gay rights or women's rights. But if you include govt as a broader defintion of politics, then govt certainly affects many things we do and most certainly flying. How about TFRs for candidates, that is a direct affect of politics and certainly govt on our flying.

What if we had a forum for motorcycles, could we write about govt rules for helmet use or dirt bikes in national forrest or epa or noise pollution laws?

Hey, Zack, except for a few unpleasant guys, no one on here is going to melt if we did talk directly about politics. I wish, except for lies or libel ,that you guys would get off that kick and let us write as adults in our world today.

You might be just in a bad mood today, with summer coming to an end and the gloomy season heading your way. Go have a deviled egg and a brownie, it always works for me, and puts me in a better mood.

And if you get out Colorado way, come see us, the weather is fabulous in Sept.
And we can go flying if you can settle for a Bonanza or glider.

[Zack Baughman]

No one on here is going to melt if we did talk directly about politics. I wish, except for lies or libel ,that you guys would get off that kick and let us write as adults in our world today.


Unfortunately, that's not the point. There are plenty of other forums around the great big ol' Internet where you can write about politics to your heart's content. Just don't do it here. Government relations with the aviation community is certainly a valid topic, but this particular topic jumped ship when it shifted from the TSA and it's possible harassment of a U.S. Congressman to opinions about which way a particular newspaper leans politically. As soon as the words "liberal" and "conservative" are bandied about, the discussion has moved away from useful information to opinions.

In my experience, adults inevitably quite acting like adults when it comes to discussions about politics and religion, so it's best just to avoid those conversations altogether when it comes to special interest forums such as this one. As I say, as long as you can leave out political statements condemning one side or the other, discussions about government and its role in aviation are certainly valid. Making sweeping statements about "liberals" or "conservatives" crosses the line.

Zack

PS: I have no problems with Bonanzas or gliders! ;)

[Jim Rosenow]

Hey, Bill, Zack wrote about what he wants on HIS forum....sorta, kinda like usin' his football to play with, isn't it?

There's always Plan B for you.... http://www.startyourownforums.com/ Let me know when you get it set up, and I promise to stop by.

[Bill Greenwood]

Zack, perhaps one of us is having a reading problem; and I don't think it is me.
Maybe, Hawkeye is not a literal term?

Just to put things in perspective I was the best reader in my entire elementary school, ( ok,it wasn't Harvard) of about 400 kids. I was exempt from sitting in reading class my last year and got to go to the library and read whatever I wanted.
I didn't know about airplanes then so I read all the Cousteau, and Cmdr. Ellsworth books then.

So when you say I went over the line by writing about "liberals" or "conservatives", my initial reaction was no. So I went back and reread all my post on this topic twice. The words "liberals" or "conservative" don't even appear at all in what I wrote. If I am wrong and not seeing it correctly, please give me the exact quote where I wrote those, and I'll not doubt you.

Otherwise, I think it is your perception of what you think I wrote or was trying to say.
Another way to settle it, I'll take Iowa St, and 8 points vs,the Hawkeyes Sat., loser admits he can't read? It's well known that eating too much cheese is bad for your eyesight.

By the way, by the time I got to statistics in college I was about rock bottom in that subject of commuter programing via Fortran.
One reason I like vintage airplanes is that they don't have computers in them.

[EDGEFLY]

Zack,Congratulations, it is about time a moderater moderated on this forum ! I believe there are plenty of reasons to be contributing to it in specific terms without leaving aeronautical topics and related administrative matters such as FAA Policy and programs. If that is too limited a subject area for some participants, They should start their own political bile forum and use whatever basis they wish to justify their comments. That "freedom" is afforded to all of us. Especially in the age of the Internet.Dale

[rwanttaja]

As Jim said, we ARE playing with Zack's ball. He has the right to decide what topics can be discussed here.

Put it another way: What will be *resolved* here if the conversation continues? Is anyone likely to change their minds? Are the blankety-blank Conservatives going to switch to a more liberal stance, or will the expletive deleted Liberals suddenly start getting tatoos of Millard Fillmore?

Not going to happen, from ANY degree of discussion here.

So why feed the flames of rancor?

Ron Wanttaja

[steveinindy]

or will the expletive deleted Liberals suddenly start getting tatoos of Millard Fillmore?

Ron, you're one of the few people I know who could discuss Millard Fillmore in a 'normal conversation' without sounding like a blithering idiot. God bless you for being a fellow history geek. LOL

[Bob Meder]

Unfortunately, that's not the point. There are plenty of other forums around the great big ol' Internet where you can write about politics to your heart's content. Just don't do it here. Government relations with the aviation community is certainly a valid topic, but this particular topic jumped ship when it shifted from the TSA and it's possible harassment of a U.S. Congressman to opinions about which way a particular newspaper leans politically. As soon as the words "liberal" and "conservative" are bandied about, the discussion has moved away from useful information to opinions.

In my experience, adults inevitably quite acting like adults when it comes to discussions about politics and religion, so it's best just to avoid those conversations altogether when it comes to special interest forums such as this one. As I say, as long as you can leave out political statements condemning one side or the other, discussions about government and its role in aviation are certainly valid. Making sweeping statements about "liberals" or "conservatives" crosses the line.

Zack

PS: I have no problems with Bonanzas or gliders! ;)

Thank you, Zack.

It's gonna be a long 80 some days...

[Joe LaMantia]

Well if we read the starting thread it is an angry "political" rant and maybe Zack should have closed it before we all got involved. I don't think anyone has been offended and yes Zack does have the power to shut it off whenever. I would respond to Zack by noting that EAA as an organization has taken political positions in areas that impact it's members i.e. user fees for example. AOPA is the primary Aviation lobby group and covers a broader range of issues affecting all segments of aviation. The TSA topic is really all about the airlines, and maybe "Pilot" whoever he is should post his thread on an AOPA blog?

No foul, no penalty!

Joe
:cool:

[Zack Baughman]

I'm rather adverse to closing threads. I'd rather that the users of this forum self regulate with some guidance from the moderators. Discussions about TFRs, the TSA, body scanners, etc., can all be had without people getting their political digs in. Bill seems to think I am picking on him, but I was really addressing everyone.

As for EAA being political - the organization takes positions on policies that impact aviation. It doesn't matter if those policies were created by bi-partisan committees or strictly along party lines. We try to do what is right for aviation and aviators, regardless of political persuasion. As a non-profit 501C(3) organization, EAA HAS to be apolitical. There is some good info about that here: http://masspta.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=11&Itemid=26

In any case, "Pilot," I apologize for this severe thread drift. To everyone else, feel free to discuss policy as much as you would like, but please leave the political comments and digs out of it. If you can't figure out a way to have that discussion without injecting politics into it, I would suggest not having the discussion at all. I'd prefer that the only "right wing" or "left wing" that gets mentioned around here have something to do with airplanes. ;)

[Bill Greenwood]

Zack, not thinking you are "picking on me", however I assume that much of your caution post was in response to what I wrote and THE KEY POINT I AM MAKING IS THAT I DID NOT WRITE THE WORDS THAT YOU ATTRIBUTED TO ME.

I don't see the whiners complaining about posts by other people for the most part, and trying, with some success to get Zack to do their dirty work by censoring a topic or post.

Maybe others don't share my feeling on this point, but sometimes this forum can get mundane and pretty flat. How many days can you really hold interest on a topic like if water at EAA cost $2 or $3?

I try to write about things that interest me or that I think are important or are ones that I have some experience with, like learnig to fly and that I think others might be interested in. And sometimes I try to add a little humor which in my opinion most of us, and the world and this forum really need more of.

I get enough bilge water for some of the things that I do write, without having words put in my mouth as it were that are not mine.

[Hal Bryan]

Zack, not thinking you are "picking on me", however I assume that much of your caution post was in response to what I wrote and THE KEY POINT I AM MAKING IS THAT I DID NOT WRITE THE WORDS THAT YOU ATTRIBUTED TO ME.

Bill, Zack didn't put words in your mouth. He wasn't even addressing you specifically - his original comment was in response to Joe's post about "conservatives." The fact that you posted in between (most likely just a question of timing) is immaterial. As for the follow-up discussion, the same holds true - he was addressing the discussion as a whole. At no point did he say "Bill, you said liberal and conservative."


Maybe others don't share my feeling on this point, but sometimes this forum can get mundane and pretty flat. How many days can you really hold interest on a topic like if water at EAA cost $2 or $3?

No argument there, whatsoever.


I'm rather adverse to closing threads. I'd rather that the users of this forum self regulate with some guidance from the moderators. Discussions about TFRs, the TSA, body scanners, etc., can all be had without people getting their political digs in. Bill seems to think I am picking on him, but I was really addressing everyone.

As for EAA being political - the organization takes positions on policies that impact aviation. It doesn't matter if those policies were created by bi-partisan committees or strictly along party lines. We try to do what is right for aviation and aviators, regardless of political persuasion. As a non-profit 501C(3) organization, EAA HAS to be apolitical. There is some good info about that here: http://masspta.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=11&Itemid=26

In any case, "Pilot," I apologize for this severe thread drift. To everyone else, feel free to discuss policy as much as you would like, but please leave the political comments and digs out of it. If you can't figure out a way to have that discussion without injecting politics into it, I would suggest not having the discussion at all. I'd prefer that the only "right wing" or "left wing" that gets mentioned around here have something to do with airplanes. ;)

I couldn't have said it better myself!

Now then... does anyone have anything to say that's actually related to the topic? I've been looking around, and haven't found any additional information about the Ron Paul / TSA incident at Clearwater. Has this happened elsewhere? Have any of you ever been in a similar situation? If the TSA is starting to show up and screen GA aircraft, that's obviously a lot more important than a lot of the rest of the discussion that's gone on in this thread.

[Joe LaMantia]

Zack,

I get your point. I think most of us when talking to friends in hangers at our home base, may in fact stray off "props and flaps" to a whole array of subjects including politics. EAA like any effective group must lobby both sides of the political aisle to be effective. Nothing is gained by making someone angry. Maybe we should consider changing the name of this forum form Hanger Talk to Aviation Talk, that might help in keeping the conversations away from controversy? I for one am not upset with anyone on this thread and I hope I didn't offend anyone with my comments. I had a very unpleasant experience with TSA in Albuquerque this past spring and it's a hot button with me. I can sympathize with "Pilot" regarding his angry incon.

Joe
:cool:

[Mike M]

"Now then... does anyone have anything to say that's actually related to the topic?"

yes.

"Was there a TFR in place?"

yes.

"...could only find reports from very right wing small origanizations, which have an obvious bias.
I saw nothing on CNN , NBC, etc. Do you have any source from a mainstream newspaper or tv outlet?"

now that's pertinent. since it did happen, why wasn't it reported?

perhaps because with the TFR in place, it SHOULD have happened to ANYONE who wanted to fly in the TFR airspace? thus although true, it's not newsworthy.

[Hal Bryan]

Here's the Flight Advisory from the FAA with details on the TFR:

http://www.faa.gov/news/updates/media/120730_Published_RNC_Flight_Advisory.pdf

[RV8505]

That's alot of stuff! I think you are much better off leaving the plane in the hanger. The question I have is, are they jacking everyone up or are they targeting a select few.

[FlyingRon]

Neighbor called flight service today at 1300 (Local). Was told the DNC TFR (which overlies our field) starts at 1500.
At 1305, a revised TFR is issued moving the start time up to 1415.
At 1418 neighbor departs.
At 1430, Homeland Security calls me. Wants to know who just departed. I honestly don't know, I'm at the hardware store down the street.
Shortly thereafter neighbor's Garmin/XM Weather shows new TFR and he boogies directly to the nearest edge of the TFR.
By the time he lands they're already calling his destination with his type and color.
Fortunately when he calls them, they decide he's done as best he could and aren't pursuing it.

Ouch.

[Bill Greenwood]

WARNING, POLITICS BELOW! And if that upsets you, go back to listening to Rush and don't read this post.
Re: the event in St. Pete, besides the question of what if anything happened since the source is pretty limited, and why didn't this make the other news outlets? There are at least 2 other questions: 1. What TSA or secret service protection is Romney given? Is it the same as Pres Obama, even though he is a private citizen, not an elected official? 2. Is the protection from TSA even though normally the not so Secret Service protects the President and VP? 3. Was the TFR at Clearwater in place because there was the large convention nearby, not just because Romney was there?

The print was so small on the Notam that I could not read the details.

[FlyingRon]

I believe once Romney got the nomination is SS protection went into full swing.
HSA/TSA provides cover for the SS in either event (actually, Secret Service is now part of HSA rather than treasury).
It appears that neither the RNC or DNC gets full coverage unless Obama or Romney are present.

[FlyingRon]

But let me see, in my lifetime we've had:

1 president assasinated
1 president shot and seriously injured
1 president attempt to be shot at but the gun misfired
1 presidential candidate assasinated
1 presidential candidate shot and seriously injured

Yeah, I think they deserve a measure of protection.

[RV8505]

Neighbor called flight service today at 1300 (Local). Was told the DNC TFR (which overlies our field) starts at 1500.
At 1305, a revised TFR is issued moving the start time up to 1415.
At 1418 neighbor departs.
At 1430, Homeland Security calls me. Wants to know who just departed. I honestly don't know, I'm at the hardware store down the street.
Shortly thereafter neighbor's Garmin/XM Weather shows new TFR and he boogies directly to the nearest edge of the TFR.
By the time he lands they're already calling his destination with his type and color.
Fortunately when he calls them, they decide he's done as best he could and aren't pursuing it.

Ouch.

Does the TSA come to the airfield during the TFR?

[FlyingRon]

No, they called the airport manager at both the origin and destination fields and did a telephone interrogation of the pilot once he was located.

[Mike M]

Yeah, I think they deserve a measure of protection.

me, too. but a smaller, better measure than right now. first, the 10/30nm radii plan is primarily for the "commander in chief" of the military, which means there is a chain of command and a backup plan. a replacement CIC is available 24/7. the republic has not faltered through any of the events Ron listed. second, the current unrealistic, ineffective ubersecurity is putting a LOT of people in a bind for no good reason. banner towing, crop dusting, sightseeing, etc etc etc. i've had trouble getting clearance for EMS flights, which are permitted! a careful planner could get authorization to fly even in the 10nm arc, then launch threat aircraft instead of the pre-cleared ones. constituents struggling for business, out of work, or fighting for life itself - and overzealous paranoids think they are grounding model airplanes? do they really believe twelve-year-olds are reading NOTAMS?

after more than a decade, this empty and stifling posing is the best our top security experts can devise? shameful.

[Mike M]

Here's the Flight Advisory from the FAA with details on the TFR:

http://www.faa.gov/news/updates/media/120730_Published_RNC_Flight_Advisory.pdf

Hal, i know your motives are pure, but please don't do that. here in the tampa bay area, i have several friends who got the advisory and never checked NOTAMS because they thought they already had the info. it's the NOTAMS that count. and as FlyingRon noted, the NOTAMS change rapidly.

[Hal Bryan]

Don't do what? How does posting this publicly available info well after the fact do anything other than possibly provide some context to the original topic? I'm confused.