Anyone that's flying on Wednesday.

[Telarus]

In saw a surprisingly refreshing opinion piece on the TSA from (what appear to be the quite liberal anchorwomen of ) KGW Channel 8 News. Aside from the completely anti-TSA attitude ("BTW, we contacted TSA to join us for this interview and they blew us off *sharp look at the camera*."), they key piece was an interview with some older guy with one of the actual 'orgs' protesting this.

New lady: So why are you protesting here. PDX airport doesn't even have these X-Ray machines.

Dude from Org: Well, we're here to spread information and to educate. Yadda yadda.

...later....

News Lady: Don't you think that if there are travel delays that it will just make the travelers at the airports angry at the protesters?

Duse from Org: I don't expect travel delays this week. Currently, only 10-15 percent of the major airports even have the X-Ray Backscatter machines. So I don't think it'll be much of a problem. At least, not this time.



TSA calling this a "win" is very much marketing.

[Jasper]

It's a win because they got a memo from the white house giving them carte blance to whip out the patriot act on anyone who resists.

Chalk another one up to the spiders.  Opposition crushed.

[hooplala]

Remington's article is very grave news.  Anybody who opts out, ever, can be considered a domestic "extremist", aka terrorist.  Says the PRESIDENT.

It was probably inevitable that it would come to this.  Your citizens don't behave the way you want them to?  Brand them as terrorists.  Simple.

[Richter]

It was probably inevitable that it would come to this.  Your citizens don't behave the way you want them to?  Brand them as terrorists.  Simple.

Well, a group of unempowered citizens enountered action by the government that they wanted to address by causing problems through unconventional means, and thereby garner media attention for their cause.

[Cramulus]

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/tsa-administrative-directive-opt-outters-to-be-considered-domestic-extremists_11242010



Non-confirmed, but it fits with the TSA.

oh my fucking god

[Cain]

The logic is rather elegant, actually:

TSA groping and ritual humiliation is necessary to combat terrorism.
The anti-TSA protestors wish to remove these necessary methods.
In this zero-sum struggle, hindering the TSA ends up abetting terrorists.
Aiding and abetting terrorism can be considered a crime, such as materially supporting terrorist groups.
In recent years, the law has not distinguished between terrorists who engage in violence and the various support networks behind them.
Therefore, TSA protestors are terrorists.
As they are not wearing uniforms or acting under a formal chain of command, they are unlawful combatants.
Therefore, Obama can have them assassinated.

[hooplala]

Hail Eris.

[Telarus]

All Hail Discordia.


Well, It's either that, or they're trying to make us all into sexually traumatized sleeper agents. Shit, if they start playing THE WIZARD OF OZ on domestic flights, I''ma crap my pance.

[Requia ☣]

On the plus side, this ought to shut up anybody who still think that Obama is on their side.   

[hooplala]

Woman wears a bikini to LAX: http://www.nbclosangeles.com/traffic/transit/Traffic-LAX-holiday-travel-thanksgiving-110384004.html?dr

[Cain]

On the plus side, this ought to shut up anybody who still think that Obama is on their side.   

I havent even looked at The New Republic in the past month, but I'm pretty sure Marty Peretz and the op-ed squad over there are cheering this on.  They have to show how "serious" and "concerned"* they are about terrorism, after all.

*I'm pretty sure this word, in this context, is short for "concern-trolling".  Not by design, but that's how it normally turns out.

[Requia ☣]

Remington's article is very grave news.  Anybody who opts out, ever, can be considered a domestic "extremist", aka terrorist.  Says the PRESIDENT.

Oh no, you don't have to opt out.  Simply objecting to the whole process is enough to do the trick.  Congratulations, you're a terrorist!

I'm most concerned about the 'alternative media' bit.  This is basically a full scale announcement that the first ammendment is gone.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Can someone cut & paste, for the nannywall-impaired?

[Cain]

the shtfplan.com site one, you mean?

I'm trying, but I cannot even get the page to load currently.

[hooplala]

Can someone cut & paste, for the nannywall-impaired?

If the information recently acquired by Doug Hagmann of Northeast Intelligence Network is accurate, then something really big is happening in America right now - and it's most certainly not a step towards individual liberty.

According to Mr. Hagmann, he was contacted by a source within the DHS who provided an alarming memo detailing a new administrative directive agreed upon by DHS chief Janet Napolitano and the head of TSA John Pistole. The memo, according to Doug Hagmann, "officially addresses those who are opposed to, or engaged in the disruption of the implementation of the enhanced airport screening procedures as 'domestic extremists'."

The memo leaves no doubt as to who, exactly, is leading the charge to label Americans who refuse current security measures due to health and privacy concerns as extremists. "The measures to be taken in response to the negative public backlash as detailed [in this directive], have the full support of the President," it says.

Under the new labeling procedures, those who choose to opt-out or are perceived as being troublemakers will be detained, questioned and processed for further investigation:

The terminology contained within the reported memo is indeed troubling. It labels any person who "interferes" with TSA airport security screening procedure protocol and operations by actively objecting to the established screening process, "including but not limited to the anticipated national opt-out day"  as a "domestic extremist." The label is then broadened to include "any person, group or alternative media source" that actively objects to, causes others to object to, supports  and/or elicits support for anyone who engages in such travel disruptions at U.S. airports in response to the enhanced security procedures.

For individuals who engaged in such activity at screening points, it instructs TSA operations to obtain the identities of those individuals and other applicable information and submit the same electronically to the Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division, the Extremism and Radicalization branch of the Office of Intelligence & Analysis (IA) division of the Department of Homeland Security.

The United States government, under complete control and direction of our elected President, is now actively labeling anyone who exercises their 4th amendment Constitutional right which protects against warrantless and unreasonable searches and seizures as, essentially, engaging in terrorism as defined by Section 802 of the USA Patriot Act:

Section 802 [USA Patriot Act]

(a) DOMESTIC TERRORISM DEFINED- Section 2331 of title 18, United States Code, is amended–
'(5) the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that–
'(B) appear to be intended–
'(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
'(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

Though it may seem a broad interpretation, the definitions for domestic terrorism are very vague, allowing for a variety of views depending on who happens to be making the decisions. The very fact that TSA is allegedly going to label opt-out travelers as 'domestic extremists' suggest that they are, by today's standards, considered no different than terrorists - and thus - may have their Constitutional rights stripped and be held without trial. In a previous article we discussed Matt Kernan, who may have found a Constitutional argument that works to avoid enhanced security in the airport. But, what if the-powers-that-be determined, by whatever vague definition, that the Constitution doesn't apply?

With the outrage from American travelers and the pressure being put on corporate profits, the President and TSA may eventually change their tune. But if they don't, then we can expect more intrusive checkpoints from our government in the very near future. Ms. Napolitano has already publicly stated that DHS is looking at other mass transit systems like buses and trains as the next target.

Something big is happening. And either the American people are going to force the change - starting with each individual making a personal decision to stand up against policies that can be described as nothing less than tyrannical - or the expansion of surveillance and control systems will continue to spread.

If the American people fail this time as we did with bailouts and healthcare, the end result will be backscatter machines in schools, malls, stadiums, and any other public venue which is deemed a security threat by our government.