Last week I wrote defining the similarities between the definition of terrorism and the new screening procedures required by the TSA – namely “enhanced” pat-downs – http://martin.farrowz.com/archives/162
Today I must warn you; be careful! It is your right to opt out of the Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) or background scanner; but you MUST subject yourself to an invasive body pat-down.
If you don’t submit to the pat-down and ask to leave (opting not to travel because you don’t want the intimate screening) you could be subject to civil penalties.
But anyone who refuses to complete the screening process will be denied access to airport secure areas and could be subject to civil penalties, the administration said, citing a federal appeals court ruling in support of the rule.
The ruling, from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, says that “requiring that a potential passenger be allowed to revoke consent to an ongoing airport security search makes little sense in a post-9/11 world. Such a rule would afford terrorists multiple opportunities to attempt to penetrate airport security by ‘electing not to fly’ on the cusp of detection until a vulnerable portal is found.”
So, let me refresh you of my last blog (I think it is more relevant today):
- the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
- the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
- a terrorist method of governing or of resisting a government
- TSA enhanced pat-down; to be subjected to intrusive finger and palm manipulation of the genitalia area in a public setting; to be humiliated by questionable TSA screened personnel; to subject your children to legalized molestation.
With option number 5: If you do not submit to TSA intrusive scanning you will be prosecuted!
I realize that flying is a privilege not a right and that security is imperative, but we must ask ourselves as we submit to this level of indignity:
Has the terrorists won?