Posted on 11/16/2010 5:35:57 PM PST by jazusamo
The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has crossed the line. As if subjecting millions of Americans to X-rated x-ray scans and public groping sessions weren't bad enough, the agency now threatens $11,000 in fines against anyone refusing to submit to humiliation at the airport.
Oceanside, Calif., resident John Tyner found this out after he posted on YouTube a video of his degrading encounter with TSA screeners. Mr. Tyner's catchy phrase, "If you touch my junk, I'll have you arrested," spread quickly, thanks to attention provided by the Drudge Report. TSA was not amused, and an official announced Monday that Mr. Tyner faces punishment for leaving the airport without submitting to the high-tech or low-tech molestation options.
The term is not used lightly. Under 18 U.S. Code Section 2244, " 'sexual contact' means the intentional touching, either directly or through the clothing, of the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh or buttocks of any person with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade." It's no coincidence that TSA initiated sexual-contact pat-downs after fliers began to refuse the pornographic scanners. There can be no question that when threats of civil punishment are used to ensure compliance, those encounters with the TSA lose their status as a voluntary transaction. It's even more outrageous that these unnecessary searches are being conducted on children.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
My most sinister thoughts tell me that this is an effort by the government to CONDITION the populace to COMPLY with instructions given by government agents. Testing the waters.
Janet Napolitano, lesbian, liberal, abusing a position of power...
Janet Reno, lesbian, liberal, abusing a position of power...
Coincidence? I think NOT!
I don’t think anyone would be blaming Obama if we stopped using this technology and a terrorist with a bomb slipped through, destroyed an aircraft, killing all on board.
I have it on good authority (retired successful attorney) that the notion of “signing away your rights” e.g. waiving the right to seek damages for a tort against you is basically a crock, and the American public have been duped into thinking any piece of paper they sign to that effect holds legal weight. If you for example sign a waver that supposedly indemnifies an auto wrecker if you get injured or killed on their property, and a car falls and crushes you to death and it really was negligence on the part of the property owner, that waiver isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on, yet they (on the advice of lawyers) put it in there in authoritative sounding legalese to discourage lawsuits and intimidate injured parties.
What I keep remembering was the Libs throwing a hissy fit over the Patriot Act. That targeted known or suspected terrorist. Now they are targeting everyone who flies with a far more intrusive violation of privacy and we hear crickets from the left. Amazing hypocrisy.
The gay guy in line today said he enjoyed his groping today. TSA - Thousands standing around.
ROFL!!
That’s a keeper!
I believe it was the EARLY Romans who prohibited several classes of people from holding public office: Those of illegitimate birth (bastards), eunuchs and homosexuals. (That unfortunately changed leading up to the fall.)
While these children had no choice in the matter, bastards were prohibited because, having no sense of their family past or history, they could not be trusted to operate for the good of the culture based on its history or traditions.
Eunuchs (castrated males) and homosexuals because they could not and/or would not sire children and would, therefore, most likely have no abiding interest in preserving the culture for future generations.
While there are a number of exceptions, I’ll let YOU tell me what sort of folks we have in public office HERE today.
You have got to be kidding.
You do know that the Obama regime has EXEMPTED muslim women wearing burkhas from the pornoscanner, and has restricted their pat-downs to the head and neck area only?
This is political correctness taken to the extremes of insanity. It's MUSLIMS who are blowing up airliners and committing terrorist acts, for Pete's sake!
Stripping ordinary Americans of their 4th Amendment freedom from unreasonable search and seizure isn't the answer to securing airline travel. Profiling for the established markers of terrorists is the answer.
Just ask the Israelis. They've been doing it that way for a very long time, and their airlines are arguably the safest in the world.
If the A.C.L.U. wasn’t a communist front group they would be all over this. The press gives them write ups for opposing it, but the legal arm, the real power of the organization, never gets involved.
Beware of powerful lesbians named Janet.
It pains me to stick up for the ACLU but they contacted the “don’t touch my junk” guy and offered him legal assistance. He said so on Alex Jones today. I was shocked.
If CAIR prevails, Muslim women don’t get searched and there is a successful attack -
That scenerio seems rather obvious and I for one do not want someone to blame, I want it stopped before it happens.
If CAIR prevails, Muslim women don’t get searched and there is a successful attack -
That scenerio seems rather obvious and I for one do not want someone to blame, I want it stopped before it happens.
If CAIR prevails, Muslim women don’t get searched and there is a successful attack -
That scenerio seems rather obvious and I for one do not want someone to blame, I want it stopped before it happens.
NEW LAW FOR THE NEW GOP CONTROLLED HOUSE.
NO BERKHAS ON PLANES. PERIOD. DON’T EVEN GET IN LINE. DON’T BUY YOUR TICKET ONLINE. IF YOU WANT TO GET ON THE PLANE, TAKE YOUR BERKHA OFF !!!
The same perverted logic would support a rule rhat required us all to submit to rectal examinations. After all, if you didn't do it, when the technology is available, then whatever happens is because the pervs don't have complete free reign.
There is always at least one in the crowd that will cheer the advance of the police state.
So because you object to invasive inspections now in space, the full body "x-ray" and the pat downs, and as a result, these examinations are removed, (which seems likely) you would still hold our government responsible for a terrorist attack that would have been prevented by these inspections? Just making sure.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.