You will comply; or else. (airport scanners)

Discussion in 'The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr' started by Marlin T, Nov 26, 2010.

  1. Marlin T

    Marlin T Well-Known Member

    Jul 8, 2005
    New Mexico
    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.
    Hagmann continues:
    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.
    Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says terrorists will continue to look for U.S. vulnerabilities, making tighter security standards necessary.
    And now court houses…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…
    Also see:

  2. jack404

    jack404 Former Guest

    Jan 11, 2010
    I'll book via Hamas Travel arrive in mexico city get picked up driven to the border and shown where and when to walk across , no scanners

    and when in the US i'll wear a burqa when i need to fly unmolested ..

    and Obozo made it possible

    thank you Obozo

  3. Haligan

    Haligan Well-Known Member

    Feb 25, 2008
    FEMA Region II
    Wow, it's almost like "they" are not even worried about cave dwelling religious fanatics at all.

    Seams like all this "security" is for us, the freedom loving people of the world.

  4. cycloneman

    cycloneman Well-Known Member

    Dec 16, 2008
    i was listening to Andrew Wilkow last week and he wes refering to the tsa as obama's private army. Sure does seem like it.

    I also wonder where all the scans of people are going to be saved. Seems to me that if a scanned person some way made it past the process with a bomb of some sort that the tsa would have a record of the person's scan. I believe all the scans are going into a data base. :confused:

    I also have to say it is perfect timing too. When else to put this into effect but on our freedom and Christmas holidays.
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2010
  5. johnlives4christ

    johnlives4christ Former Guest

    Apr 28, 2008
    i think that there is an alterior motive to the new regulations. while security is probably a small part, i think they are testing to see just how far they can push the general public in the name of security. pretty soon it'll be anyone that flies will have to have a special ID, then a microchip. or everyone will have to have a finger or retina scan.

    one step closer to the mark of the beast.
  6. jack404

    jack404 Former Guest

    Jan 11, 2010
    Obozo and the Beast are on first name basis , the beasts nick name is "George"
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr UN security council says USA will comply to new gun laws May 23, 2012
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr Chelsea Clinton Hopes MAGA Hat on Pic of Lincoln Is Photoshopped Mar 27, 2017
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr Did Anyone Else View This Trump Prophecy Before The Election Nov 9, 2016
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr Does anyone else get mad about this or is it just me? Aug 11, 2016
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr Chelsea Hubble Apr 22, 2016