Effect of Homeland Security List being felt
By lilwonders
@lilwonders456 (8214)
United States
April 9, 2009 11:00am CST
For those of you that do not know, a little while back a list came out of people that homeland security wants to watch (they think they may be "domestic terrorist"). On this list was people who were pro life, third party candidates supporters, Ron Paul supporters, members of Campaign for Liberty ,militia members, anyone who speaks out about our constitution (just to name a few of the things on the list). This list was leaked in MO, and a few other states. But sense homeland security is national you can bet it is going on in every state.
Well Campaign for Liberty had a region meeting and one of its key officials got stop by TSA and questioned for a half hour before he was allowed to board his flight. He was returning home from this confernece in St.Louis MO. Look like MO is taking that list seriously. (note to self....do not fly or go to MO anytime soon).
Here is a link to read about it. Of course CNN did not cover it. But the washington Times did.
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/06/tsa-detains-official-from-ron-paul-group/
What do you think about this happening? Why is it not being covered by the main stream media? Should they get sued? tell me what you think.
4 people like this
3 responses
@Adoniah (7512)
• United States
9 Apr 09
I was traveling with an 80 year old lady that was strip searched and almost not let on a plane because her drivers license was out of date (you need and up to date picture id to fly). We had already flown from Fl. to Chicago and were just trying to get home. Just how many 80 year old little ladies are terrorists?
He was questioned because he had a very suspitious large metal box in his luggage. When opened it was filled with more money than is normal to be traveling with. You can blame 911 for this new extra caution not any militia. You can also put blame on the official for refusing to answer even the simplest of questions. He acted guilty of something. He could have answered the simple questions and then been on his way with no problems. He was looking for trouble and got it.
The only thing the TSA did was at one point get really rude, and for this there should be an inquiry and something done to the employee. But as for searching his luggage, they were well within their right and were doing their jobs. The questions could have been handled better on both sides.
Shalom~Adoniah
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
9 Apr 09
"All he did was ask a question "Am I legally required to answer your questions?" But the police and TSA did not tell him that he did not have to. DId you notice that? They basically refused to answer his question."
I don't think they knew the answer to his question. A lot of these people are too stupid to know what their actual authority is.
Even police often don't know what their own legal authority is. I knew a guy who got arrested because he refused to show his drivers license to a cop after being accused of shoplifting. He told the cop very plainly that, unless he is driving a vehicle, he is under no obligation to display his license, or even HAVE a license for that matter. He is only required to give the police officer his name which he did. The charges were later dropped, but that's a small consolation after being accused of a crime he didn't commit and being arrested with no charge.
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
9 Apr 09
he was not legally required to answer their questions.
Also in light of the list from homeland security that came out about Ron Paul and Campaign for liberty supporters, he really did not want to talk to them about it. Which I do not blame him.
All he did was ask a question "Am I legally required to answer your questions?" But the police and TSA did not tell him that he did not have to. DId you notice that? They basically refused to answer his question.
So I say that if fair play. They refused to tell him he did not have to answer their questions and he refused to answer their questions until they tol him if he legally had to.
He did nothing wrong. Carry cash and checks on a plane is not illegal. Yes they needed to open the box to make sure it did not have a explosive in it. But once they saw that the contents of the box was not dangerous he should have been allowed to go on his way without any further harrassement.
I think some people at TSA are going to loose their jobs over this one.
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
9 Apr 09
First of all I want to make it clear that I think this list is a bunch of BS. However, I'm not so sure this incident had much, if anything, to do with that list. Here's what the article you linked to states:
"Steve Bierfeldt, director of development for Campaign for Liberty, was selected for additional screening after officials spotted a metal box in his luggage that contained a large amount of cash and checks made out to the campaign."
Could it be Bierfeldt was selected for additional screening simply because his luggage contained a metal box full of cash and checks? Trust me, I'm not sticking up for TSA screeners, I know they're only doing their jobs but they can be royal pains in the butt! My daughter was pulled out of line and searched because hair clip caused the alarm to go off. However, I have a feeling having a metal box with a large amount of cash may have triggered additional screening no matter who this guy was representing or whether he had stickers with him or not. To be honest, I'm not sure I have a problem with someone carrying a large amount of cash like that being checked into further. The bottom line is he was allowed to continue on his flight. Had he been arrested and taken into custody, that would be a whole different thing.
Annie
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
9 Apr 09
Most of the money was in the forms of checks. Made out to the campaign for liberty. So it is pretty obvious where the money came from. Also it is not illegal to carry cash on a plane. The box.... I can see why they opened it and wanted to know what was in it. But once they saw waht it was he should have been allowed to go on his way immediately. INstead of being questioned for a half hour on who he was and who he worked for. Obviously by the checks and material he had on him he works for Ron Paul. But really is that any of TSA's business? He did not have anything illegal on him.
As for the list. It is not BS. It is real. It does state "campaign for liberty and Ron Paul supporters on it". Howthey became targets as possible "domestic terrorist" I have no idea. But in the same state this list was first leaked out of (by a police officer that got the list from homeland security, thought what HLS was doing was wrong so he leaked it to the press, and boy now is he in a lot of trouble for it too) now you have a campaing for liberty officer being detained and questioned. He did nothing wrong or illegal. By the way MO is not the only state that has this list leaked out off. Alabama too.
2 people like this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
9 Apr 09
Wow, I guess I'd better be more careful how I word things...lol! I didn't mean the list isn't real, I meant my opinion of the list is that it's a bunch of sh1t. Again, I'm not defending what happened but the article I read sounded like there was a fairly large amount of case in the box and I'm honestly not sure if the TSA has certain protocol they have to follow in cases like that, for right or for wrong. I know from experience some TSA employees can be a bit arrogant and like to throw their weight around.
Annie
@gewcew23 (8007)
• United States
10 Apr 09
You got to watch out for those Ron Paul supporter. Well Lilwonders it almost seem like what we are seeing is what our founding fathers must have gone through right before they signed the Declaration of Independence. Our founding fathers had to deal with an out of control tyrannical government and now we are too. I do not think suing will work. Think about it suing the government is just suing you and me. What does the TSA care they will just pass the bill to the taxpayers.
