Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

4 Bumps

TSA Administrative Directive: Opt-Outters To Be Considered “Domestic Extremists”

TSA Administrative Directive: Opt-Outters To Be Considered “Domestic Extremists”

Author: Mac Slavo
                            Comments (47)

If the information recently acquired by Doug Hagmann of Northeast Intelligence Network is accurate, then something really big is happening in America right now - and it’s most certainly not a step towards individual liberty.

According to Mr. Hagmann, he was contacted by a source within the DHS who provided an alarming memo detailing a new administrative directive agreed upon by DHS chief Janet Napolitano and the head of TSA John Pistole. The memo, according to Doug Hagmann, “officially addresses those who are opposed to, or engaged in the disruption of the implementation of the enhanced airport screening procedures as ‘domestic extremists’.”

The memo leaves no doubt as to who, exactly, is leading the charge to label Americans who refuse current security measures due to health and privacy concerns as extremists. “The measures to be taken in response to the negative public backlash as detailed [in this directive], have the full support of the President,” it says.

Under the new labeling procedures, those who choose to opt-out or are perceived as being troublemakers will be detained, questioned and processed for further investigation:

The terminology contained within the reported memo is indeed troubling. It labels 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.” 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.

For individuals who engaged in such activity at screening points, it instructs TSA operations to obtain the identities of those individuals and other applicable information and submit the same electronically to the Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division, the Extremism and Radicalization branch of the Office of Intelligence & Analysis (IA) division of the Department of Homeland Security.

The United States government, under complete control and direction of our elected President, is now actively labeling anyone who exercises their 4th amendment Constitutional right which protects against warrantless and unreasonable searches and seizures as, essentially, engaging in terrorism as defined by Section 802 of the USA Patriot Act:

Section 802 [USA Patriot Act]

(a) DOMESTIC TERRORISM DEFINED- Section 2331 of title 18, United States Code, is amended–
‘(5) the term `domestic terrorism’ means activities that–
‘(B) appear to be intended–
‘(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
‘(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

Though it may seem a broad interpretation, the definitions for domestic terrorism are very vague, allowing for a variety of views depending on who happens to be making the decisions. The very fact that TSA is allegedly going to label opt-out travelers as ‘domestic extremists’ suggest that they are, by today’s standards, considered no different than terrorists - and thus - may have their Constitutional rights stripped and be held without trial. In a previous article we discussed Matt Kernan, who may have found a Constitutional argument that works to avoid enhanced security in the airport. But, what if the-powers-that-be determined, by whatever vague definition, that the Constitution doesn’t apply?

With the outrage from American travelers and the pressure being put on corporate profits, the President and TSA may eventually change their tune. But if they don’t, then we can expect more intrusive checkpoints from our government in the very near future. Ms. Napolitano has already publicly stated that DHS is looking at other mass transit systems like buses and trains as the next target.

Something big is happening. And either the American people are going to force the change - starting with each individual making a personal decision to stand up against policies that can be described as nothing less than tyrannical - or the expansion of surveillance and control systems will continue to spread.

If the American people fail this time as we did with bailouts and healthcare, the end result will be backscatter machines in schools, malls, stadiums, and any other public venue which is deemed a security threat by our government.

Sources: Northeast Intelligence Network, Electronic Privacy Information Center

Author: Mac Slavo
Date: November 24th, 2010
Visit the Author's Website:


Asked by Gal51 at 9:35 PM on Nov. 24, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 23 (15,495 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (22)
  • oh FUCK that noise. I'm an extremist for insisting on my fourth amendment rights?

    Answer by autodidact at 10:39 PM on Nov. 24, 2010

  • This adm is going to push people to the brink. Will they be prepared to turn our military on the American people? It is coming.

    Answer by Carpy at 10:00 PM on Nov. 24, 2010

  • Are they kidding me?! Extremists, my ass! We are NOT free. I am so afraid for this country. We have to accept everything the government implements, or else we're treated like criminals?

    Answer by LovingSAHMommy at 11:00 PM on Nov. 24, 2010

  • LOL autodidact! WELCOME to the club!

    I don't think they will have much luck getting the US military to turn...some will because like some of the moms on hear..they simply don't know any better. Gal51, you do bring an interesting thing to the table. Interesting and scary. I have always said I am against an amed conflict because only God knows WHO will wind up on top.

    Answer by yourspecialkid at 10:57 PM on Nov. 24, 2010

  • This is insane. I dont understand how anyone can NOT care about what these people are doing.

    Answer by MissAlisabeth at 10:57 PM on Nov. 24, 2010

  • Does this smell of 'Rules for Radicals' to anyone else?


    Answer by QuinnMae at 11:25 PM on Nov. 24, 2010

  • Well dang..excuse my typos. I have a sprained wrist AND I am medicated!


    Answer by yourspecialkid at 11:18 PM on Nov. 24, 2010

  • Well dang..excuse my typos. I have a sprained wrist AND I am medicated!Answer by yourspecialkid

    ME TOO!  Mine is a lovely Napa Red! What are you having?  How did you sprain your wrist?  Must have been counting all of that money you make, you greedy capitalist.  (you know I am kidding). 

    Good Gravy, are we going to have to take up a collection to buy some extra heavy duty foil for every member of the TSA?  An individual with personal space boundaries does not an extremist make. 


    Answer by QuinnMae at 11:24 PM on Nov. 24, 2010

  • The headline made me chuckle a bit. I remember not too long ago the same label being given to us Libertarians. It's so ridiculous that it's laughable. The TSA is just burying itself more with the general public with this silly ploy.

    Answer by KelleyP77 at 11:47 PM on Nov. 24, 2010

  • Oh, and as for this post...

    What Obama and his henchmen FAIL to understand, is the more they push people, the more we will fight back--but in ways that are detrimental to our economy! If they put the equivalent of backscatter scanners in malls....people will simply shop on line (literally from groceries to houses!), if they put the same scanners in bus terminals and train stations, LESS people will travel--whether for personal or business reasons--video conferencing, and webinars already exist, and millions of people already work-from-home or telecommute, so it wouldn't necessarily be a stretch to enhance the technology!

    People will simply cut their discretionary spending, and OPT for a "simpler" life. Way to go Obama! (sarcasm)

    Answer by LoriKeet at 8:04 AM on Nov. 25, 2010