Able bodied ordinary heroes have prevented the last couple o attempts, and Bury aint happy bout it either (/snappy head finger tude)!
Thank God, I no longer fly in the USSA, and have not since Jan 05.
I just had a terrible thought.
Imagine an underwear bomber type that just goes into the airport for a flight and the “grope” sets off his bomb that blows away all those waiting for the flight.
I have a TWIC Card Credential. Transportation worker ID. I had to have a full FBI Security check of my background to get it. Yep they still want to see me naked and grab my crotch. The Federal Government is over the edge out of control.
So we destroy the airline industry because moslems have rights too?
“If you don’t like it, don’t take the train. After all, rail travel is no more a right than air travel. The bus system could come next.”
Now you know why the Left wants to push public transportation.
Haven’t heard a peep from the airlines over this fiasco. As for rail lines, terrorists don’t need to ride a train to disrupt train travel or rail cargo.
“Before you jump out of line and into your car, however, be warned that you can be fined up to $11,000 for changing your mind at the airport. After all, we wouldn’t want terrorists with hand grenades walking away from the screening area when they realize that all the rumors about metal detectors and such are true. If you’re going to take Secretary Napolitano’s advice, be sure you opt not to fly before you reach the airport.”
At what point do I have the right to NOT engage in commerce? I have never read the fine print on “purchasing” a plane ticket.
Does TSA have Law Enforcement Powers? What are they?
Mobility in any culture is a value. Based upon the time-place aspect of economics when you take away mobility you take away value. That’s exactly what has happened here. And the terrorists (with our own goverment’s inadvertent help) are using competetive strategies to accomplish their goals.
I think that Zero and his minions are attempting to steer us in the direction of “we had better shut up or they will only make it harder on us”. I suggest that we go the other direction and take a page out of the Alinsky handbook. From Rules for Radicals “The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength.”
A dash of Alinsky and spoonful of MLK will result in useful disruption. While it is still legal, why not have a national go the airport day? Parking lots will overflow, traffic will back up and toilet paper will run out in the non secure areas.
Jan the Man and Boy Wonder will overreact. Many airports have more than one point of entry. All will have to be policed to determine if the people have any reason to go to the airport. Many people with a legitimate reason to be at the airport will be turned away due to arrogance of the gatekeepers and traffic will back up. Some will say that a tactic like this will delay millions of people. Well that is true. But the value of exposing just how much control these liberals are willing to take from citizens may be worth it.
There is already talk of installing scanners on rail stations, subways, buses, and malls.
But don’t worry comrade! It is for your own good!
Welcome to demonrat Amerika! Now that the pleasantries are over...
Up against the wall, citizen. Your rights are what we tell you they are:
You have the right to shut the 'F' up, spread and submit.
Federal law establishes a right to air travel.
See 49 U.S.C. § 40103 : US Code - Section 40103: Sovereignty and use of airspace, section (a)(2): "A citizen of the United States has a public right of transit through the navigable airspace."
Hat tip to Lazamataz for this tidbit.
The U.S. Supreme Court has weighed in on our right to travel in general. See U.S. vs Guest. It's pretty unequivocal. The phrase "and other instrumentalities" is particularly important in this particular topic.
The District Court was in error in dismissing the indictment as to this paragraph. The constitutional right to travel from one State to another, and necessarily to use the highways and other instrumentalities of interstate commerce in doing so, occupies a position fundamental to the concept of our Federal Union. It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized.
Empasis mine. There are several other excellent references and quotes in the opinion.
In Edwards v. California, 314 U.S. 160 , invalidating a California law which impeded the free interstate passage of the indigent, the Court based its reaffirmation of the federal right of interstate travel upon the Commerce Clause. This ground of decision was consistent with precedents firmly establishing that the federal commerce [383 U.S. 745, 759] power surely encompasses the movement in interstate commerce of persons as well as commodities. Gloucester Ferry Co. v. Pennsylvania, 114 U.S. 196, 203 ; Covington & Cincinnati Bridge Co. v. Kentucky, 154 U.S. 204, 218 -219; Hoke v. United States, 227 U.S. 308, 320 ; United States v. Hill, 248 U.S. 420, 423 . It is also well settled in our decisions that the federal commerce power authorizes Congress to legislate for the protection of individuals from violations of civil rights that impinge on their free movement in interstate commerce. Mitchell v. United States, 313 U.S. 80 ; Henderson v. United States, 339 U.S. 816 ; Boynton v. Virginia, 364 U.S. 454 ; Atlanta Motel v. United States, 379 U.S. 241 , Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U.S. 294 .
Although there have been recurring differences in emphasis within the Court as to the source of the constitutional right of interstate travel, there is no need here to canvass those differences further. 16 All have agreed that the right exists. Its explicit recognition as one of the federal rights protected by what is now 18 U.S.C. 241 goes back at least as far as 1904. United States v. Moore, 129 F. 630, 633. We reaffirm it now. 17Although there have been recurring differences in emphasis within the Court as to the source of the constitutional right of interstate travel, there is no need here to canvass those differences further. 16 All have agreed that the right exists. Its explicit recognition as one of the federal rights protected by what is now 18 U.S.C. 241 goes back at least as far as 1904. United States v. Moore, 129 F. 630, 633. We reaffirm it now. 17 [383 U.S. 745, 760] [383 U.S. 745, 760]
Freeper AndyJackson points us to this...
18 USC §241. Conspiracy against rights
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death
18 USC § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
I'm going to try to build on this a bit as time goes by.
As an aside, now that the Supreme Court has clarified for the ignorant that the 2nd Amendment is a personal right acknowledged by the Constitution. You could make a fairly strong case for insisting you be allowed to carry a firearm aboard an aircraft with you.
Oh, and Janet, I'm probably already on your list. Cross check with the FBI. They know who Zeugma is.
