6 votes

TSA Opt Out Week Nov. 19 - 26: “Just say no” to humiliation and abuse this Thanksgiving

With just three days to go until the Opt Out & Film campaign begins, the effort to stand up to the TSA is garnering national attention, with consumer advocate Chris Elliott throwing his support behind a move to “just say no” to invasive screening procedures.

Writing for the Huffington Post, Elliott points to the Infowars campaign (infowars.com/optout) as a way to “Slow screenings to the point where the agency will have to reconsider the way it checks air travelers, as it did during a successful opt-out action two years ago.”

Pointing out the fact that airport body scanners pose a major health threat, are useless at detecting foreign objects, haven’t caught a single terrorist, and represent an unconstitutional violation of privacy, Elliott emphasizes that, “In order to end the warrantless scans for good, we need to stand up at the same time and say “no” even after Opt-Out Week ends. We need to do it until the TSA changes the way it screens us.”

Saying no to the TSA represents a real solution, a form of civil disobedience that has a real chance of success given the fact that the TSA has been forced to roll back the invasiveness of its screening procedures in recent months, notably by mothballing 91 of its dangerous x-ray body scanning machines.

Continue:
http://www.infowars.com/tsa-opt-out-and-film-week-garners-na...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
meekandmild's picture

Fille title 42 lawsuits on TSA and its individual employees

title 42 United States code §1983
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1983

It will cost a couple of hundred dollars for filling fees in Federal court. but if TSA will have to have attorneys showing up in courts wherever you file your suit at. If TSA spends it time in court it will spend it money. also when you file the paper work file an cease and desist order against the TSA until suit is settled. when the courts start filling up with TSA lawsuits maybe it will do something.

"Opted out" since October, 2007.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/04/nyregion/04gotbaum.html?_r=0

That was it for me, done flying. Never had to worry about getting groped or irradiated, I had already quit flying before they started that.

Love or fear? Chose again with every breath.

Last time

I was flying was autumn of 2005.
Rome Italy to Toronto Canada.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

X-ray scanners not mothballed

The story that reported the replacement of those machines said that they will be sent to smaller regional airports. There was no mention of mothballing. As I recall, the story also said that the rate of "false positives" on the new machines runs as high as 50%.

Recommended reading: The Most Dangerous Superstition, http://www.amazon.com/Most-Dangerous-Superstition-Larken-Ros...