The TSA’s Extortion Racket

[Rule of Reason Blog]

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) only seems to lack perspicuity, foresight, basic analytical skills, and senses of humor and irony. Its head, its staff, and its administrator are as distant from reality as Pluto is from the Sun. It has just launched a propaganda campaign called, “If You See Something, Say Something.” They have roused the wrong “enemy” – the American people.

"As Americans head into the busy holiday travel season, it is important to remember that every individual has a role to play in keeping our country safe and secure," said Secretary Napolitano. "The ‘

If You See Something, Say Something'

campaign encourages travelers and those who work in the hotel industry to identify and report indicators of terrorism, crime and other threats to the proper law enforcement authorities."

Imagine that in Nazi Germany, every German was urged to perform the same “patriotic” duty to keep the country safe and secure. To wit: “If you see a Jew, say something. If you see a gypsy, say something. If you see a Negro, say something. If you see a German curse Hitler, say something.” You get the picture.

In the official announcement site, the term “terrorism” occurs only once. Nowhere are the terms, Islam, Muslim, and jihad to be found, even though it is Islamic terrorists who are the purported enemy. The enemy, however, is left unidentified. Common criminals can wage terror, too, while “other threats” also float in the sump of official DHS terminology. You, the concerned citizen, have a role to play in spotting and ratting on shapeless, nameless bogeymen. Forgive the TSA if it treats you like a suspect, guilty before proven innocent. It is your duty to act guilty until proven innocent by a semi-literate making just above the minimum wage.

But, think twice, though, if you see a Muslim behaving oddly or suspiciously. Do not point fingers at men performing prayers in an airport lounge, or at women wearing various kinds of strange headgear. That would be discriminatory, evidence of prejudice, bigotry, and groundless fear.

Do not for one minute, however, think that the introduction of these “enhanced” security procedures is a consequence of poor planning or shortsightedness. The procedures are obnoxious, repellent, and invasive by design. They are intended to inure Americans to being treated as chattel and the property of the state. Americans are supposed to treat the right and luxury of flying as a state-granted privilege.

A memo to DHS secretary Janet Napolitano: I have seen something, and I am saying something. Aside from violating the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee against the federal government conducting “unreasonable searches and seizures” at airports, loosing on American and foreign travelers the costly, invasive, and futile sham of security checks at airports, sexually assaulting individuals of both genders and of all ages, subjecting said travelers to degradation and humiliation, physically assaulting travelers who may have included an eye-drop dispenser or a tube of toothpaste in a carry-on bag – there is this observable but too-often overlooked defining characteristic of especially the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA’s) airport security checks: the practice of criminal extortion.

The legal definition of the act and crime of extortion includes:

Perform[ing] any other act which would not in itself materially benefit the actor but which is calculated to harm another person materially with respect to his health, safety, business, calling, career, financial condition, reputation or personal relationships.

Excuse me, but doesn’t this definition apply to a TSA agent (I refuse to call these creatures “officers”) telling you that if you don’t submit your luggage and your person to his optionless search and likely seizure, you won’t be flying anywhere? You won’t be going to Cleveland on business, you won’t be having turkey with all the trimmings with family in Reno, you won’t be seeing your sweetheart in Des Moines?

Of course, once one submits to the extortion, it triggers and sanctions the unreasonable search and seizure, also chargeable offenses.

Extortion is the threat of withholding a value by compelling a victim’s consent to surrender another, perhaps lesser value. Think Sophie’s Choice. The consensual character of extortion does not hide or disguise the element of the threat of initiated physical force by compelling an individual to take an action he otherwise would not choose to take.

But this is not the exclusive realm of TSA policy. It is the federal government’s modus operandi in virtually all areas of American life. For example, Americans are already “conditioned” to filing tax returns under the threat of audits, fines, expropriation, and prison. Employers act as unpaid tax collectors under penalty of audits, expropriation, fines, and prison. Other examples would fill several pages of redundancies. The TSA is merely a late-comer to the game, an in-your-face and in-your-pants late-comer that reveals the true nature of statism.

The growing resistance to the TSA’s policies is evidence that Americans still don’t like to be pushed around. They don’t like being treated like pieces of meat, or print cartridges, to be inspected and certified by the lackeys of federal authority.

The Fourth Amendment reads:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

So, when an infant, or a person in a wheelchair, or schoolchildren, or adults, are subjected to virtual strip searches, legalized molestation, and exposed to radiation in the back-scattering machines, where is the “probable cause,” unless one is already a suspect? Where are the “warrants”? And where is the “particular place” that must be searched, other than one’s whole person and property? Where is the description of the “person or things to be seized”?

Nowhere to be found in the TSA playbook. The TSA’s policies, past and present, are in complete and demonstrable violation of the Constitution. What a banquet of litigation and lawsuits Napolitano’s and John Pistole’s policies present to the legal profession!

The TSA and its operatives across the nation, as actors in the extortion, do not “materially benefit” from the act (unless they are the receivers of the all the confiscated – that is, stolen – goods taken from travelers). They are just “doing their job,” like the good totalitarian functionaries they were hired to be. There are, however, personal and psychological benefits they must derive from holding power over their victims. They hold one’s values hostage until the ransom is paid, and that ransom is submitting to their salacious scrutiny. The only alternative they offer is the destruction of a value. They are gratified, either way, because they offer you no choice. You, the violated individual, are the loser.

Americans exhibited signs of rebellion during the Tea Party movement and in the recent midterm elections. A brewing revolution against the depredations and incompetency of the TSA and DHS is part and parcel of those uniquely American phenomena.

After all, “opting out” is nearly as good as good as “Going Galt.”

Cross-posted from Metablog

[~Sophia~]

Do not for one minute, however, think that the introduction of these “enhanced” security procedures is a consequence of poor planning or shortsightedness. The procedures are obnoxious, repellent, and invasive by design. They are intended to inure Americans to being treated as chattel and the property of the state. Americans are supposed to treat the right and luxury of flying as a state-granted privilege.

Very good analysis. Thank you.

[SapereAude]

The TSA is playing the "administrative search" card- which has often been shielded by the courts from the 4th amendment.

For a brief overview of administrative search see here:

http://research.lawyers.com/glossary/administrative-search.html

The problem with calling it an administrative search is that it still is not performed on everyone equally (a requirement by definition) amongst other things.

The constitution was thrown out long ago. Impossible to rely on that anyway.

It will be interesting to which way this goes. Once Americans accept this we've crossed the rubicon.

[CapitalistSwine]

From what I understand, and please correct me if I am wrong, the key issue pertaining to the constitutionality debate right now is that everyone that goes through this process is treated as guilty until proven innocent. This is the response I have most often heard to the claim that Constitutionality does not apply as the Airlines are private companies and they have permitted for the TSA to take over their security directives, along with things like its a public airline, you paid for the ticket and chose to fly on that airline etc.

‘‘§ 44933. Federal Security Managers

‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT, DESIGNATION, AND STATIONING.—The

Under Secretary of Transportation for Security shall establish the

position of Federal Security Manager at each airport in the United

States described in section 44903©. The Under Secretary shall

designate individuals as Managers for, and station those Managers

at, those airports.

‘‘( DUTIES AND POWERS.—The Manager at each airport shall—

‘‘(1) oversee the screening of passengers and property at

the airport;"

Yes, it is true that the airport operators could have a private security company provide passenger screening but the procedures will be dictated by the TSA:

‘‘(d) STANDARDS FOR PRIVATE SCREENING COMPANIES.—The

Under Secretary may enter into a contract with a private screening

company to provide screening at an airport under this section

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:46 Nov 29, 2001 Jkt 099139 PO 00071 Frm 00016 Fmt 6580 Sfmt 6581 E:\PUBLAW\PUBL071.107 APPS16 PsN: PUBL071

PUBLIC LAW 107–71—NOV. 19, 2001 115 STAT. 613

only if the Under Secretary determines and certifies to Congress

that—

‘‘(1) the level of screening services and protection provided

at the airport under the contract will be equal to or greater

than the level that would be provided at the airport by Federal

Government personnel under this chapter; and

‘‘(2) the private screening company is owned and controlled

by a citizen of the United States, to the extent that the Under

Secretary determines that there are private screening companies

owned and controlled by such citizens.

‘‘(e) SUPERVISION OF SCREENED PERSONNEL.—The Under Secretary

shall provide Federal Government supervisors to oversee

all screening at each airport at which screening services are provided

under this section and provide Federal Government law

enforcement officers at the airport pursuant to this chapter."

This is not a private business establishing its practices; it is government controlling a function that would be best left to the airlines. As it stands, the TSA is now controlling passenger movement.

http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/Aviation_and_Transportation_Security_Act_ATSA_Public_Law_107_1771.pdf

Further, Article IV of the Bill of Rights is not geographically limited. The right to be secure in your person and free from illegal search and seizure applies to the individual, regardless of whether that individual is at home, work or the airport. Furthermore, there is a belief among some that sacrifice of this right is the price necessary for security. I say that this is the speech of the cowardly. The first defense against terrorism is the American citizen. The strongest weapon of the American citizen is the Consitution. To voluntarily sacrifice the rights of the Consitution is to weaken the American citizen, and destroy the nation. If the stated goal of terrorists is to destroy this nation, then apathetic and fearul citizens. willing to sacrifice their Consitutional rights, are the terrorists greatest weapon and ally.

[dream_weaver]

Further, Article IV of the Bill of Rights is not geographically limited. The right to be secure in your person and free from illegal search and seizure applies to the individual, regardless of whether that individual is at home, work or the airport. Furthermore, there is a belief among some that sacrifice of this right is the price necessary for security. I say that this is the speech of the cowardly. The first defense against terrorism is the American citizen. The strongest weapon of the American citizen is the Consitution. To voluntarily sacrifice the rights of the Consitution is to weaken the American citizen, and destroy the nation. If the stated goal of terrorists is to destroy this nation, then apathetic and fearul citizens. willing to sacrifice their Consitutional rights, are the terrorists greatest weapon and ally.

I would further augment this with the 'shall not be infringed' portion of Article II of the Bill of Rights.

If you do not know what your rights are, you do not have any.

[~Sophia~]

Mark Steyn commentary -

(about 10 min) Edited November 24, 2010 by ~Sophia~

[CapitalistSwine]

If you do not know what your rights are, you do not have any.

Well said. In fact, I might borrow this statement sometime

Edited November 24, 2010 by CapitalistSwine

[dream_weaver]

Well said. In fact, I might borrow this statement sometime

I wish I could claim it as my own to confer it, but the individual who I heard it from has since passed away and as a patriot and Objectivist, would not mind it being spread further.