Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

EDITORIAL: Big Sister's police state--TSA's tyrannical tactics threaten American freedoms
The Washington Times ^ | November 16, 2010 | Editorial

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 ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: bigsister; napolitano; patdowns; tsa; tsapervs
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-42 next last
To: AmericanInTokyo

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.


21 posted on 11/16/2010 6:02:17 PM PST by GunsAndBibles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Janet Napolitano, lesbian, liberal, abusing a position of power...

Janet Reno, lesbian, liberal, abusing a position of power...

Coincidence? I think NOT!


22 posted on 11/16/2010 6:04:05 PM PST by Judith Anne (Holy Mary, Mother of God, please pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

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.


23 posted on 11/16/2010 6:06:30 PM PST by Doe Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

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.


24 posted on 11/16/2010 6:15:39 PM PST by SpaceBar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Photobucket

25 posted on 11/16/2010 6:29:02 PM PST by Dick Bachert (11/2 was a good start. Onward to '12. U Pubbies be strong or next time we send in the libertarians!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericanInTokyo

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.


26 posted on 11/16/2010 6:29:18 PM PST by buschbaby (~Irritated ~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

The gay guy in line today said he enjoyed his groping today. TSA - Thousands standing around.


27 posted on 11/16/2010 6:30:58 PM PST by ncfool (The new USSA - United Socialst States of AmeriKa. Welcome to Obummers world or Obamaville USSA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

ROFL!!

That’s a keeper!


28 posted on 11/16/2010 6:32:59 PM PST by jazusamo (His [Obama's] political base---the young, the left and the thoughtless: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
Photobucket

29 posted on 11/16/2010 6:36:33 PM PST by Dick Bachert (11/2 was a good start. Onward to '12. U Pubbies be strong or next time we send in the libertarians!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

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.


30 posted on 11/16/2010 6:39:21 PM PST by Dick Bachert (11/2 was a good start. Onward to '12. U Pubbies be strong or next time we send in the libertarians!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes
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.

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.

31 posted on 11/16/2010 6:59:05 PM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

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.


32 posted on 11/16/2010 7:27:34 PM PST by Luke21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Luke21

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.


33 posted on 11/16/2010 9:12:58 PM PST by Georgia Girl 2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes

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.


34 posted on 11/16/2010 9:24:43 PM PST by pacpam (action=consequence and applies in all cases - friend of victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes

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.


35 posted on 11/16/2010 9:24:51 PM PST by pacpam (action=consequence and applies in all cases - friend of victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes

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.


36 posted on 11/16/2010 9:24:52 PM PST by pacpam (action=consequence and applies in all cases - friend of victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: pacpam

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 !!!


37 posted on 11/16/2010 9:30:52 PM PST by TomasUSMC ( FIGHT LIKE WW2, FINISH LIKE WW2. FIGHT LIKE NAM, FINISH LIKE NAM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes
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.

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.

38 posted on 11/16/2010 9:39:39 PM PST by zeugma (Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

Comment #39 Removed by Moderator

To: zeugma
The same perverted logic would support a rule rhat required us all to submit to rectal examinations.

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.

40 posted on 11/17/2010 3:42:56 PM PST by Doe Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-42 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson