HAH! I have long claimed that the point of TSA is not to keep terrorists out. The borders are wide open! And furthermore, their modus operendi makes it clear that they are focusing on true blue law-abiding patriotic Americans, and furthermore, are much too curious about movement of property across borders.
Do you really think that they suspected this man of being Al Queda?
Some of their REAL functions, as I have long suspected, are CAPITAL CONTROL and SURVEILLANCE of law-abiding Americans.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/06/20/tsa.lawsuit/index.htmlWARNING: IMPLIED (edited out) STRONG LANGUAGE. But this is important enough that I'll ignore my own G-rated rule:
Steve Bierfeldt says the Transportation Security Administration pulled him aside for extra questioning in March. He was carrying a pocket edition of the U.S. Constitution and an iPhone capable of making audio recordings. And he used them.
On a recording a TSA agent can be heard berating Bierfeldt. One sample: "You want to play smartass, and I'm not going to play your f**king game."
Bierfeldt is director of development for the Campaign for Liberty, an outgrowth of the Ron Paul presidential campaign. He was returning from a regional conference March 29 when TSA screeners at Lambert-St. Louis (Illinois) International Airport saw a metal cash box in his carry-on bag. Inside was more than $4,700 dollars in cash -- proceeds from the sale of political merchandise like T-shirts and books.
There are no restrictions on carrying large sums of cash on flights within the United States, but the TSA allegedly took Bierfeldt to a windowless room and, along with other law enforcement agencies, questioned him for almost half an hour about the money.
Some needed clarifications: there are no LEGAL restrictions on carrying large sums of cash. In practice, the USA has "civil asset forfeiture laws", meaning that YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE CHARGED WITH A CRIME for government agents to SEIZE YOUR PROPERTY. The legal fiction is that YOUR PROPERTY IS CHARGED WITH A CRIME.
However, now I am splitting hairs, because in practice, a lot of extra-legal (outside of the law) policies are in place, and the law is routinely ignored.
The American Civil Liberties Union has taken up Bierfeldt's cause and is suing Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, whose department includes the TSA. Their complaint alleges that Bierfeldt was "subjected to harassing interrogation, and unlawfully detained."
Larry Schwartztol of the ACLU said the TSA is suffering from mission creep.
"We think what happened to Mr. Bierfeldt is a reflection that TSA believes passenger screening is an opportunity to engage in freewheeling law enforcement investigations that have no link to flight safety," he said.
Schwartztol believes many other passengers have been subjected to the same kind of treatment, which he claims violates constitutional protections against unlawful searches.
...
The TSA wouldn't comment on the lawsuit, but said in a statement that the movement of large amounts of cash through a checkpoint may be investigated "if suspicious activity is suspected."
Unbeknownst to the TSA agents, Bierfieldt had activated the record application on his phone and slipped it into his pocket. It captured the entire conversation.
An excerpt:
Officer: Why do you have this money? That's the question, that's the major question.
Bierfeldt: Yes, sir, and I'm asking whether I'm legally required to answer that question.
Officer: Answer that question first, why do you have this money.
Bierfeldt: Am I legally required to answer that question?
Officer: So you refuse to answer that question?
Bierfeldt: No, sir, I am not refusing.
Officer: Well, you're not answering.
Bierfeldt: I'm simply asking my rights under the law.
The officers can be heard saying they will involve the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Drug Enforcement Administration, and appear to threaten arrest, saying they are going to transport Bierfeldt to the local police station, in handcuffs if necessary.
...
According to the TSA, "Passengers are required to cooperate with the screening process. Cooperation may involve answering questions about their property. A passenger who refuses to answer questions may be referred to appropriate authorities for further inquiry"
Bierfeldt contends he never refused to answer a question, he only sought to clarify his constitutional rights.
"I asked them, 'Am I required by law to tell you what you're asking me? Am I required to tell you where I am working? Am I required to tell you how I got the cash? Nothing I've done is suspicious. I'm not breaking any laws. I just want to go to my flight. Please advise me as to my rights.' And they didn't."
Fourth Amendment – Protection from unreasonable search and seizure.
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.
The fifth amendment is usually construed as reserving a right to remain silent when questioned.
I am guessing that such "rights" as might de facto exist are extremely nebulous. I am guessing that in private situations, the Bill of Rights is effectively suspended. (Oh well, it never was enforced very well. Have a look at it, and if you dig just under the surface of history, you will find repeated and chronic violations. They started happening almost immediately after it became law!)
