UPDATE OCT 2011: TSA gaterape for every motorist on Tennessee highways
UPDATE MAY 2011: Secret TSA backscatter radiation safety tests were rigged
UPDATE JAN 2011: Red Dog APD Unit Investigated And Settle Lawsuits Over Public Strip Searches
Dragonater Note: I discussed this on my radio show yesterday, with an elderly female caller who wants a massive police state to shut down transportation at Deals Gap. I told her she can go to McGhee Tyson airport and be a porn star or get her vagina petted and her boobies squeezed. Bloody tampons look like sticks of dynomite in TSA's X-ray naked body scanners...
The sheeple will get exactly what they want. Three days after my radio broadcast on WBCR 1470 am, TSA announced that McGhee Tyson will get the kosher Israeli pedophile RAPEscan TM naked body scanners, thanks to Al Qaeda Dictator Saddam Hussein Obama Bin Laden. Note that all dissenting comments are banned forever by WATETV.com PR propaganda service, including The Dragonater.
This is why The Dragonater always carries a declassified copy of Pentagon's OPERATION NORTHWOODS when flying by airline, along with an explanation by ABC News... OPERATION GLADIO is another useful carry-on.
TSA pedophiles joke about raping children
A Flickr photo shows a computer in a TSA airport office with a desktop image of a satirical book entitled “My First Cavity Search.” Our photo and Photoshop experts have examined the image and believe that it is real. Infowars.com is currently attempting to contact the Flickr photographer to establish if the image is real.
Congress may be squeamish about anal cavity searches, but if the photo below is indeed real, employees at the TSA consider this most humiliating form of molestation to be a laughing matter, especially when conducted on children.
As the neocon Jeffrey Goldberg wrote in late October, the TSA considers the backscatter scanners and the “opt-out” manual search comical. Goldberg asked a TSA officer if the new Department of Homeland Security guidelines include a cavity search. “No way. You think Congress would allow that?” the TSA employee responded.
For the First Time, the TSA Meets Resistance to It's "Dick-Measuring Device"
At BWI, I told the officer who directed me to the back-scatter that I preferred a pat-down. I did this in order to see how effective the manual search would be. When I made this request, a number of TSA officers, to my surprise, began laughing. I asked why. One of them -- the one who would eventually conduct my pat-down -- said that the rules were changing shortly, and that I would soon understand why the back-scatter was preferable to the manual search. I asked him if the new guidelines included a cavity search. "No way. You think Congress would allow that?"
I answered, "If you're a terrorist, you're going to hide your weapons in your anus or your vagina." He blushed when I said "vagina."
"Yes, but starting tomorrow, we're going to start searching your crotchal area" -- this is the word he used, "crotchal" -- and you're not going to like it."
"What am I not going to like?" I asked.
"We have to search up your thighs and between your legs until we meet resistance," he explained.
"Resistance?" I asked.
"Your testicles," he explained.
'That's funny," I said, "because 'The Resistance' is the actual name I've given to my testicles."
He answered, "Like 'The Situation,' that guy from 'Jersey Shore?'"
Yes, exactly, I said. (I used to call my testicles "The Insurgency," but those assholes in Iraq ruined the term.)
I pointed out to the security officer that 50 percent of the American population has no balls (90 percent in Washington, D.C., where I live), so what is going to happen when the pat-down officer meets no resistance in the crotchal area of women? "If there's no resistance, then there's nothing there."
"But what about people who hide weapons in their cavities? I asked. I actually said "vagina" again, just to see him blush. "We're just not going there," he reiterated.
I asked him if he was looking forward to conducting the full-on pat-downs. "Nobody's going to do it," he said, "once they find out that we're going to do."
In other words, people, when faced with a choice, will inevitably choose the Dick-Measuring Device over molestation? "That's what we're hoping for. We're trying to get everyone into the machine." He called over a colleague. "Tell him what you call the back-scatter," he said. "The Dick-Measuring Device," I said. "That's the truth," the other officer responded.
Are any parts of your body sore?" he asks.
"No," I say, instantly regretting that I didn't say, "Yes. My groin. Very sore." Next time.
He feels me up. "Could you widen your stance, please?" he asks.
"Hey, I'm not in the United States Senate!" I say, widening my stance.
His search is fairly half-hearted. He spends more time stroking the back of my tie than he spends between my legs.
I ask, "Do a lot of people opt-out?"
"No, not many."
"People are cows," I say.
"What do you mean?"
"I mean they'll do whatever the federal government tells them to do," I say.
"How come you don't go through the machine?" he asks me.
I give him several more answers than he expected:
1) I prefer to limit my exposure to radiation, which the back-scatter imager produces;
2) I don't think this new technology will stop terrorism;
3) I find the idea of the government taking pictures of my genitalia a discomfiting invasion of privacy;
4) I find the specific pose a person is forced to take inside the machine -- hands up, as in a mugging -- particularly debasing.
"Okay," he says, "have a nice flight."
In addition, the Atlantic’s Goldberg was told by the TSA agent directly that pat downs were made increasingly invasive not for any genuine security reason, but to make the experience so uncomfortable for the traveler that they would prefer to use the body scanner, despite the fact that scientists at Columbia University and the Inter-Agency Committee on Radiation Safety, along with other scientific bodies, have all warned that the devices increase the risk of developing cancer.
In January, the Guardian reported that experts determined that naked body scanner technology violates child protection laws which ban the creation of indecent images of children. The British Department for Transport confirmed that the “child porn” problem was among the “legal and operational issues” under discussion within the government.
Since the introduction of airport scanners, there have been countless complaints regarding privacy issues.
Earlier this year, a TSA employee in Miami was arrested after he physically assaulted a co-worker who had joked about the size of his penis.
In March, a TSA worker who conducted so-called patdowns was charged with multiple child sex crimes targeting an underage girl. “The bust outraged privacy and passenger advocates who say it justifies their fears about Logan International Airport’s full-body scanner,” the Boston Herald reported.
TSA sees bloody tampons in X-ray naked body scans
Raw Story
The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) now admits that airport scanners that can see through clothes to create images of the naked body can also detect sanitary napkins.
New York Times reporter Joe Sharkey wrote that he was getting a lot of question from women who travel in a little noticed article Monday.
"Do the imagers, for example, detect sanitary napkins?" women wanted to know. "Yes," wrote Sharkey.
"Does that then necessitate a pat-down? The T.S.A. couldn’t say. Screeners, the T.S.A. has said, are expected to exercise some discretion."
"And what about tampons?" asked the blog Feminist Peace Network. "They look kind of like sticks of dynamite. Are they going to ask us to pull them out and show them just to be sure?"
Some Americans are outraged at the idea that the TSA has the right to touch their private parts in the pat-down process.
On man trying to board a plane at San Diego International Airport threatened to have a screener arrested.
"If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested," the man, who blogs as Johnny Edge, said to agents.
"I felt what they were doing was a sexual assault, and that if they were anyone but the government, the act would be illegal," Edge wrote.
But travelers may have good reason to avoid the scanners. A group of scientists warned Friday that the scanning process may actually be dangerous.
"They say the risk is minimal, but statistically someone is going to get skin cancer from these X-rays," Dr Michael Love, who runs an X-ray lab at the department of biophysics and biophysical chemistry at Johns Hopkins University school of medicine, told AFP.
"No exposure to X-ray is considered beneficial. We know X-rays are hazardous but we have a situation at the airports where people are so eager to fly that they will risk their lives in this manner," he said.
One website is urging travelers to "opt out" from the body scanners and instead choose to have a pat-down in public view, so that everyone can "see for themselves how the government treats law-abiding citizens."
OptOutDay.com declares November 24 to be the day when air travelers should refuse to submit to a full body scan and choose the enhanced pat-down -- an option many travelers have described as little short of a molestation.
The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg even suggested that travelers forgo underpants and wear kilts so that screeners could share in their embarassment.
Israeli RAPEscan Gamma Ray of Death coming to an airport, shopping mall, ballgame and highway near YOU
Operation Gladio: “NOT ONE TERRORIST IN A HUNDRED….A THOUSAND…..IS REAL”
"...The last time a bomb came into the US, the “terrorist” was personally seated on the plane by an airport security official working for an Israeli company. He was walked around inspections. Why search anyone at all under circumstances like that? The same company manages most of America’s airports too. Have we lost our minds here?"
Flight Attendants Outraged Over Vagina Patdowns, Flights Delayed by Arrests of Flight Attendants for Refusing Naked Body Scanners
Despite a claim by the Transport Security Administration that its employees are not sexually assaulting passengers, a flight attendants union with 2,000 members has voiced its outrage over “invasive pat-downs” recently implemented by the TSA.
Now you too will be a porn star
“We’re getting calls daily about peoples’ experiences, our members are concerned,” Deborah Volpe, Vice President of the Association of Flight Attendants Local 66, told ABC 15 in Phoenix, Arizona. Volpe said the union is offering advice to its flight attendants.
ABC 15 reports that union email informs flight attendants if they opt out of using the body scanner through security and are required to undergo a pat-down to ask the pat-down be conducted in a private area with a witness. “We don’t want them in uniform going through this enhanced screening where their private areas are being touched in public,” said Volpe. “They actually make contact with the genital area.”
In addition to voicing their concern with the union, some flight attendants have contacted the ACLU.
The outrage of flight attendants follows that of commercial pilots who have protested both naked body scanners and intrusive pat-downs. “Pilots are piping mad over the options, saying the full-body scanners emit dangerous levels of radiation and that the alternative public patdown is disgraceful for a pilot in uniform. Some pilots have said they felt so violated after a patdown, they were unfit to fly,” reports ABC News.
Captain Dave Bates, the head of Allied Pilots Association, wrote an email to pilots suggesting they forgo naked body scanners and the humiliation of a public patdown. “In my view, it is unacceptable to submit to one in public while wearing the uniform of a professional airline pilot,” Bates said.
On Monday, the head of the US Airways Pilots Association, Captain Mike Cleary, said the new procedures have both the public and pilots up in arms. “These changes are far reaching, intrusive and have been implemented almost overnight, leaving little time for groups who are adversely affected to form a response,” said Cleary.
He told ABC News about the experience of one U.S. Airways pilot who was so traumatized by a patdown, he is now unable to function as a crewmember. “The words this pilot used to describe the incident included ‘sexual molestation,’ and in the aftermath of trying to recover, this pilot reported that he had literally vomited in his own driveway while contemplating going back to work and facing the possibility of a similar encounter with the TSA,” Cleary said.
The procedures are also a direct violation of the Fourth Amendment. “All this is a gross violation of Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights, of course. It’s also demeaning and (intentionally) humiliating to air travelers. In addition, the use of naked body scanners on children violates child porn laws,” writes Mike Adams of Natural News.
“The TSA, through its groping of passengers and the capturing of their naked body images, is guilty of committing numerous felony crimes. If a security guard at a grocery store, for example, groped little children with his fingers and took ‘naked body scanner’ pictures of customers, he would be arrested as a sex crime offender,” Adams continues. “So why are we letting our own federal government commit sex crimes against us when we’d be thrown in prison for the same lewd behavior?”
Addendum
Meanwhile, the corporate media is engaged in a full court press to convince people they have no choice but to submit to government molestation and/or a pornographic naked body scanner with its dangerous radiation.
On Tuesday, Bill O’Reilly said we have no choice but to submit or “hitchhike.” He said he would submit to a naked body scanner instead of allowing TSA minimum wage goons to grope his genitalia.
Especially disgusting is the reaction of Mafia prosecutor Kimberly Guilfoyle who reacted with indignation that anybody would actually resist submitting to the government.
Pilots Association urges airline pilots to opt out of TSA naked body scanners
In yet another significant blow to the TSA's naked body scanners, the president of the Allied Pilots Association (APA) issued a letter urging all pilots to opt out of the naked body scanners, also known as Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT).
"Backscatter AIT devices now being deployed produce ionizing radiation, which could be harmful to your health," wrote Allied Pilots Association president Dave Bates. He then went on to add:
"We are exposed to radiation every day on the job. For example, a typical Atlantic crossing during a solar flare can expose a pilot to radiation equivalent to 100 chest X-rays per hour. Requiring pilots to go through the AIT [naked body scanner] means additional radiation exposure. I share our pilots' concerns about this additional radiation exposure and plan to recommend that our pilots refrain from going through the AIT. We already experience significantly higher radiation exposure than most other occupations, and there is mounting evidence of higher-than-average cancer rates as a consequence."
He goes on to call for airline pilots to be exempted from security screening.
Air travelers get the same radiation
Air travelers subjecting themselves to the TSA naked body scanners are exposed to the same radiation as pilots who are scanned by those machines, of course. The ionizing radiation emitted by the body scanners is concentrated on the skin, says Dr David Brenner, head of Columbia University's center for radiological research. And it could cause skin cancer in a small but significant number of people who may be susceptible to gene mutations (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...).
Although the amount of radiation emitted by these machines is considerably lower than the radiation received while flying at high altitude, this is "artificial radiation," and by that I mean it is radiation that's focused by a man-made machine rather than propagating as ambient background radiation. And when radiation is focused on a target subject through a man-made machine, things can go wrong. How many medical CT scanners have been found to be mis-calibrated, operating at radiation doses that were orders of magnitude higher than their safe levels? This happens every day in hospitals across the world today, and these CT scanners are operated by professionally-trained radiology experts! (http://www.naturalnews.com/028621_C...)
The APA doesn't want its pilots going through the TSA's naked body scanners precisely because these machines add a radiation burden to your body. And for what? For the illusion of airport security?
Do you realize what kind of intense background checks pilots have to go through in order to fly a passenger airliner? They are subjected to rigorous physical and psychological testing as well as criminal history background checks. Pilots are not a risk to air security. To treat them like terrorists at security checkpoints is a demeaning yet useless waste of taxpayer dollars.
Clearly, the whole point of subjecting pilots to these demeaning pat-downs is to remind them they all live in a police state. It has nothing whatsoever to do with actual security. (Have you ever heard of a PILOT hijacking a passenger airliner in the US?)
And of course that's the whole point of subjecting air travelers to naked body scanners, too: All the sheeple have to be reminded from time to time that they are under the control of government agents. Hence the "you're under arrest" position of the arms that travelers are told to assume when passing through the naked body scanners. This body position, with both hands held over your head, gets the public used to assuming the "I surrender" position when confronted with authority figures. It's really more of a training program to get the public indoctrinated for yet more police state tactics down the road.
Fortunately, more and more people are now opting out of the naked body scans. Sure, they get felt up by TSA agents who grope their crotches, breasts and buttocks (http://www.naturalnews.com/030100_n...), but at least they don't get subjected to yet another dose of ionizing radiation that can contribute to skin cancer.
Don't you find it fascinating, by the way, that the U.S. government tells everybody to avoid tanning salons because they claim "UV radiation promotes skin cancer," yet when it comes to airport security, they want to subject you to a far more harmful wavelength of radiation "for your safety" ? (X-Rays are far more harmful than ultraviolet light.)
I guess radiation is all okay as long as it serves the police state interests of the federal government.
Sources for this story: Aviation Blog
Radio host Meg McLain on FreeTalkLive.com
TSA Orders Naked Body Scan of Hottie Radio Host, Cuffs to Chair, Ticket Torn Up
All Meg McLain wanted to do was catch her flight. Instead, she got caught up in another Transportation Security Administration drama. The young lady dared to opt out of the complete body scanning offered by the TSA.
What happened next is mind-boggling, but true.
Meg McLain Refuses Body Scan, Cuffed To Chair And Had Ticket Torn Up (Video)
Meg McLain, a young radio host, was scheduled to depart from a Fort Lauderdale airport when she was randomly chosen to be body-scanned. Or porn-scanned, as it’s often referred to.
When she refused, the TSA agents began bellowing “Opt-Out, Opt-Out” in a premediated attempt to embarrass her into changing her mind. Who, after all, wants to be the object of close scrutiny in front of many strangers?
Ms. McLain was told she would be subjected to the advanced ‘pat-down’ and started to ask questions, i.e. “what are you going to do to me?”
Apparently she wasn’t given the memo to never question TSA or upset their agents in any way, because they will punish you harshly—-in front of God and everybody.
She was pushed into a chair and handcuffed, ridiculed and had her ticket torn up in front of her face. After tiring of intimidating and humiliating Meg McLain, the half dozen or so agents called in twelve (12) yes, TWELVE—Miami Dade Police officers to escort the young lady off the premises.
You must listen to her story in the video. Be afraid, people, be very afraid.
If you have any thoughts on ‘Meg McLain Refuses Body Scan, Cuffed To Chair And Had Ticket Torn Up’ please leave them in the comment section after the video.
How do you feel about all these security measures—that to date have done nothing to stop terrorism?
I quit flying long ago, and will probably never fly again. No one is going to radiate or grope me as long as I am a law abiding citizen in the USA.
Do we really need our breasts and genitalia fondled by strangers? Have we not been x–rayed and radiated enough?
When, why and how did we allow the TSA to become such bullies?
We can’t profile, but we can physically assault people that have done nothing wrong?
How pathetic.
That’ll be $10,000 and a Grope, Citizen
by mistermix
Here’s a self-told tale of a guy who didn’t want to have his junk X-Rayed or touched by the TSA. He tried to back out of the security line, but the TSA wanted to hold him at the airport:
by John Tyner, software engineer
At this point, I thought it was all over. I began to make my way to the stairs to exit the airport, when I was approached by another man in slacks and a sport coat. He was accompanied by the officer that had escorted me to the ticketing area and Mr. Silva. He informed me that I could not leave the airport. He said that once I start the screening in the secure area, I could not leave until it was completed. Having left the area, he stated, I would be subject to a civil suit and a $10,000 fine. I asked him if he was also going to fine the 6 TSA agents and the local police officer who escorted me from the secure area. After all, I did exactly what I was told. He said that they didn’t know the rules, and that he would deal with them later. They would not be subject to civil penalties. I then pointed to Mr. Silva and asked if he would be subject to any penalties. He is the agents’ supervisor, and he directed them to escort me out. The man informed me that Mr. Silva was new and he would not be subject to penalties, either. He again asserted the necessity that I return to the screening area. When I asked why, he explained that I may have an incendiary device and whether or not that was true needed to be determined. I told him that I would submit to a walk through the metal detector, but that was it; I would not be groped. He told me that their procedures are on their website, and therefore, I was fully informed before I entered the airport; I had implicitly agreed to whatever screening they deemed appropriate. I told him that San Diego was not listed on the TSA’s website as an airport using Advanced Imaging Technology, and I believed that I would only be subject to the metal detector. He replied that he was not a webmaster, and I asked then why he was referring me to the TSA’s website if he didn’t know anything about it. I again refused to re-enter the screening area.
We are all underwear bombers until proven innocent.
Airport staff print out naked photos of passengers, grab boobs for boobie bombers
A federal court judge ordered TSA to stop firing 1,000s of illegal aliens as airport security screeners. Because 50-million illegal aliens need jobs...
Out of 28,000 airport screeners nationwide, 10,000 are illegal immigrants...
80% of airport security screeners are NOT citizens of USA - Charles Slepian, a security consultant who has been New York's City's director of tourism, told NewsMax.com, "The transportation secretary was persuaded to keep the same minimum-wage workers that are now employed in the San Francisco airport because the mayor of San Francisco convinced him it was more important to save jobs for non-American citizens than to provide security by using retired law enforcement personnel." "What, in my view, the secretary did is illegal," Slepian complained. "You cannot employ those 700 workers who are not American citizens even in a pilot project program. The law says if you are a screener, whether in a pilot program or working as a federal worker, you must be an American citizen. "Nevertheless, he granted that pilot project status to San Francisco knowing that 700 of those workers are not American citizens and the vast majority of them are employed by companies that are not American owned and operated, which is another requirement of the law." Eighty percent of the 1,200 screeners working for three contractors in San Francisco are not U.S. citizens, Daz Lamparas of Service Employees International Union admitted. He told NewsMax.com that "citizenship status has nothing to do with work performance."
TSA Gives Rapists And Illegals The Green Light While Groping Children
AllCIAduh sewing bombs into dogs, so TSA bans dogs from airlines
$20,000 porn contest protests Israeli RAPEscans in airports
Don't touch my junk or I'll have you arrested!
by John Tyner, software engineer
Please spread this story as far and wide as possible. I will make no claims to copyright or otherwise.
This morning, I tried to fly out of San Diego International Airport but was refused by the TSA. I had been somewhat prepared for this eventuality. I have been reading about the millimeter wave and backscatter x-ray machines and the possible harm to health as well as the vivid pictures they create of people’s naked bodies. Not wanting to go through them, I had done my research on the TSA’s website prior to traveling to see if SAN had them. From all indications, they did not. When I arrived at the security line, I found that the TSA’s website was out of date. SAN does in fact utilize backscatter x-ray machines.
I made my way through the line toward the first line of “defense”: the TSA ID checker. This agent looked over my boarding pass, looked over my ID, looked at me and then back at my ID. After that, he waved me through. SAN is still operating metal detectors, so I walked over to one of the lines for them. After removing my shoes and making my way toward the metal detector, the person in front of me in line was pulled out to go through the backscatter machine. After asking what it was and being told, he opted out. This left the machine free, and before I could go through the metal detector, I was pulled out of line to go through the backscatter machine. When asked, I half-chuckled and said, “I don’t think so.” At this point, I was informed that I would be subject to a pat down, and I waited for another agent.
A male agent (it was a female who had directed me to the backscatter machine in the first place), came and waited for me to get my bags and then directed me over to the far corner of the area for screening. After setting my things on a table, he turned to me and began to explain that he was going to do a “standard” pat down. (I thought to myself, “great, not one of those gropings like I’ve been reading about”.) After he described, the pat down, I realized that he intended to touch my groin. After he finished his description but before he started the pat down, I looked him straight in the eye and said, “if you touch my junk, I’ll have you arrested.” He, a bit taken aback, informed me that he would have to involve his supervisor because of my comment.
We both stood there for no more than probably two minutes before a female TSA agent (apparently, the supervisor) arrived. She described to me that because I had opted out of the backscatter screening, I would now be patted down, and that involved running hands up the inside of my legs until they felt my groin. I stated that I would not allow myself to be subject to a molestation as a condition of getting on my flight. The supervisor informed me that it was a standard administrative security check and that they were authorized to do it. I repeated that I felt what they were doing was a sexual assault, and that if they were anyone but the government, the act would be illegal. I believe that I was then informed that if I did not submit to the inspection, I would not be getting on my flight. I again stated that I thought the search was illegal. I told her that I would be willing to submit to a walk through the metal detector as over 80% of the rest of the people were doing, but I would not be groped. The supervisor, then offered to go get her supervisor.
I took a seat in a tiny metal chair next to the table with my belongings and waited. While waiting, I asked the original agent (who was supposed to do the pat down) if he had many people opt out to which he replied, none (or almost none, I don’t remember exactly). He said that I gave up a lot of rights when I bought my ticket. I replied that the government took them away after September 11th. There was silence until the next supervisor arrived. A few minutes later, the female agent/supervisor arrived with a man in a suit (not a uniform). He gave me a business card identifying him as David Silva, Transportation Security Manager, San Diego International Airport. At this point, more TSA agents as well as what I assume was a local police officer arrived on the scene and surrounded the area where I was being detained. The female supervisor explained the situation to Mr. Silva. After some quick back and forth (that I didn’t understand/hear), I could overhear Mr. Silva say something to the effect of, “then escort him from the airport.” I again offered to submit to the metal detector, and my father-in-law, who was near by also tried to plead for some reasonableness on the TSA’s part.
The female supervisor took my ID at this point and began taking some kind of report with which I cooperated. Once she had finished, I asked if I could put my shoes back on. I was allowed to put my shoes back on and gather my belongs. I asked, “are we done here” (it was clear at this point that I was going to be escorted out), and the local police officer said, “follow me”. I followed him around the side of the screening area and back out to the ticketing area. I said apologized to him for the hassle, to which he replied that it was not a problem.
I made my way over to the American Airlines counter, explained the situation, and asked if my ticket could be refunded. The woman behind the counter furiously typed away for about 30 seconds before letting me know that she would need a supervisor. She went to the other end of the counter. When she returned, she informed me that the ticket was non-refundable, but that she was still trying to find a supervisor. After a few more minutes, she was able to refund my ticket. I told her that I had previously had a bad experience with American Airlines and had sworn never to fly with them again (I rationalized this trip since my father-in-law had paid for the ticket), but that after her helpfulness, I would once again be willing to use their carrier again.
At this point, I thought it was all over. I began to make my way to the stairs to exit the airport, when I was approached by another man in slacks and a sport coat. He was accompanied by the officer that had escorted me to the ticketing area and Mr. Silva. He informed me that I could not leave the airport. He said that once I start the screening in the secure area, I could not leave until it was completed. Having left the area, he stated, I would be subject to a civil suit and a $10,000 fine. I asked him if he was also going to fine the 6 TSA agents and the local police officer who escorted me from the secure area. After all, I did exactly what I was told. He said that they didn’t know the rules, and that he would deal with them later. They would not be subject to civil penalties. I then pointed to Mr. Silva and asked if he would be subject to any penalties. He is the agents’ supervisor, and he directed them to escort me out. The man informed me that Mr. Silva was new and he would not be subject to penalties, either. He again asserted the necessity that I return to the screening area. When I asked why, he explained that I may have an incendiary device and whether or not that was true needed to be determined. I told him that I would submit to a walk through the metal detector, but that was it; I would not be groped. He told me that their procedures are on their website, and therefore, I was fully informed before I entered the airport; I had implicitly agreed to whatever screening they deemed appropriate. I told him that San Diego was not listed on the TSA’s website as an airport using Advanced Imaging Technology, and I believed that I would only be subject to the metal detector. He replied that he was not a webmaster, and I asked then why he was referring me to the TSA’s website if he didn’t know anything about it. I again refused to re-enter the screening area.
The man asked me to stay put while he walked off to confer with the officer and Mr. Silva. They went about 20 feet away and began talking amongst themselves while I waited. I couldn’t over hear anything, but I got the impression that the police officer was recounting his version of the events that had transpired in the screening area (my initial refusal to be patted down). After a few minutes, I asked loudly across the distance if I was free to leave. The man dismissively held up a finger and said, “hold on”. I waited. After another minute or so, he returned and asked for my name. I asked why he needed it, and reminded him that the female supervisor/agent had already taken a report. He said that he was trying to be friendly and help me out. I asked to what end. He reminded me that I could be sued civilly and face a $10,000 fine and that my cooperation could help mitigate the penalties I was facing. I replied that he already had my information in the report that was taken and I asked if I was free to leave. I reminded him that he was now illegally detaining me and that I would not be subject to screening as a condition of leaving the airport. He told me that he was only trying to help (I should note that his demeanor never suggested that he was trying to help. I was clearly being interrogated.), and that no one was forcing me to stay. I asked if tried to leave if he would have the officer arrest me. He again said that no one was forcing me to stay. I looked him in the eye, and said, “then I’m leaving”. He replied, “then we’ll bring a civil suit against you”, to which I said, “you bring that suit” and walked out of the airport.
This video starts with my bag and belongings going through the x-ray machine.They’re kind of long, and they don’t show much, but the audio is really good.
I was in the middle of telling someone that if I was going to be felt up, I wanted it done in public so that everyone could see what it is that the TSA does. Here is the rest of that video.
After I was escorted out to the ticketing area, I went to have my ticket refunded. I didn’t have the opportunity or the presence of mind to turn the camera back on until everyone walked away from me.
Radio host OhDoctah JJ Stone found out TSA puts their hands INSIDE your pants:
TSA airport screeners remove shirts and expose womens' bare breasts in public
The TSA has been hit with a number of lawsuits as the revolt against Big Sis, naked body scanners, and invasive groping measures explodes, with one case involving a woman who had her blouse pulled down in full public view by TSA goons who then proceeded to laugh and joke about her exposed breasts.
One of the most disturbing, which is subject to an ongoing lawsuit, involved a 21-year-old college student from Amarillo Texas. The woman was passing through security at Corpus Christi airport on May 29 2008 when she was subjected to “extended search procedures” by the TSA.
“As the TSA agent was frisking plaintiff, the agent pulled the plaintiff’s blouse completely down, exposing plaintiffs’ breasts to everyone in the area,” the lawsuit said. “As would be expected, plaintiff was extremely embarrassed and humiliated.”
TSA workers continued to laugh and joke about the incident “for an extended period of time,” leaving the woman distraught and needing to be consoled. After the woman re-entered the boarding area, TSA workers continued to humiliate her over the incident.
“One male TSA employee expressed to the plaintiff that he wished he would have been there when she came through the first time and that ‘he would just have to watch the video,’” the suit said.
The woman filed an administrative claim against the TSA but was forced to launch a full lawsuit after the agency failed to respond.
The incident bears similarities to a 2002 case involving a pregnant woman who had her breasts exposed by TSA agents in public. Her husband was thrown in the airport jail for complaining about the treatment of his wife.
"Terrorist" L.A. food stylist pulled from flight for 'Atom Bomb' tattoo
It was the Tweet heard 'round the L.A. food world.
Noted Los Angeles food stylist Adam C. Pearson was settling into his seat aboard a Delta flight Saturday morning when the flight attendant tapped him on the shoulder and asked him to come to the front of the plane. His first thought? "I'm getting an upgrade!"
Not exactly.
Pearson was temporarily asked to step off the plane and learned that another passenger had reported him for suspicious behavior, and noted that he had the words "Atom Bomb" tattooed across his fingers. Questioned by the captain and the flight attendant, Pearson explained that the tattoos referred to a childhood nickname. After answering a few more questions, Pearson -- who is a frequent Delta passenger and has flown over 142,000 miles with the airline this year alone -- was allowed to return to his seat.
"I was just shocked," Pearson said. "All eyes were on me, I felt everyone staring at me and I was like, 'I didn't do anything.' " Before the plane took off, he twittered: "Just pulled off delta flight, passenger said I was suspicious looking due to my tattoos @DeltaAssist not happy at all #goldmedallion fail"
When he landed in Memphis, he had over 150 e-mails asking him what happened, and learned that his Tweet had exploded on the social media venue. It was "reTweeted" by many in L.A.'s close-knit food world, where Pearson is well-known for his stylish presentation of food so that it can be photographed for glossy magazines, advertisements and cookbooks. (It was laughable to many that the colorful Pearson could be considered a safety threat.)
"I had no idea all this was going on while I was in the air," Pearson said of the digital flurry. "It speaks to the power of social media."
A Delta representative told Pearson the airline would look into the incident. “A public apology would be nice,” Pearson said. “I’m not out for blood,” he added, “but why didn’t they offer to book that other person on another flight if they didn’t like my tattoos? Why was that other person more important than me?”
Later in the day, Delta spokesman Anthony Black said he did not have any knowledge of the incident but said that the pilot and flight attendant must use their judgment to handle such matters.
Pearson, who is one half of a food blogging/food photography/food styling power duo (the other half being Matt Armendariz), said he has never before been questioned about his tattoos or behavior while flying. "It really just made me kind of sad that you could just point at someone and say 'That guy is acting suspicious,' " he said. "It was just a bummer."
It was also just one of the snafus in his trip. Pearson was traveling to Milwaukee for a food styling job for Kohl's, but his first flight was cancelled. After racing around for new tickets, he was booked on the flight that would take him to Memphis and then on to Milwaukee. But a connector flight was overbooked, leaving him and his assistant with several hours to kill in Tennessee.
Like any good foodie, Pearson was finding a way to make it work: He used the Memphis layover to make a barbecue pit stop at Jim Neely’s Interstate Bar-B-Que, which is where we caught up with him.
"They've got good pig," he said.
FLASHBACK: PENN JILLETTE CALLS COPS ON GROPING TSA AGENT
Penn Jillette
11/13/02
Last Thursday I was flying to LA on the Midnight flight. I went through security my usual sour stuff. I beeped, of course, and was shuttled to the "toss-em" line. A security guy came over. I assumed the position. I had a button up shirt on that was untucked. He reached around while he was behind me and grabbed around my front pocket. I guess he was going for my flashlight, but the area could have loosely been called "crotch." I said, "You have to ask me before you touch me or it's assault."
He said, "Once you cross that line, I can do whatever I want."
I said that wasn't true. I say that I have the option of saying no and not flying. He said, "Are you going to let me search you, or do I just throw you out?"
I said, "Finish up, and then call the police please."
When he was finished with my shoes, he said, "Okay, you can go."
I said, "I'd like to see your supervisor and I'd like LVPD to come here as well. I was assaulted by you."
He said, "You're free to go, there's no problem."
I said, "I have a problem, please send someone over."
They sent a guy over and I said that I'd like to register a complaint. I insisted on his name and badge number. I filled it out with my name. The supervisor, I think trying to intimidate me, asked for my license, and I gave it to him happily as he wrote down information. I kept saying, "Please get the police," and they kept saying, "You're free to go, we don't need the police." I insisted and they got a higher up, female, supervisor. I was polite, cold, and a little funny. "Anyone is welcome to grab my crotch, I don't require dinner and a movie, just ask me. Is that asking too much? You wanna grab my crotch, please ask. Does that seem like a crazy person to you?" I had about 4 of them standing around. Finally Metro PD shows up. It's really interesting. First of all, the cop is a BIG P&T fan and that ain't hurting. Second, I get the vibe that he is WAY sick of these federal leather-sniffers. He has that vibe that real cops have toward renta-cops. This is working WAY to my advantage, so I play it.
The supervisor says to the cop, 'He's free to go. We have no problem, you don't have to be here." Which shows me that the Feds are afraid of local. This is really cool. She says, "We have no trouble and he doesn't want to miss his flight."
I say, "I can take an early morning flight or a private jet. " The cop says, "If I have a citizen who is saying he was assaulted, you can't just send me away."
I tell the cop the story, in a very funny way. The cop, the voice of sanity says, "What's wrong with you people? You can't just grab a guy's crank without his permission." I tell him that my genitals weren't grabbed and the cop says, "I don't care, you can't do that to people. That's assault and battery in my book."
The supervisor says that they'll take care of the security guy. The cop says, "I'm not leaving until Penn tells me to. Now do you want to fill out all the paper work and show up in court, because I'll be right there beside you."
The supervisor says it's an internal matter, and they'll take care of it. "If you want to pursue this, we're going to have to go through the electronic evidence."
I say, "You mean videotape? Yeah, go get it."
She says, "Well, it'll take a long time, and you don't want to miss your flight. We have no problem with you, you're free to go."
The cop says, "Your guy grabbed his crank. That ain't right."
So, I fill out all the paper work and insist on a number to call to register a complaint. She says that I filled out a complaint, and I say, "I want more, give me another number. " She gives me a number that I find out later has been disconnected. I leave. I have a card with the name and number on it and the bad 800 number for the FAA.
My flight is way delayed, so I go to Burger King with Glenn - and all the feds are now off duty and at BK and sneering at us.
The next day the woman in charge of public relations calls me to "do anything to make my McCarran experience more enjoyable." I was a little under the weather with allergies and busy, so I didn't call back until yesterday.
It took some phone tag, but I finally got the woman on the phone. I was very cool and sweet. I explained the problem. "Do you allow your crotch to be grabbed without being asked?" I didn't exaggerate, I said that there was nothing sexual, I wasn't hurt, and it wasn't my genitals. I just said it was wrong. She said "Well, your feedback is really important because most people are afraid of us." She said, "I'd love to meet you so we could clear this up, and everyone wants to meet a celebrity." She said she had watched the videotape and there was no sound, but she saw him reach around. She said she couldn't tell me what was being done to him but . . . and I stopped her and said, she shouldn't do anything wrong.
I said that I had talked to two lawyers and they said it was really a weird case because no one knows if he can be charged with assault and battery while working in that job. But I told her, that some of my lawyer friends really wanted to find out. She said, "Well, we're very new to this job . . ." and I said, "Yeah, so we need these test cases to find out where you stand."
She said, "Well, you know a LOT about this." I said, "Well, it's not really the right word, but freedom is kind of a hobby with me, and I have disposable income that I'll spend to find out how to get people more of it."
She said, "Well, the airport is very important to all of our incomes and we don't want bad press. It'll hurt everyone, but you have to do what you think is right. But, if you give me your itinerary every time you fly, I'll be at the airport with you and we can make sure it's very pleasant for you."
I have no idea what this means, does it mean that they have a special area where all the friskers are topless showgirls, "We have nothing to hide, do you?" I have no idea. She pushes me for the next time I'm flying. I tell her I'm flying to Chicago around 2 on Sunday, if she wants to get that security guy there to sneer at me. She says, she'll be there, and it'll be very easy for me. I have no idea what this means.
I tell her that I'm still thinking about pressing charges, and I don't just care about me, it's freedom in general. I say the only thing that was good about it, was that while they were dealing with me, maybe they weren't beating up people in wheelchairs. It was amazing. All she was trying to do was make me happy. She said she'd burned a CD ROM of my video and it was being sent all around and they were going to change their training. She said, "We're federal employees, we're working for you, you pay us and we want customer satisfaction. It doesn't matter what the law is, we have to make you very happy so your flying experience is a pleasurable one, and most people don't give us this kind of intelligent feedback."
So, that was it. I'm flying on Sunday, I have no idea what will happen. How crazy is this? Do I really have some sort of mysterious VIP status to shut me up? Should I press charges? She said she was going to talk to the cop. I said he didn't see anything. She said, "Well, he may be able to see the forest for the trees, because he was right there." I quoted his "crank" comment and she laughed and then knew that was a very bad sign. I said, "He'll tell you I was polite, cold, angry, and funny" - that's more than should be expected of me. I still don't know what I'm going to do, but my advice to everyone is complain all you can and call the cops. I think it might make a little difference. Maybe you can become a VIP too.
Penn
District Attorney: TSA Feds Are Not Above The Law
Tide turns against TSA: Groping over clothing is a misdemeanor, searches under clothing are felonies.
The district attorney’s office in San Mateo County, California has promised to follow up any complaints of over the top TSA pat-downs with prosecutions on the charge of sexual battery, reports ABC 7 News.
“The case would be reviewed and if we could prove the elements of it, that it was inappropriately done with a sexual or lewd intent, that person would be prosecuted,” DA Steve Wagstaffe told reporters.
“If it is skin to skin, if someone were to take their hand and put it underneath somebody’s blouse and touch someone inappropriately and go skin to skin, that’s a felony, and if it’s done simply over the clothing, according to California law, that’s a misdemeanor,” Wagstaffe added.
Watch the ABC News report:
Sportbike rider and former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson joined the chorus of dissenters recently, appearing on Freedom Watch to denounce the massive ramp up of security measures in airports.
“I think abolishing the TSA is something that absolutely ought to be looked into, and it just seems to me that there are some real entrepreneurial opportunities here to offer a less intrusive and more safe of doing all of this.” Johnson said.
Watch the interview below:
Airports NOT required to have TSA screeners
Did you know that the nation's airports are not required to have Transportation Security Administration screeners checking passengers at security checkpoints? The 2001 law creating the TSA gave airports the right to opt out of the TSA program in favor of private screeners after a two-year period. Now, with the TSA engulfed in controversy and hated by millions of weary and sometimes humiliated travelers, Rep. John Mica, the Republican who will soon be chairman of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, is reminding airports that they have a choice.
Mica, one of the authors of the original TSA bill, has recently written to the heads of more than 150 airports nationwide suggesting they opt out of TSA screening. "When the TSA was established, it was never envisioned that it would become a huge, unwieldy bureaucracy which was soon to grow to 67,000 employees," Mica writes. "As TSA has grown larger, more impersonal, and administratively top-heavy, I believe it is important that airports across the country consider utilizing the opt-out provision provided by law."
In addition to being large, impersonal, and top-heavy, what really worries critics is that the TSA has become dangerously ineffective. Its specialty is what those critics call "security theater" -- that is, a show of what appear to be stringent security measures designed to make passengers feel more secure without providing real security. "That's exactly what it is," says Mica. "It's a big Kabuki dance."
Now, the dance has gotten completely out of hand. And like lots of fliers -- I spoke to him as he waited for a flight at the Orlando airport -- Mica sees TSA's new "naked scanner" machines and groping, grossly invasive passenger pat-downs as just part of a larger problem. TSA, he says, is relying more on passenger humiliation than on practices that are proven staples of airport security.
For example, many security experts have urged TSA to adopt techniques, used with great success by the Israeli airline El Al, in which passengers are observed, profiled, and most importantly, questioned before boarding planes. So TSA created a program known as SPOT -- Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques. It began hiring what it called behavior detection officers, who would be trained to notice passengers who acted suspiciously. TSA now employs about 3,000 behavior detection officers, stationed at about 160 airports across the country.
The problem is, they're doing it all wrong. A recent Government Accountability Office study found that TSA "deployed SPOT nationwide without first validating the scientific basis for identifying suspicious passengers in an airport environment." They haven't settled on the standards needed to stop bad actors.
"It's not an Israeli model, it's a TSA, screwed-up model," says Mica. "It should actually be the person who's looking at the ticket and talking to the individual. Instead, they've hired people to stand around and observe, which is a bastardization of what should be done."
In a May 2010 letter to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Mica noted that the GAO "discovered that since the program's inception, at least 17 known terrorists ... have flown on 24 different occasions, passing through security at eight SPOT airports." One of those known terrorists was Faisal Shahzad, who made it past SPOT monitors onto a Dubai-bound plane at New York's JFK International Airport not long after trying to set off a car bomb in Times Square. Federal agents nabbed him just before departure.
Mica and other critics in Congress want to see quick and meaningful changes in the way TSA works. They go back to the days just after Sept. 11, when there was a hot debate about whether the new passenger-screening force would be federal employees, as most Democrats wanted, or private contractors, as most Republicans wanted. Democrats won and TSA has been growing ever since.
But the law did allow a test program in which five airports were allowed to use private contractors. A number of studies done since then have shown that contractors perform a bit better than federal screeners, and they're also more flexible and open to innovation. (The federal government pays the cost of screening whether performed by the TSA or by contractors, and contractors work under federal supervision.)
TSA critics know a federal-to-private change won't solve all of the problems with airport security. But it might create the conditions under which some of those problems could indeed be fixed. With passenger anger overflowing and new leadership in the House, something might finally get done.
Naked body RAPEscanners and homosexual pedophile gangrape coming to McGhee Tyson Airport
Nov 18, 2010
ALCOA (WATE) - Transportation Security Administration officials insist they have no other choice but to install full body scanners in airport nationwide, including McGhee Tyson Airport.
TSA officials would not say when the new technology will be installed at McGhee Tyson, but passengers waiting for their flights already had an opinion on the subject.
"I don't have any problem with it," said Maria Varela. "I think it's a pretty anonymous process."
"When you have something like 9/11 and you travel every week, and you know what to expect, you get it down to a science, and you don't mind these little changes," said Craig Baker.
"If it keeps us a little safer I'm willing to take one for the team," said J LaLonde, a traveler who was headed to Miami.
If an alarm goes off when passengers walk through the scanner, or if a passenger refuses a body scan, the only alternative is a pat down by an agent of the same-sex.
TSA said officers will be using a new technique that is more thorough.
Greg Tipton said he's had experience with a pat down.
"I was pulled over to the Plexiglas little room and I got the pat down in different directions and angles," Tipton said.
He added he did not mind the pat down, but other passengers said it is too much.
"I kind of disagree with the pat down because it is invasive," said Mitch Reed.
TSA officials declined to demonstrate an on-camera pat down for security purposes.
By the end of the year 450 new full body scanners will be installed. Another 500 will follow in 2011.
Boston's Logan Airport was the first to get the x-ray body scanners in March and now it is already set to get newer machines.
Boston would be the first airport in the country to get new technology showing a "stick figure" instead of the controversial outline of a passenger's body.
WATE was paid by Israeli RAPEscan TM to play RAPEscan's PR Video News Release (VNR) "interviews" of only 3 sheeple (3 paid actors?), with 100% love of gangrape by pedophile jewish naked body scanners. WATE refused to interview The Dragonater. It's illegal "propaganda" under US Code for TV news corporations to be paid advertising contracts then pretend that's "news".
H.R.2764 Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008, SEC. 639.
"No part of any appropriation contained in this Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes within the United States not authorized before the date of the enactment of this Act by the Congress."
U.S. Rep. John J. Duncan Jr. rips airport scanners, pat-downs
Tenn. congressman says new security policies 'invasive'
WASHINGTON - Acknowledging a "nationwide revolt" over airport body scanning machines, U.S. Rep. John J. Duncan Jr. in a House floor speech Wednesday also blasted the Transportation Security Administration for what he deems invasive "pat-downs" of U.S. citizens.
Duncan also said lucrative government contracts play a role in the use of body scanning machines at airport checkpoints.
Duncan, R-Knoxville, former chairman of the House Aviation Subcommittee and the current top Republican on the House Subcommittee on Highways and Transit, said in a press release, "Unfortunately, for the traveling public, Big Brother never makes a mistake, so I am not surprised they are trying to defend the purchase of these scanners."
In his speech, Duncan said: "Hundreds of thousands of frequent fliers who fly each week are upset about getting these frequent doses of radiation. Parents are upset about being forced to have their children radiated or being touched inappropriately by an unrelated adult.
"There is already plenty of security at the airport, but now we are going to spend up to $300 million to install 1,000 scanners. ...
"The former secretary of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, represents Rapiscan, the company which is selling these scanners to his former department. Far too many federal contracts are sweetheart, insider deals. Companies hire former high-ranking federal officials, and then magically, those companies get hugely profitable federal contracts.
"The American people should not have to choose between having full-body radiation or a very embarrassing, intrusive pat-down every time they fly, as if they were criminals."
Meanwhile, the head of the Transportation Security Administration is acknowledging that the new pat-downs are more invasive than what travelers were used to in the past, The Associated Press reported.
TSA Administrator John Pistole - testifying before a Senate committee - says he has received the new pat-down, as has his boss, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.
Some travelers complain that the new inspections target sensitive body areas. Pistole, according to the AP, says he understands those privacy concerns but says the government must provide the best possible security for air travelers.
Body scanners are not in service yet at McGhee Tyson Airport, but the new pat-down procedures are, as is the case at airports nationwide, said Jon Allen, Transportation Security Administration spokesman.
Becky Huckaby, spokeswoman for the Metropolitan Knoxville Airport Authority, which operates McGhee Tyson and Downtown Island airports, said there have been more questions and comments from users of the airport lately - some of them complaints about security procedures, but mostly questions.
"We have people calling and asking about the new scanners, and we tell them they need to talk to the TSA because we don't have any experience with them yet," she said.
Allen said the TSA does not announce when scanners will be in place at an airport until shortly before they are installed.
"I can tell you that advanced imaging technology is in place at 68 airports across the country, including Nashville and Memphis in Tennessee," he said.
The scanners are also in use in Atlanta, Charlotte and Raleigh-Durham, N.C., Allen said.
Allen would not discuss the changes in the pat-down procedure.
"For security reasons, I cannot go into detail on the new pat-down procedure," he said.
TSA's website says pat-downs happen in three situations: when a passenger sets off an alarm at a walk-through metal detector, when something suspicious is detected by the body scanner, or as part of a random screening of passengers.
The pat-downs are also done if a passenger opts not to use the body scanner.
"It's worth mentioning that only a small percentage of passengers end up needing a pat-down," according to the TSA website. "The best way to be prepared at the checkpoint is to remove everything from your pockets prior to screening."
Allen's advice is to put loose items such as wallets, belts, bulky jewelry, money, keys and cell phones in a carry-on bag before going through scanning.
Comments by Police State Death Squads, all dissenting commenters banned forever, including The Dragonater
The Dragonater personally handed Rep Duncan videotape evidence vthat George W Bush carried out the 9/11 terrorist massacres, and Rep Duncan agreed that when found guilty, Bush will be executed by death penalty for murder and treason.
Congressional bill to kill TSA screeners
Senator Michael J. Doherty (R- Hunterdon, Warren) and Senator James Beach (D- Camden) announced they will present resolutions to the Senate and Assembly calling on the U.S. Congress to end TSA screening procedures requiring full body scans and pat downs at U.S. airports Their action comes in response to widespread concerns over privacy and radiation, as well as reports of inappropriate conduct by TSA agents during the screening process.
“The pursuit of security should not force Americans to surrender their civil liberties or basic human dignity at a TSA checkpoint,” said Doherty. “Subjecting law-abiding American citizens to naked body scans and full body pat downs is intolerable, humiliating, vulnerable to abuse, and is fast becoming a disincentive to travel. Particularly concerning to us is the fact that physical searches result in children being touched in private areas of the body. Terrorists hate America because of the freedoms upon which this great nation was built. By implementing these screening measures, the TSA has already handed a victory to those who seek to destroy our freedoms.”
Recent news reports have documented widespread public outcry over the new security measures and numerous reports of groping or inappropriate touching of passengers and airline personnel by TSA agents. Pilots and flight attendant advocacy groups, including the Airline Pilots Association (ALPA) object to the new screening measures for airline personnel, while pilots and flight attendants have been increasingly choosing to forgo full body scans due to radiation exposure.
“While no one questions the need for greater security at our airports, no one should be forced to hand over their dignity in the name of safety, ” said Senator Jim Beach (D-Camden). “Creating a pat-down procedure that is purposely invasive and time-consuming is no way to make passengers feel safer or more secure. In fact, it can do the opposite. With the busiest travel day of the year just 10 days away, the TSA needs to get a reality check and soon. Airport security is meant to make passengers feel better about flying, not humiliate them.”
Senator Doherty was joined at a State House press conference announcing the resolution by Senator Diane Allen (R- Burlington), American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey Executive Director Deborah Jacobs, and Assembly members Erik Peterson, Alison McHose, John DiMaio, and Valerie Vanieri Huttle.
Senator Allen expressed reservations about passenger exposure to unnecessary radiation. “Certain Americans, including cancer patients and survivors who are being treated or have been treated with radiation therapy are told by their doctors to avoid unnecessary exposure to additional radiation. As a cancer survivor myself, the new imaging equipment used for full body scans concerns me greatly. The U.S. government has not provided adequate information on the potential health impacts of these machines- to say nothing of the invasive nature of the alternative presented to passengers. David Brenner, director of the Center for Radiological Research at Columbia University has in fact said it is likely that at least some people who are exposed to the new scanners will develop cancer as a result, with frequent fliers and children among the most susceptible.”
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming."
—Dick Cheney, WhiteHouse.gov, Interview of the Vice President by Tony Snow, March 29, 2006
"I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks.”
—Usama bin Laden, CNN, Bin Laden says he wasn't behind attacks, September 17, 2001
"I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; the people who are a part of the U.S. system, but are dissenting against it. Or those who are working for some other system; persons who want to make the present century as a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity so that their own civilization, nation, country, or ideology could survive. They can be anyone, from Russia to Israel and from India to Serbia. In the U.S. itself, there are dozens of well-organized and well-equipped groups, which are capable of causing a large-scale destruction. Then you cannot forget the American-Jews, who are annoyed with President Bush ever since the elections in Florida and want to avenge him. Then there are intelligence agencies in the U.S., which require billions of dollars worth of funds from the Congress and the government every year. This [funding issue] was not a big problem till the existence of the former Soviet Union but after that the budget of these agencies has been in danger. They needed an enemy. So, they first started propaganda against Usama and Taleban and then this incident happened. You see, the Bush Administration approved a budget of 40 billion dollars. Where will this huge amount go? It will be provided to the same agencies, which need huge funds and want to exert their importance. Now they will spend the money for their expansion and for increasing their importance. I will give you an example. Drug smugglers from all over the world are in contact with the U.S. secret agencies. These agencies do not want to eradicate narcotics cultivation and trafficking because their importance will be diminished. The people in the U.S. Drug Enforcement Department are encouraging drug trade so that they could show performance and get millions of dollars worth of budget. General Noriega was made a drug baron by the CIA and, in need, he was made a scapegoat. In the same way, whether it is President Bush or any other U.S. President, they cannot bring Israel to justice for its human rights abuses or to hold it accountable for such crimes. What is this? Is it not that there exists a government within the government in the United Sates? That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks. I have already said that we are not hostile to the United States. We are against the [U.S. Government] system, which makes other nations slaves of the United States, or forces them to mortgage their political and economic freedom. This system is totally in the control of the American Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States. It is clear that the American people are themselves the slaves of the Jews and are forced to live according to the principles and laws laid down by them. So the punishment should reach Israel."
-Usama Bin Laden, Ummat in Pakistan, BBC Monitoring Service, 2001-09-28
September 911 Surprise
Illuminati Vowed in 1969: "Travel Will Be More Difficult"
By Henry Makow Ph.D.
(Flashback from Dec 2009)
Like sheep, humanity had better adjust to constant harassment as long as it tolerates Illuminati control of all important government and social institutions.
At the height of the holiday season, millions of travelers to the US were delayed and inconvenienced because of one suspicious incident Friday.
In 1969, Rockefeller Insider Dr. Richard Day MD predicted the future in these terms:
" Travel ... would become very restricted. People would need permission to travel and they would need a good reason to travel. If you didn't have a good reason for your travel you would not be allowed to travel, and everyone would need ID... later on some sort of device would be developed to be implanted under the skin that would be coded specifically to identify the individual." ( New Order of the Barbarians Tape two)
The reaction to the failed "terrorist attack" eventually may lead to this state of affairs. Ironically, the Nigerian bomber was allowed on the plane without a passport! Although shabby in appearance, he was accompanied by an East Indian man, presumably an Intelligence agent, who was well dressed. This man bought the $2200 ticket. Why is there no inquiry as to his identity?
Anyone who has traveled recently knows security measures already are stringent. There is no way a man can get on a plane with an explosive device taped to his body. Like most terror, this event was concocted by the Illuminati and executed by their intelligence agencies.
In a Globe and Mail Poll Monday, over 2/3 said the current security measures were an overreaction. Now people are getting felt up at security, a perfect job for Illuminati perverts. Is this really an experiment to see how much degradation people will suffer?
Can anyone bring down a plane with exploding underwear?
As long as the masses refuse to acknowledge the Illuminati conspiracy, they will continue to be complicit in their own destruction.
It's been a good decade for the Illuminati. Society is far more fearful and pessimistic, far more willing to accept totalitarian control.
In the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the author writes that their goal is: "To wear everyone out by dissensions, animosities, feuds, famine, inoculation of diseases, want, until the Gentiles sees no other way of escape except by appeal to our money and our power." (Protocol 10)
"We will so wear out and exhaust the Gentiles by all this that they will be compelled to offer us an international authority, which by its position will enable us to absorb without disturbance all the governmental forces of the world and thus form a super-government." (Protocol 5)
Harold Rosenthal who was a member of this cabal boasted that they even implanted a "guilt complex" over the holocaust and anti-Semitism that prevents society from addressing the threat.
Through control of banking, they acquired a total monopoly of "the movie industry, the radio networks and the newly developing television media...we took over the publication of all school materials... Even your music! We censor the songs released for publication long before they reach the publishers...we will have complete control of your thinking."
We "have put issue upon issue to the American people. Then we promote both sides of the issue as confusion reigns. With their eyes fixed on the issues, they fail to see who is behind every scene. We, Jews, toy with the American public as a cat toys with a mouse."
It would be great if the problem could be confined to "Jews" but literally everyone who advances the New World Order agenda wittingly or unwittingly is implicated, and that is, millions of people, i.e. the "Establishment."
When I was a sixties radical, we used to think people who worked for the Establishment had sold their soul to the devil. I didn't imagine it was literally true, as the Illuminati are Satan worshippers, so you're unwittingly working for his disciples.
The world has been colonized by this Satanic cult. What we are experiencing, while trying to maintain some civilized traditions over Christmas, is their relentless attempt to induct us into their cult as mind controlled servants.
Israeli citizen Michael "Son Of The Devil" Chertoff is CEO of Israeli RAPEscan naked body scanner Inc - Chertoff was employed by US Dept of Justice to get illegal alien terrorist bombers out of jail, then promoted to director of US Dept of Homeland Security. Only jews are allowed to be citizens of Israel. Jewish law requires rabbis to suck the penis of little babies during circumcision bris ritual, even when it kills them. Nazi jew George Soros also owns naked body scanners, says Commie China has best govt genociding 80% of babies and paying 20-cents/hour.
US presidents, supreme court judges, media moguls and directors of Homeland Security perform annual child sacrifice and snuff kiddie porn at kosher Bohemian Grove homosexual nudist compound
How to beat TSA's naked death ray
PS: Pilots and stewardesses are now exempt from TSA's naked death rays and gaterape molestations. Equal protection means that EVERYONE is now exempt...
Dictator Obama's Secretary of War Vinnie Da Chin Panetta and the Pentagram Joints Chief Of Operation Northwoods testified to Congress yesterday that Obama takes his orders to invade from United Nations and NATO, not Congress.
This is the equivalent ot Caesar crossing the Rubicon with his military to invade Rome under martial law, resulting in civil war, and 5 years later every member of the Roman Senate stabbing Caesar in the back...literally on the Ides Of March (next week...).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Caesar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossing_the_rubicon
ATICLES OF IMPEACHMENT RESOLUTION 2012
H.CON.RES.107 -- Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high... (Introduced in House - IH)
HCON 107 IH
112th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. CON. RES. 107
Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
March 7, 2012
Mr. JONES submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.
Whereas the cornerstone of the Republic is honoring Congress's exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that, except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress violates Congress's exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution and therefore constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.
Coup D’etat: Pentagon & Obama Declare Congress Ceremonial
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s testimony asserting that the United Nations and NATO have supreme authority over the actions of the United States military, words which effectively declare Congress a ceremonial relic, have prompted Congressman Walter Jones to introduce a resolution that re-affirms such behavior as an “impeachable high crime and misdemeanor” under the Constitution.
During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday, Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey brazenly admitted that their authority comes not from the U.S. Constitution, but that the United States is subservient to and takes its marching orders from the United Nations and NATO, international bodies over which the American people have no democratic influence.
Panetta was asked by Senator Jeff Sessions, “We spend our time worrying about the U.N., the Arab League, NATO and too little time, in my opinion, worrying about the elected representatives of the United States. As you go forward, will you consult with the United States Congress?”
The Defense Secretary responded “You know, our goal would be to seek international permission. And we would come to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this, whether or not we would want to get permission from the Congress.”
Despite Sessions’ repeated efforts to get Panetta to acknowledge that the United States Congress is supreme to the likes of NATO and the UN, Panetta exalted the power of international bodies over the US legislative branch.
“I’m really baffled by the idea that somehow an international assembly provides a legal basis for the United States military to be deployed in combat,” Sessions said. “I don’t believe it’s close to being correct. They provide no legal authority. The only legal authority that’s required to deploy the United States military is of the Congress and the president and the law and the Constitution.”
In an effort to re-affirm the fact that “the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution,” Republican Congressman Walter Jones has introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives.
Pentagon Launches Desperate Damage Control Over Shocking Panetta Testimony
The Pentagon is engaging in damage control after shocking testimony yesterday by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta at a Senate Armed Services Committee congressional hearing during which it was confirmed that the U.S. government is now completely beholden to international power structures and that the legislative branch is a worthless relic.
During the hearing yesterday Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey brazenly admitted that their authority comes not from the U.S. Constitution, but that the United States is subservient to and takes its marching orders from the United Nations and NATO, international bodies over which the American people have no democratic influence.
Panetta was asked by Senator Jeff Sessions, “We spend our time worrying about the U.N., the Arab League, NATO and too little time, in my opinion, worrying about the elected representatives of the United States. As you go forward, will you consult with the United States Congress?”
The Defense Secretary responded “You know, our goal would be to seek international permission. And we would come to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this, whether or not we would want to get permission from the Congress.”
Despite Sessions’ repeated efforts to get Panetta to acknowledge that the United States Congress is supreme to the likes of NATO and the UN, Panetta exalted the power of international bodies over the US legislative branch.
“I’m really baffled by the idea that somehow an international assembly provides a legal basis for the United States military to be deployed in combat,” Sessions said. “I don’t believe it’s close to being correct. They provide no legal authority. The only legal authority that’s required to deploy the United States military is of the Congress and the president and the law and the Constitution.”
Panetta’s assertion that he would seek “international permission” before ‘informing’ Congress about the actions of the US military provoked a firestorm of controversy, prompting the Pentagon to engage in damage control by claiming Panetta’s comments were misinterpreted.
“He was re-emphasizing the need for an international mandate. We are not ceding U.S. decision-making authority to some foreign body,” a defense official told CNN.
However, this is not the first time that the authority of international bodies has been framed as being superior to the US Congress and the Constitution.
In June last year, President Obama arrogantly expressed his hostility to the rule of law when he dismissed the need to get congressional authorization to commit the United States to a military intervention in Libya, churlishly dismissing criticism and remarking, “I don’t even have to get to the Constitutional question.”
Obama tried to legitimize his failure to obtain Congressional approval for military involvement by sending a letter to Speaker of the House John Boehner in which he said the military assault was “authorized by the United Nations (U.N.) Security Council.”
Panetta’s testimony that the US looks to obtain “international permission” before it acts, allied with Obama citing the UN as the supreme authority while trashing the power of Congress, prove that the United States has ceded control over its own affairs to unelected international bureaucrats, just as the countries of the European Union have done likewise.
Attorney General Eric Holder, the top “legal” voice of the US regime, argued to Northwestern University law students that the US Constitution is no limit to the regime dictatorially assassinating Americans. This follows regime arguments to seize and “disappear” any person in opposition to regime dictates as “terrorist supporters,” and extracting their confessions with controlled drowning (euphemistically “waterboarding”), found by all US and international courts as torture. The regime’s followers in Congress voted for legislation (2006 Military Commissions Act, 2012 NDAA) that these dictates are consistent with the US Constitution.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/03/attorney-general-holder-degrades-us-to-fascist-assassination-nation-99-response.html
THE DRAGONATER WINS IN TRAFFIC COURT AT DEALS GAP, RAISES SPEED LIMIT TO 65 MPH ON THE DRAGON - NOLLE PROSEQUI BY BLOUNT COUNTY ATTORNEY GENERAL. NO TESTIMONY, HEARING NOR TRIAL WHATSOEVER. 60 MPH SPEEDING TICKET DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, COSTS PAID BY THE STATE, IN BLOUNT COUNTY GENERAL SESSIONS COURT WITH JUDGE BREWER. THP TROOPER RANDALL HUCKEBY ADMITTED ON VIDEOTAPE DURING TRAFFIC STOP THAT ALL SPEEDING TICKETS NORTHBOUND ON US129 AT MILE MARKER 0.5 ARE FEDERAL JURISDICTION, NOT STATE JURISDICTION (VIDEO BY THE DRAGONATER). TDOT ADMITTED IN WRITING THAT THE MANDATORY TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SURVEY SPEED AUDIT WAS NEVER PERFORMED, IN VIOLATION OF TN CODE, THUS THE POSTED 30 MPH SPEED LIMIT ON THE DRAGON REVERTS TO THE DEFAULT 65 MPH IN TN CODE. THE DRAGONATER ALSO MADE VIDEO OF TROOPER HUCKEBY SPEEDING UP TO 60 MPH ON THE DRAGON IN A 30 MPH ZONE, WITHOUT MANDATORY EMERGENCY LIGHTS NOR SIREN, IN VIOLATION OF TN CODE, AND PERJURY IN HIS PERSONNEL FILE, WHICH SHOWED HIS $100,000+ SALARY. 2007 TDOT SAFETY AUDIT REPORT CONFESSED THAT THP'S JOB IS TO BAN ALL COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES ON THE DRAGON, SO THP TICKETS INCREASED 11,400% IN BLOUNT COUNTY. THP'S STALKER RADAR OPERATOR MANUAL CONFESSED THAT RADAR CANNOT MEASURE THE SPEED OF VEHICLES WITHIN 18 MPH OF ACTUAL SPEED. WATCH THIS SPACE FOR FULL EVIDENCE FILE. UPDATE 7 MARCH 2011
