SSCC #29–Radcliff, KY PD

Of the 26 arrests, which were made public Friday, half were made sporadically following forensics testing on their computers or online chats in which they expressed "nasty" and "abnormal" sexual desires to an agent posing as a child. A lieutenant in the Radcliff (Kentucky) Police Department typed to an undercover deputy about his wish to impregnate a child, according to the sheriff’s office.

The individual in question was charged as follows:

David Williams, 37, West Point, KY Lewd Exhibition and Solicitation

Initially I was figuring this to be an honorable mention since there is no direct evidence of him having committed the crime while on duty.  That said, his position of authority and trust allowed him the opportunity to exploit it at his wish.  It was mostly by luck that he was caught prior to him exploiting that power.  See my original post and note the following from the rules:

The person committed the crime while on duty, or his job provided access to commit the crime under color of law (see the pedophile above).

This is a bit more difficult since the pedophile could use his job to touch children without legal recourse by the definition of his job as defined by the state.  The officer however does have a position of trust and authority that he can use to manipulate children.  While his department certainly wouldn’t protect his actions like the TSA would, we have seen elsewhere that departments will protect their officers until there is public backlash.  So with that I’ll let it stand as a member of the count.  It is borderline and if you feel differently, feel free to explain your reasoning in the comments.

State Sponsored Criminal Count: 29

Because what else would an official from the state do to someone who has been told to unquestionably follow their orders.

Via Joe

SSCC #24-26 –Oklahoma State Patrol

In a news release Tuesday, Logan County District Attorney Tommy Lee says while on duty as a trooper, Venable pulled over a woman on the Broadway Extension in Oklahoma City. Lee says Venable took the woman into custody for driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor. He’s accused of then transporting her to a residence in Guthrie where he had sex with her.

While on duty he made an arrest.  Then he proceeded to use his position over the woman to satisfy his own urges.  Ignore the statement that he is a “former” officer because he resigned as opposed to actually being dismissed by the OSP as punishment.  This is by no means the first issue with OSP either, not even the first of a sexual nature.

Arganbright has been under investigation for professional misconduct by the Internal Affairs Division of the state Department of Public Safety. Among the allegations against him, are that he used his patrol car for romantic rendezvous with a 16-year-old girl and sent text messages to her, asking her run away with him, authorities said.

A cop having relations with a minor, at least in this case the OSP actually fired him.  Not to mention he was also tagged with violating a protection order and embezzlement.  The most famous incident of late though happens to be the following:

This incident though from 2009 shows the depth of the problem considering the officer at question was reinstated shortly there after.  There is a history of the OSP looking the other way when it’s officers step out of line.

State Sponsored Criminal Count: 26 (All three officers committed these crimes while on duty)

Because since the girl was drunk it’s all her fault since the officer was on duty, right? 

Because pedophiles could never possibly work for the government, and most definitely wouldn’t use their authority to abuse their victims, right?

Because the cop and his authoritah is considerably more important than the woman having a heart attack in the back of the ambulance.

SSCC #13–TSA Takes Teens $100 Gift

Now it seems that TSA agents have found a more subtle score: stealing $100 that was a gift to a 16-year-old honor student from his grandmother. The boy’s mother tells the Post that the theft was "disgusting and a violation of my son’s trust."

The TSA has not terminated this individual involved as it is still under investigation.  Despite the claims of zero tolerance, I doubt anything is going to come from this as how can they prove he swiped 100 bucks.  It’s not as if he swiped 20 grand worth of jewelry and pawned it.

A Security Theater has proven worthless and nothing more than a den for thieves and perverts.

State Sponsored Criminal Count: 13

Because nothing says free like representatives of the state stealing a kids lunch money gift from his grandmother.  I mean where else have we ever seen this kind bullying before?

What makes them so special?

James Clyburn would like special treatment for members of congress at airports.

“We’ve had some incidents where TSA authorities think that congress people should be treated like everybody else,” he said. “Well, the fact of the matter is, we are held to a higher standard in so many other areas, and I think we need to take a hard look at exactly how the TSA interact with members of Congress.”

Why shouldn’t the congress critters by abused by the DHS and TSA they created?  Oh that’s right, they think they’re a ruler over us peasants.  They believe that because this happened once, that magically all of them are going to be dead.  Now with all the threats they think, “They want us all dead.”  No, we want you out of office because you’re acting like elitists.  I would like to point out though the shooter would have been considerably more effective just driving a truck into the crowd.

As for a security measure mentioned today,

and they are demanding improved protection ranging from office security cameras to the installation of a Plexiglas barrier over the House floor.

I believe Executive Orders from Tom Clancy already solved that barrier.  All of this behavior is to remind us who the rulers are, and who the peasants are.

Update on EPIC TSA Lawsuit

EPIC has submitted numerous Freedom of Information Act requests regarding the body scanners.  They have posted the information online for all to see.

These documents include:

Initially it was claimed that the TSA body scanners could not store or transmit images.  Then the US Marshal Service in August 2010 reported they had saved more than 35000 imagesThe TSA responded by claiming that it has not done so and the machines do not have the ability.  Some still believe the TSA, the smart one’s have distrusted them from the start.

One WBI system,  identified by  the Government, shall (26) have the capability, which can be configurable at the superuser level. to record  images for training purposes. The superuser password shall(27) be managed by  the TSA. The capability to retain  images at the superuser level will be disabled on operational systems

Later in the same document(emphasis mine):

Incorporate a three  level user and password scheme allowing supervision and “superusers” access and override capabilities

While they claim for it to be possibly disabled the fact that the feature is there means that someone can re-enabled it.  Some would claim that no one would possibly want it.  However there have been rumors about a “new fetish”.  The thing is though, it’s already happened.  That could be your one of your loved ones.  We know the types of people the TSA employs.

While reading through the Operational Requirements, you can find the following:

image

Normally one would avoid conjecture, however what could be considered critical to national security regarding the privacy capability of the device?  NMAB-482-1 can be found here, the section we really care about is here.

It appears that the tactic being used for airport security is to rule this search as being administrative.

Airport security searches fit quite naturally into the administrative search exception to the Fourth Amendment. Administrative searches are justified on the basis that they serve a societal purpose other than standard criminal law enforcement (Vernonia School District 47J, 1995, citing Griffin, 1987). After all, the Fourth Amendment cannot be construed to prevent the government from fulfilling a variety of other necessary functions, such as maintaining school discipline, preventing drunk driving, detecting illegal aliens, or even ensuring air traffic safety (Vernonia, 1995; Michigan Dept. State Police, 1990; United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 1976).

Each of those examples though require some sort reasonable suspicion.  Randomly stopping cars for drunk drivers and testing everyone, until recently has never happened.  In the instance Florida’s new checkpoints, there will probably be a strong legal challenge.  When attempting to maintain school discipline they must be disruptive to begin with.  As for illegal aliens, detecting them is extremely difficult. If it is as they claim above, why isn’t Arizona’s law legal unquestionably?  Especially since it requires contact of a lawful nature, they can’t just walk around carding people.

With regard to the TSA though, they claim the right to do this to any person for any reason.  No reasonable suspicion is required of a crime having been committed.

Against the special need of the government, the court must consider the passenger’s expectation of privacy. This consideration involves the same analysis used in the threshold issue of whether a search has occurred, with one important difference. Deciding whether a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy for purposes of determining whether or not a search has taken place is a yes-or-no-question. Either one does or does not have a legitimate expectation of privacy in this context. On the other hand, expectation of privacy as a factor in the balancing test becomes a matter of degree. Thus, the court in Vernonia (1995) held that schoolchildren, because of the supervisory role schools have over them, have a decreased expectation of privacy at school. As discussed in the first section, airline passengers most probably have a legitimate expectation of privacy against being searched in an intrusive manner. Nevertheless, this expectation could decrease if passengers perceive the threat level to be high.

Emphasis mine.  Their method to get around this problem is to convince the public that a statistically rare event (you’re actually more likely to be struck by lightning) is actually more common than it is.  The comparison to school children also shows the view they have of the public in general of being children and the government has the supervisory role.  We’re the children in school and they’re the principal.

Further the NMAB states:

Thus, measures should be taken to minimize the appearance of nakedness, the number of people having access to and identifying the image with the traveler, the time the image endures or is preserved, the uses to be made of the data, etc., to the extent consistent with safety objectives. The next section deals with the concept of less versus more intrusive means.

The assumption though that is enough for some people regarding their privacy is false.  If it wasn’t why would these have popped up overnight?  Also the ability to store the images as I talked about earlier has been proven to be false.  While they may claim it is not “normally” enabled.  The machines do have the capability and there is no way for the public to verify that it does not store the image.  We must take the governments word, which at this point should be worthless to everyone. If you opt out of the scanner the TSA humiliates anyone who refuses to go through the body scanner.  They are doing a procedure that is highly intimate and detrimental to victims of sexual abuseThis scanner can also reveal however private medical information that may not want to be shared because it’s no one’s business but yours and your doctors.  This also ignores the health concerns regarding the radiation exposure.  What is disturbing is this is the only time I’ve ever heard of people working around equipment that uses radiation that do NOT wear dosimeters

These documents display a crafted, thought out, and planned destruction of our 4th Amendment rights.  Their justification to violate the 4th Amendment centers around creating the illusion of necessity.  A Security Theaters has yet to stop any terrorists.  Yet they claim that their infringements are necessary and merely administrative to stop this “common” threat.  They need to be rendered impotent to stop the spread of their idiocy and evil.

(Sorry about going all Kevin Baker(it’s a complement Kevin) on this post.)

TSA, Lost Fliers and EPIC Lawsuits

Via Oleg: TSA behavior is causing more and more people to quit flying.  Not only that but it is causing people who are nude models to be uncomfortable.  The whole concept that one group of strangers is allowed to record intimate pictures of individuals without their consent while others can just don’t make sense.  Not to mention the fact that the TSA has been known to hire sexual deviants. Back in 2004 I swore I would never fly again until The Security Theater is abolished.  I know many others who will only fly commercially for business and tourism in the US has decreased due to the TSA.


Via Alan: The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) has filed lawsuit against the TSA for their security scanners.  The TSA has filed a brief in response, but what really got my attention about their brief:

DHS explains why the Court should not stop TSA from using the naked body scanners until the legality of it all is decided.

Translation: “So we’re breaking the law and we would like to be allowed to continue to do such until such time as you actually issue your ruling saying we’re breaking the law.”    The TSA Steals, Molests, and Abuses our American citizenry under color of law.  They should be destroyed.  If only there was a way.

Quote Of the Day–John Adams, 01062011

If men through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce and give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great end of society, would absolutely vacate such renunciation; the right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and voluntarily become a slave. – John Adams


Currently our leaders would like us to believe that terrorism shall annihilate us all.  This tactic of fear is then used as the necessity for the TSA to violate our rights and humiliate us.  They tell people that A Security Theater will stop the terrorists and make them safe again.  This has been proven anything but true.  When TSA fails, it is those abused by the TSA who do actually save the day.  The fact is, the TSA is a joke, they are ineffective, and the methods being used to trample our rights are fear and fraud.  Some have been willing to give up their rights but the thing is, it’s not theirs to give up.  Who has any right to walk up to someone else and say, “Sir you need to give up your rights so the rest of us can have the illusion of security.”  It is one thing if you want to give up the right yourself, fine that’s your business.  However no one has any right to infringe on someone else’s rights.  Furthermore, absolutely no one of this world has the right or ability to take it away.

TSA and the Law

Janet Napolitano played down the idea of migrating to an Israeli type security screening at airports here in the United States despite the back lash from the sexual assaults intrusive patdowns and screenings.

“There are some differences in the laws and the legal constraints that we abide by,” she said. “There may be some things that can be shared (with Israel) and some things that would not … The practices and techniques that we use will differ and do differ.”

What Janet really means by that statement is, “Currently we are actually violating the law, should we stop we might loose control over some of the sheep we have trained.”  By violating the 4th Amendment you have already shown the fact that you completely disregard the law, including the most important ones.

 

No you do not have to violate anyone’s 4th Amendment rights because they want to fly.  This is absurd and beyond belief.  There is absolutely no justification for it.  They attempt to claim justification but the truth of the matter is that necessity is the plea of every infringement!  How many people has TSA actually saved?  On the other side of that equation though, how many people abused by the TSA has stopped a terrorist attack?

This whole thing is a farce and a power grab.  This whole mess is worse than Russia in 1989.  What the hell is it going to take to wake these sheep up?