Daisy Fuentes had to remove her sweater but a woman in a burka did not

Hijinx

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Well Daisy we aren't all ok with that.
It's the TSA catering to Muslims.

For all you know the "lady" in front of you may have been a man.
It's BS to let Antifa run wild wearing masks and to let Muslim wearing Burka's not be identifiable.
But none of our politicians have the balls to make a law to stop it.

The Muslims are using our own Constitution to kill us.
Freedom of religion should not be freedom from recognition.
 
Monello

Monello

Smarter than the average bear
PREMO Member
Muslim woman trumps hispanic woman 3X. The burka adds in another 1.5X to the equation.
 
T

transporter

Well-Known Member
Wow....

So...I don't know if this is possible for the three chuckleheads above...but THINK...for normal human beings it doesn't take much intellectual capacity to figure out why a TSA agent would ask Daisy Fuentes to take off her sweater.

If, for some reason you still can't figure this out (which wouldn't surprise me), go look at the photo she uses on her twitter account.
 
Merlin99

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
transporter said:
Wow....

So...I don't know if this is possible for the three chuckleheads above...but THINK...for normal human beings it doesn't take much intellectual capacity to figure out why a TSA agent would ask Daisy Fuentes to take off her sweater.

If, for some reason you still can't figure this out (which wouldn't surprise me), go look at the photo she uses on her twitter account.
Click to expand...

Once again you miss the point, it's getting embarrassing at this point.
 
Toxick

Toxick

Splat
transporter said:
Wow....

So...I don't know if this is possible for the three chuckleheads above...but THINK...for normal human beings it doesn't take much intellectual capacity to figure out why a TSA agent would ask Daisy Fuentes to take off her sweater.

If, for some reason you still can't figure this out (which wouldn't surprise me), go look at the photo she uses on her twitter account.
Click to expand...



Are you suggesting that the TSA made her take her top off so they could get a better look at her jugs?



First of all, tits look amazing in a sweater. You don't remove the sweater to get a better look. If you're a skeezy perv trying to get your jollies in the TSA line, then you manipulate her into jiggling or putting her arms up or something, while she's still in a sweater.

Secondly, if this sort of thing was happening regularly, we'd have been made aware of it a long time ago. PoundMeToo





If you're trying to say the Burqa wearing person isn't being given preferential treatment because of :jameo: SJW haranguing, then you're a ####ing idiot.
 
This_person

This_person

Well-Known Member
:doh: :bawl:

We appear to have ALL missed the main point here. The TSA should not be asking ANYONE to remove ANYTHING, or be searching through anything, or even be there in the first place.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.​

Unless the TSA agent had a search warrant for Daisy due to probable cause as sworn to in front of a judicial official and the warrant issued said exactly what they were looking for, it was unconstitutional.

Just because a one-time hot chick gets upset because someone ELSE wasn't violated as much as she was is not reason to make the someone else violated more. It's time we called this out for what it is, not how it is applied.
 
Yooper

Yooper

Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
transporter said:
Wow....

So...I don't know if this is possible for the three chuckleheads above...but THINK...for normal human beings it doesn't take much intellectual capacity to figure out why a TSA agent would ask Daisy Fuentes to take off her sweater.

If, for some reason you still can't figure this out (which wouldn't surprise me), go look at the photo she uses on her twitter account.
Click to expand...

In this day and age when we need to be sensitive to the trauma the Patriarchy has inflicted on woman who are challenged with excess body mass in places that cause Neandertal, toxic masculinity, cis-het identifying, both XY and XX chromosomal organisms, but choose a gender that would encourage to assault via stare I cannot believe that you would suggest TSA agents would objectify a woman. That's sexist.

Secondly, that you are suggesting it seems to point to you not being as woke as you claim to be. Off to the reeducation camp for you, Xir! Zoot, alors!

Third, Titiana McGrath would agree. And that's all that matters. She's my poet.

--- End of line (MCP)
 
Toxick

Toxick

Splat
This_person said:
We appear to have ALL missed the main point here. The TSA should not be asking ANYONE to remove ANYTHING, or be searching through anything, or even be there in the first place.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.​
Click to expand...


We haven't missed that point - at least I haven't - although that wasn't really the topic that was on the table from what I gathered. The topic at hand is the apparent double-standard that's being applied. Whether there should be a standard at all is a whole nother* thing.





This_person said:
Unless the TSA agent had a search warrant for Daisy due to probable cause as sworn to in front of a judicial official and the warrant issued said exactly what they were looking for, it was unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

Philosophically, I agree with you - however there's one thing: Flying isn't a Constitutionally protected God-Given right. Nobody is making you fly and airlines are private organizations - by walking into the security line in an airport, you're tacitly submitting to the search, and this is splattered all over the process of buying tickets. So it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone..

If you don't wanna be searched, don't fly.





This_person said:
Just because a one-time hot chick gets upset because someone ELSE wasn't violated as much as she was is not reason to make the someone else violated more. It's time we called this out for what it is, not how it is applied.
Click to expand...


And now the real debate: Are you trying to imply Daisy Fuentes isn't currently smokin' hot. Because, sir - that, my good sir, is the way to find yourself in a violently heated debate, sir.




*I'm using "a whole nother" ironically. In actuality, I boil with seething hatred for that phrase.
 
SamSpade

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
Toxick said:
And now the real debate: Are you trying to imply Daisy Fuentes isn't currently smokin' hot. Because, sir - that, my good sir, is the way to find yourself in a violently heated debate, sir.
Click to expand...

wall-survivor-daisy-fuentes-daisy-fuentes-dresses-cocktail-dresses.jpg

Not bad for 52.
 
This_person

This_person

Well-Known Member
Toxick said:
We haven't missed that point - at least I haven't - although that wasn't really the topic that was on the table from what I gathered. The topic at hand is the apparent double-standard that's being applied. Whether there should be a standard at all is a whole nother* thing.

*I'm using "a whole nother" ironically. In actuality, I boil with seething hatred for that phrase.
Click to expand...

We certainly agree on "a whole nother"! :buddies:

I realize that wasn't the topic, but arguing that it is being applied by a wrong standard is very much like saying, "you murdered your mother wrong - you killed her with a hammer when any good person would have used poison."


Philosophically, I agree with you - however there's one thing: Flying isn't a Constitutionally protected God-Given right. Nobody is making you fly and airlines are private organizations - by walking into the security line in an airport, you're tacitly submitting to the search, and this is splattered all over the process of buying tickets. So it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone..

If you don't wanna be searched, don't fly.
Click to expand...

I agree they're private organizations. If THEY want to search my stuff to allow it on their plane, I'm all for that.

According to the tenth amendment, flying absolutely IS a constitutionally-protected God-given right. At the very least, if we disagree on that point, the tenth amendment tells us that it is NOT in the purview of the federal government to get involved, and if the federal government feels the need to get involved for safety reasons they need to follow the fourth amendment.

That it is not a surprise is not sufficient. It would not be a surprise for an oppressive government to oppress, but that doesn't mean they're not oppressive.

And now the real debate: Are you trying to imply Daisy Fuentes isn't currently smokin' hot. Because, sir - that, my good sir, is the way to find yourself in a violently heated debate, sir.
Click to expand...

There is nothing I find non-smoking-hot about Ms. Fuentes. We have no argument. But, I believe her last job was AFHV - at least, that's the last one I saw. Lots of very pretty women over 50 (my wife among them), but they're not the current crop of actresses in the news. This seems an awful lot like a way to get into the news without joining the poundmetoo. It allows a lot of us to go, "you KNOW why they wanted her sweater off in only a tank top underneath."
 
Toxick

Toxick

Splat
This_person said:
I agree they're private organizations. If THEY want to search my stuff to allow it on their plane, I'm all for that.

According to the tenth amendment, flying absolutely IS a constitutionally-protected God-given right. At the very least, if we disagree on that point, the tenth amendment tells us that it is NOT in the purview of the federal government to get involved, and if the federal government feels the need to get involved for safety reasons they need to follow the fourth amendment.
Click to expand...


Well, I'm going to have to plead ignorance on the inner (and not-so-inner) workings of the TSA and airlines and their relationships with each other. I was (and am) under the impression that although TSA is a federal agency (subsidiary of DHS??) they are working at the behest of the collective body of airlines, and is quasi-subordinate to their role. IOW, THEY are searching your stuff to allow it on their plane.
 
PeoplesElbow

PeoplesElbow

Well-Known Member
I was in love with this woman back in the 90's when she was on MTV and I met her. My question is, who wouldn't want to see her take off her sweater?
 
BOP

BOP

Well-Known Member
transporter said:
Wow....

So...I don't know if this is possible for the three chuckleheads above...but THINK...for normal human beings it doesn't take much intellectual capacity to figure out why a TSA agent would ask Daisy Fuentes to take off her sweater.

If, for some reason you still can't figure this out (which wouldn't surprise me), go look at the photo she uses on her twitter account.
Click to expand...

Right over your head, numbnuts

:whoosh:
 
O

officeguy

Well-Known Member
Because the TSA agent wanted to see Daisy Fuentes without a sweater and he has no interest to see the lady with the burqa. That's why.




If this incident is not freely invented, it points to misconduct by the TSA agent who told her to take off her sweater. You don't have to take off a sweater, only jackets or coats.
 
This_person

This_person

Well-Known Member
Toxick said:
Well, I'm going to have to plead ignorance on the inner (and not-so-inner) workings of the TSA and airlines and their relationships with each other. I was (and am) under the impression that although TSA is a federal agency (subsidiary of DHS??) they are working at the behest of the collective body of airlines, and is quasi-subordinate to their role. IOW, THEY are searching your stuff to allow it on their plane.
Click to expand...

As you say, TSA is a federal agency. Regardless of who is asking them to do it, a federal agency is searching your stuff and you, and establishing the rules.

Airlines could certainly do that, with the ones who do less losing the passengers that think safety is better than freedom, and gaining the passengers that think freedom is better than safety. In my humble opinion, that's the way it should work. Regardless - if every airline banded together and they all searched EXACTLY the same way TSA does, it would be a choice between me and a private agency on my using their service as they do it, not a non-choice between me and government where government is unconstitutionally searching (and seizing my stuff if they don't like it) with no warrant, no probable cause, and doing so because I choose to interact with a private agency.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top