My Continued TSA Saga

MegIn light of my recent TSA encounter, I have received national media attention, including FOX News, Drudge Report, InTouch magazine, and more.  Even the TSA published a pair of their own videos, since they had the freedom to do something I was prevented from doing myself – recording.  The videos, which lack even the most standard feature(s) of surveillance videos like a time stamp, the ability to show multiple angles of the same area, or even a clear view of one area in general; are supposed to disprove my claims.  While everyone is free to determine what they believe to be true, to me this another case of government not giving you the full story.  The TSA has continuously been caught in lies to cover the embarrassment of the truth, and this seems to be yet another instance of that, in attempts to misguide attention from the real issue.  The biggest question for me is: why is there a large portion of the secondary screening area not shown in either camera angle?  An area where much of my incident took place, and where countless others have been taken to be put through a procedure I can only describe as molestation.  This should be a concern for everyone.

Directly after this event occurred, I called into Free Talk Live to share what had just happened to me.  Like anyone who has just experienced a traumatic event, I was shaken and attempting to recall these events as clearly as could.  Things I said were either misinterpreted by others, or I may have misspoke while still trying to recall the events to the best of my knowledge.  Once this story went viral, it took on a life of it’s own, and I had no control over the elaborations or misinterpretations others chose to print.  This is to be expected when it comes to media, and I do not feel a responsibility to defend things I haven’t even said as truth.

The issue still remains that I was harassed, intimidated, humiliated, and eventually forced out of a contract I made with an airline by a third party – the TSA.  All this from people who are paid to keep us safe with stolen money.  I chose not to be photographed naked.  I chose to question the purpose of causing me immense discomfort through allowing a stranger to intimately touch my body.  For this, I have now faced great emotional strain and loss of my time and money, as have those who have been kind enough to help me through this difficult ordeal.  I have received countless emails from others who were subjected to the TSA’s dehumanizing treatment, and I can only continue to push the real issue here: Nobody should be forced to endure such intimately invasive procedures for the supposed (false sense of) safety they are meant to accommodate.

If you support my actions, and would like to help me return home, I ask that you please contribute to this chip in that is going directly to George Donnelly, who was gracious enough to front me the money for a return ticket home.  The chip in has been set at $300, and any extra money received over the cost of the ticket price will go to website WeWontFly.com; in hopes of bringing information regarding these degrading practices to light.

Please go here to contribute: Get Meg Home Chip In

If you would like to support more liberty activists like myself, I am also involved in the creation and execution of the Keene Activist Center.  This is a place for liberty activists in Keene to gather, share ideas, and prepare themselves for the activism they will continue to use in bringing about an end to the violent state and introduce people to a society based on voluntary interactions between consenting human beings.  Donations to the Keene Activist Center can be made at: Keene Activist Center Donations

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


185 Comments

  1. The secondary screening camera blind spot is likely by design. They need a place that they can move people to where they won't be held accountable for anything they do. I believe similar blind spots are well-known and abused in prisons by both the jailers and the inmates.

    On a side note, I just flew out of Manchester, NH and the TSA workers there were the most polite and friendly of any of the countless airports I have been through recently, and they weren't using the x-ray scanner either!

    Reply
  2. You are a liar.

    Reply
  3. I have a visceral dislike of being subjected to "something for my own good" if I have decided it isn't. What ever that is, it isn't freedom.

    Reply
  4. $20 sent. Stay safe Meg, and thanks for doing what you did!

    Reply
  5. I keep seeing George's name. Thanks for stepping up, George, and thank you, Meg, for standing up for all of us

    Reply
  6. I'm not sure what the big deal is.

    If someone is selected for the body scan and opts out, they get the secondary screening pat down. If they opt out of the secondary screening, they don't go past the security checkpoint. That seems to be what happened.

    What has the TSA lied about in this case?

    Reply
  7. The TSA has managed to change the dialogue from being about their invasive procedures to if Meg is telling the truth or not.

    Clever.

    Reply
  8. The secondary screening area is hidden by design. Not so they can grope you, you self-centered mindless liar, but so that they protect your privacy while they're patting you down, especially if it becomes necessary to lift up your blouse or whatever. Same reason for having multiple personnel; because people like you will LIE and claim that sh*t happened that didn't happen in order to get attention. You were obviously NEVER handcuffed, yelled at or grabbed. Perhaps if you'd told the truth I'd feel some sympathy, but your exaggeration and blatant lies make it obvious you've made this all up to further your own agenda, and wow how coincidental that YOU with your political agenda just happened to be subjected to this!

    Reply
  9. After having listened to the 2 FTL interviews and watching the TSA vids, Megs story makes perfect sense. Good luck with all the upcoming interviews Meg!

    Reply
  10. wow how coincidental that YOU with your political agenda just happened to be subjected to this

    Of course it's not a coincidence. She's uncomfortable having nudie pics taken of her, or being groped by strangers, and she's got the spine to question these TSA thugs. They tend not to abuse people would blindly go along with their program …

    especially if it becomes necessary to lift up your blouse or whatever

    Becomes necessary to lift up your blouse!? Gawd, you people will just go along with anything, won't you. It used to be "give me liberty or give me death", now it's "pweese mommy government, take my liberty, my privacy, and my dignity, just make me feel a little safer". It's pathetic.

    Reply
  11. Are you going to hold George Donnelly to that same high standard Meg and ask him to change the title of his video?

    It seems his mislabeling the interview as you being cuffed to a chair is what has caused all this overreaction.

    Reply
  12. As expected, the trolls will be marching on in. When is it ever necessary to be groped in public OR private for refusing to go through a naked body scanner? How can someone defend that?

    Reply
  13. Fairly straight forward question for Meg – was she handcuffed or wasnt she handcuffed? Not a lot of room for subjectivity there.

    Reply
  14. Emerson, she was interviewed again on Free Talk Live last night and she said there is a missing part of the video that doesn't show what happened. There's no time stamp on any of these videos, which is convenient for the TSA. They made some great points on last night's interview about this.

    She did state that you can see in the first video the one female TSA agent holding her ticket, and then you don't ever see that ticket again.

    Here is last night's episode: http://traffic.libsyn.com/ftl/FTL2010-11-11.mp3 Her interview is during the last hour.

    Reply
  15. When people strap bombs to their person and blow themselves and others up.

    Strike at the root and work to end foreign occupation of land not some nonsense about not flying.

    Reply
  16. "As expected, the trolls will be marching on in"

    So when Meg questions the TSA she's lauded for 'standing up to those coercive liars' but when people in turn question her story (which seems to have some legitimate reasons to be questioned) they are called trolls? Nice double-standard you've got going there.

    Reply
  17. holy_canole, having a conversation with you on the internet is the biggest waste of time I can think of. Seriously, I don't care what you have to say. I know you'll reply to this–and why I'm replying to you now is beyond me–but nothing can be gained from conversing with you.

    Reply
  18. Done STRICTLY for the attention, as was stated, "I have received national media attention,"

    My neighbour's cat gets attention by dropping a load in the hallway.

    You disrespectful lot have NO APPRECIATION for those that died or were injured, just so you can have the access to spread your bullshit.

    You have the collosal nerve to mock all those that love our country, and gave their lives so you can be the fools you are.

    YOU DISGUSTING LOSERS!!!!!!!!!!

    Reply
  19. I doubt she was handcuffed, last night she said she was handcuffed for a couple minutes. You would think the first thing she would do would be to watch the TSA videos so she would have a fresh memory and be able to make a clear argument about what was missing and left out, but she said she only watched a small part of it. None of it makes sense.

    Reply
  20. This is just the same as all 'freekeene' BS. It isn't about anything that actually happened. It's about saying that something happened, and trying to get as much media play as possible. Just look at what the blog posts are :"Meg is the #2 Hottest Topic on the Internet!!"; "Meg in the Media!". The story isn't about what actually happened or didn't happen. God forbid if the truth were to actually come out. The story is all about "Look at me, I'm a media sensation".

    Reply
  21. Mandrik,

    Not surprised to see that you ignored the double standard I pointed out and decided simply to throw around some insults.

    I would expect similar responses from most people on here, though, so you're not alone.

    Reply
  22. david,

    I actually agree with you on that. Ian and Sam have both admitted to me that a lot of what they do isn't really focused on promoting peace, it's just focused on promoting. There's some merit to the idea that you need to get your stories heard, but I think they cross the line, seeing as what they (and others) report and how they report it is usually incredibly biased and often blown out of proportion–as with this case with Meg.

    Many of her claims have shown to be, at the very least, sensationalized. Unfortunately, the damage has already been done for the most part (in that her original claims are the ones that are sticking, despite their falsehoods). It's easier to ask for forgiveness than for permission.

    Reply
  23. >"Done STRICTLY for the attention, as was stated, “I have received national media attention,"

    Nice non sequitur,

    >"My neighbour’s cat gets attention by dropping a load in the hallway."

    That's pleasant, though irrelevant.

    >"You disrespectful lot have NO APPRECIATION for those that died or were injured, just so you can have the access to spread your bullshit."

    Disrespectful? Those that died or were injured? Clearly, you are talking about the sainted troops, aka the enforcement arm of the government, aka the actual guns of government, aka murderers and murder enablers, aka welfare whores. Yeah, I disrespect them. Fuck the cunts.

    >"You have the collosal (sic) nerve to mock all those that love our country, and gave their lives so you can be the fools you are.

    >YOU DISGUSTING LOSERS!!!!!!!!!!"

    Given these statements, can there really be any confusion about why people like me think that people like you are cult members (the Cult of the State)? Note the religious, particularly messianic, language you used. Note also the vitriol and anger, just like religious adherents when they encounter a heretic who regards their religion as rubbish.

    If the troops really are charged with preserving freedom, and they sacrifice their health and lives to that end, then they are abysmally bad at their jobs, since freedom in America has been eroding at a dramatic rate, even in my relatively short life.

    Reply
  24. Let's also not forget that the emf or xray radiation from the "naked body scanners" is hazardous to your health, and the hazards are being lied about. I recently had the opportunity to go through a scanner – the TSA screener simply said "Now you go in here" without any notification of where I was going. I asked if it was a body scanner and he nodded. I said "I'm sorry, I can't go in there," and he yelled "Opt Out!" as described by Meg, and screeners all over the security area also all took up the call. This is obviously to bring attention to the miscreant who doesn't want to comply. I was taken to an area in plain view of everyone in the security area for the invasive pat down.

    Additionally, don't forget that Michael Chertoff represented a body scanner company prior to the (I think OBVIOUSLY) false-flag "Underpants Bomber" incident. Abdulmutallab – now in prison forever – is a small sacrifice to the ongoing program of social engineering.

    Reply
  25. So one of the strategies I have been told would be employed in a 'free society' is boycotting businesses that don't adhere to what people believe to be 'liberty principles.' If you go to an airport, you know full well the chances you are taking of being selected for random searches like this. If you don't like the idea of that, then why would you go there and put yourself at that risk in the first place?

    Reply
  26. Sorry Meg, but whining that you were traumatized is not responsive. You don't like the scrutiny on the details, but these were details you provided. What did you really expect would happen?

    I don't like TSA or its procedures either, but the reality right now is that the security screening process is a requirement to get on the plane. If I understand this you opted out of the scanners (understandable) but also questioned the pat down. TSA may have been obnoxious, but in the end we all either go through the security screening or we don't fly. If it's that big a deal then get on Amtrak or Greyhound until the rules change.

    Reply
  27. We’re raising money for this woman because she was too dumb to keep it moving through security at a U.S. airport?

    Reply
  28. In a free society, HC, meg could choose to patronize airline that has security policies she considers reasonable. Unfortunately, your violent gang you call "the federal government" has monopolized airline security, and prohibited competition, just as they do with so many industries. But hey, HC, you get to jam your preferences down your neighbor's throats, on threat of violence, so it's all good.

    those that love our country

    I love this country. I think you mean those that love this government.

    and gave their lives so you can be the fools you are.

    Wow, you've really been hitting the government propaganda a little hard there lately. How is running around invading third world countries and killing people at the whim of politicians somehow protecting my freedom — especially when those same politicians are the greatest ongoing threat to my freedom?

    It's funny how people like you and HC consistently support the destruction of freedom, and total government control over everyone's life and property, but yet suddenly spout "freedom" rhetoroic on cue, like some sort of trained apparatchik, when it comes to the troops.

    You're no friend or defender of freedom or liberty. Kindly stop sullying and cheapening those words by using them as just another empty phrase uttered for the purposes of worshiping the state.

    Reply
  29. We’re raising money for this woman because she was too dumb to keep it moving through security at a U.S. airport?

    No, because she stood up for people's right to travel without being photographed nude or groped by government thugs.

    For all the "freedom" rhetoric Americans spout, we sure have become a bunch of pathetic sheep. The revolutionaries stood up to the british over a few percentage points of tax, and now we'll tolerate government strip searches in order to travel. It's sickening, saddening, and pathetic.

    Reply
  30. The scanning bit I get, fine, but "groped by government thugs?" What? Really? Are she and you and I all living in the same time-space continuum here? Bc I really just want to live in a world where no one searches anyone for anything at airports, or at least a world that doesn't search white girls wearing t-shirts.

    Reply
  31. Paul,

    Yup, the government currently controls most air travel security. How does that change the fact that if people don't like it they shouldn't use it?

    Reply
  32. Also, Paul, re: 29, it's almost as if in a free society, she could simply have elected to take a train. Funny thing is, she could have done that in reality as well.

    Reply
  33. The scanning bit I get, fine, but “groped by government thugs?” What? Really?

    Yes, that's what happens if you refuse the nudie scan.

    Are she and you and I all living in the same time-space continuum here?

    Yes, I'm just calling a spade a spade. If some random individual walked up to a stranger and felt up their breasts or genitals they'd be in jail, but slap a badge on them and suddenly it's not groping, it's "procedure".

    That's a good analogy for how government in general is working these days, actually. Mugging your neighbor and giving the cash to your buddies lands you in jail, unless you slap a badge and government sanction on it, and then suddenly it's "bailouts".

    Bc I really just want to live in a world where no one searches anyone for anything at airports, or at least a world that doesn’t search white girls wearing t-shirts.

    Just make security the business of the individual airlines again. Personally, I just want my airline to lock the cabin door and arm the pilot, but if you'd want to go on the airline that does cavity searches of everyone, in order to make yourself feel safer, go for it.

    At least we'd have the freedom to choose, rather than one size fits all government "solutions" rammed down our throats.

    Reply
  34. MEG REPORDEDLY BLEEDING FROM PRIVATE PARTS AT TSA SCREENING… Live updates on the hour.
    Should we make up any more fictional accounts of what actually happened?

    Reply
  35. If your counter-argument is going to rely on, you know, hoping that I've never actually been through an airport before, I'm not quite sure what to say.

    The moral of your story otherwise seems to be that, uh, you don't want the government to grope you, because you'd prefer that a profit-seeking entity grope you? Your fetish is rubbish.

    Reply
  36. Also, Paul, re: 29, it’s almost as if in a free society, she could simply have elected to take a train. Funny thing is, she could have done that in reality as well.

    Neither you nor the government has a right to impose arbitrary diktats on other people's lives and property, and then act as if the fact that alternatives exist (at cost of money and time) makes it ok.

    Why not put the scanners on trains too. People could drive after all. Why not require them for driving? People could walk. Why not put them in grocery stores? People could go to the farmers market. Why not put them outside people's front doors? They could stay inside.

    The fact that a person could theoretically reconfigure their life to avoid a particular government violation of their rights doesn't make that violation ok — and again, the fact that we as americans are using logic like this is absolutely revolting.

    Reply
  37. The moral of your story otherwise seems to be that, uh, you don’t want the government to grope you, because you’d prefer that a profit-seeking entity grope you? Your fetish is rubbish.

    No, I want private property rights respected, which would allow the possibility of alternatives. I'm confident that an airline could find plenty of business catering to people who haven't been terrified by government scaremongering about a few dirt poor peasants an ocean away — or people that recognize the risk of dying in a terrorist attack is far lower than the risk of dying in an auto accident on the way to the airport.

    Instead, the government, as usual, destroys freedom by imposing its one size fits all solution on everyone.

    Reply
  38. You do know that if the TSA didn't exist then the airlines would be probably doing even more involved and thorough security screening since you know people could actually successfully sue them.

    Reply
  39. "The fact that a person could theoretically reconfigure their life to avoid a particular government violation of their rights doesn’t make that violation ok — and again, the fact that we as americans are using logic like this is absolutely revolting."

    Wait. But this is exactly the logic you, and others are using to predict what will happen with 'corrupt businesses' in a 'free society.' Is it only acceptable when *you* want it to be because it promotes *your* ideals?

    Reply
  40. And yet truly we *don't* live in a society of body scanners at grocery stores, despite all of the natural precursors. It must be some sort of reality-based glitch.

    Reply
  41. Yup, the government currently controls most air travel security. How does that change the fact that if people don’t like it they shouldn’t use it?

    Tell you what, let's put a nudie scanner in front of your front door. Which would be your response:

    1. You'd object to this invasion of your privacy, and work to point out and end the abuse.

    2. You'd happily conclude that since you don't like government control of outdoor security, you shouldn't use the outdoors

    Here's a radical idea: Free people have a right to travel without submitting themselves and their kids to whatever abuse your politicians and goons feel like perpetrating on them. You don't own them, the airlines, or the sky, so why don't you and your gang stop acting like it, mmkay?

    Reply
  42. And yet truly we *don’t* live in a society of body scanners at grocery stores, despite all of the natural precursors. It must be some sort of reality-based glitch.

    Give it time. 15 years ago if you told people you'd have to be photographed naked by government agents, or have your genitals touched, to fly, you'd have been considered insane.

    If people like you keep acting as apologists for whatever tyranny the government feels like dishing out, we'll be there before you know it.

    Reply
  43. "Here’s a radical idea: Free people have a right to travel without submitting themselves and their kids to whatever abuse your politicians and goons feel like perpetrating on them."

    Yup, they do. They have the right to travel however they choose. If they choose to travel with the airlines, they choose to adhere to the rules already in place. Feel free to travel another way if you want. Or get your pilot's license.

    Reply
  44. Well, at least we've squeezed an acknowledgement that people have "rights" to commercial services — commercial services that intersect with national security apparatus, no less.

    Reply
  45. Wait. But this is exactly the logic you, and others are using to predict what will happen with ‘corrupt businesses’ in a ‘free society.’ Is it only acceptable when *you* want it to be because it promotes *your* ideals?

    I don't support any violation of people's rights. What are you smoking?

    Reply
  46. God, if the government starts arresting people for murder, next thing you know, the government will start arresting people for reading Nicholas Sparks novels.

    Reply
  47. Well, at least we’ve squeezed an acknowledgement that people have rights to commercials services — commercial services that intersect with national security apparatus, no less.

    I don't have a right to the service, but I do have a right to contract for that service with a willing provider, without a third party, like a federal goon squad, coming in and imposing their preferences.

    It's really not rocket science. If my neighbor wants to sell me a ride to work, does that mean you, as a third party, have a right to come in and force me to let you feel me up?

    Reply
  48. God, if the government starts arresting people for murder, next thing you know, the government will start arresting people for reading Nicholas Sparks novels.

    Arresting someone for murder is defense. Any of us would have a right to stop such a person, who has harmed, or is harming others.

    Forcing your neighbor to undergo nude photos or groping in order to fly is aggression, not defense. They haven't harmed anyone. It's also a violation of their property rights, and those of the airline.

    Reply
  49. "I don’t support any violation of people’s rights. What are you smoking?"

    That's not what I was referring to. You said: "The fact that a person could theoretically reconfigure their life to avoid a particular government violation of their rights doesn’t make that violation ok — and again, the fact that we as americans are using logic like this is absolutely revolting." Yet you also say that, in a free society, people would be able to reconfigure their lives to avoid a particular corrupt business. What's the difference exactly?

    Reply

Care to comment?

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!