Should those who oppose TSA excesses be ‘prohibited persons’ for gun ownership?
A Transportation Security Administration directive by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano claiming “full support of the President” classifies “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.’”
That’s according to Douglas Hagmann
of the Northeast Intelligence Network, who reports that this information is from a classified memo and, because of that, it “cannot be posted or published” in full.
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.
Guilty as charged here. And I’ve been objecting for probably as long as anybody, from my “Obvious Solution
” back in 2001 to today.
Hagmann’s information, if confirmed, presents a new danger in light of the government‘s predilection for blacklists
, and the stated goal of the anti-freedom camp
to use those lists to prohibit gun purchases
I say “if confirmed.” While the existence of such a memo would not surprise me because it is consistent with an observable pattern of freedom erosion, I would need to see it. I don’t say that to challenge Hagmann’s report, merely to acknowledge a standard I impose on myself before presenting something as validated.
Perhaps a Freedom of information Act request is in order—if nothing else, a refusal to produce the requested document—even a redacted version—based on it being classified would be telling, as would a denial of its existence.
In the mean time, here’s another unfolding Napolitano plan, this time with corroboration. From The Hill
The next step in tightened security could be on U.S. public transportation, trains and boats.And now court houses
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says terrorists will continue to look for U.S. vulnerabilities, making tighter security standards necessary.
…where, if summoned presents some interesting potentials, as the state will now be compelling us to submit and surrender our unalienable rights,potentially savaging our Fifth Amendment rights in addtion to the others—at least we have a choice not to fly, and thus not voluntarily present ourselves at airports with the implicit understanding we will be violated.
But if this is all really necessary, why not also do it in schools? Why not shopping malls?
If it’s truly the solution, why the hell not
Nice freedom culture the statists are engineering for ourselves and our posterity, eh?
Wasn’t there some obsolete amendment or something that we’re told is no longer relevant today because we defeated King George and we no longer need to worry about bears and Indians? It had something to do with what the Founders considered necessary for the security of a free state…