I was stranded by the no fly list

Well If you haven't heard my story ... it is allover the alternative media.

This is a link to the first story: www.canadafreepress.com...



Yes I sound winded I was walking across the Pearl Harbor Naval Base when I was asked to call in.

Thanks to Patriot Jon for calling the hagmans, and the hagmans for putting this travesty of tyranny out into the public eye.

I called everyone I knew and asked them to spread the word about what was going on. I made this youtube video the day after the hagmans show. I also contacted 5 US Senators and 2 US Representatives.




I even called a fellow patriot I met on the flight to HI that I had had a discussion about 9-11 with and we exchanged contact info when we landed. It turns out he hosted a local cable access show and a radio show in HI. A few days later I did a recorded interview with him.

www.ustream.tv...

After the interview we talked about going to the Hawaii capitol to try to work through the state government to get some answers. A few days later we did.

Picture of me at the HI State Captol

While I was at the Hawaii State Capitol building I got the call from DHS that I was off the No Fly list and the Senior special agent made a Freudian slip and hinted that the Sec Def may have made the decision. I asked her to repeat it but she would not. So I was free to travel again with no explanation.

I did an interview with the AP after I found out I was free and that story went viral.

news.yahoo.com...

Later that night I did a phone interview with American Free Press it has an hour long podcast which is my most detailed interview to date.

americanfreepress.net...

I flew back to Travis AFB that next day which was Friday October 19, 2012. The next day my wife had to spend $1700 to fly to CA. I met her at SFO and turned off my cell phone for the next week leaving message I would return calls the next week. We spent some time at Yosemite national park camping far away from the stress of the past week.

After she flew back I called a contact I had made with Infowars.com to schedule a stop over and an in-studio interview.



I also did the nightly news.



I have had some comments on articles and my youtube channel that suggest I am a informant or some other form of government shill, I can assure that is not the case.

So thoughts? Questions?

I posted this Thread and In my rush to get the info out I violated the site Terms of Use. Thanks to the ADMIN and Owners of ATS for pulling it out of the trash bin. I plan on being very vocal about the totally Unconstitutional no fly list. I will be setting up meetings with my Senators and Representative post election. They swore an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic. They have allowed the TSA and DHS to throw out due process and shredded our founding documents.

This insanity must end. "you can't fly because we said so" nonsense MUST END!

Originally posted by SWCCFAN


So thoughts? Questions?

If the old thread was pulled out of the trash bin, why did you feel the need to create another one?

SWCCFAN,

I posted this on an earlier form, so don't know if you saw it, but I believe you were going to be placed on the no fly list as this earlier post of yours would indicate.

SWCCFAN TSA STRIP search

It's a shame that you were targeted like this for your action as a patriot and someone who is prepared in case the government fails and not as a so called terrorist.

Unfortunately when you make yourself known to the government, they will make themselves known to you.

You stuck a stick in their hive and they stung. Hopefully your plight will be able to open more eyes to the injustice that is the "no-fly" list.

As both you and I know it is pure BS and a way to continue to shutdown the US of A.

Take care and be well

Sirric

Originally posted by Sissel

Originally posted by SWCCFAN


So thoughts? Questions?

If the old thread was pulled out of the trash bin, why did you feel the need to create another one?

I didn't noticed until this thread had already been posted.

Originally posted by SWCCFAN


I didn't noticed until this thread had already been posted.

Ah, because I thought the first one explained your situation really well, and some of those details are important, so I hope anybody who hasn't read it makes a point of clicking on the link.

reply to post by sirric


Lol it could be... But none of the federal agencies have answered any of my questions. So I have filed several FOIA request as well as contacted several members of congress. If any person can be restricted to travel because the government doesn't like what they have to say, shows that we are in far worse shape than previously thought.

Thanks for digging up that post!

Originally posted by SWCCFAN
reply to post by sirric

 

Lol it could be... But none of the federal agencies have answered any of my questions. So I have filed several FOIA request as well as contacted several members of congress. If any person can be restricted to travel because the government doesn't like what they have to say, shows that we are in far worse shape than previously thought.

Thanks for digging up that post!

And none of the Federal-lies will ever answer since they all know it is a tool for them to use against "Us"

You will always be questioned and searched every time you decide to fly or try to leave the country.

I curious to see if they are now going to try and restrict your ability to purchase a gun.... I hope not.

There is a movement within the government to clamp down on all anti-government action and dissension.

You, my patriot friend are at the forefront of this ever looming shutdown and you now know what is ahead for all of us.

Sirric

reply to post by SWCCFAN


More OPSEC! It's a shame what happened to you and just goes to show you how far we've fallen. Sad times my friend.

reply to post by SWCCFAN


Given the immediate reaction to the publicity that you engendered by your due diligence it looks as though you were "chosen" to get the word out to the right people and especially to a wider audience than ever before. Thanks for your service in doing your Constitutional duty and in meeting your obligations to yourself, to your family, and most especially to "We the People." Thanks for coming here to ATS and in honoring the membership with your presence. You are setting a fine patriotic example that all us would do well to follow.

reply to post by Vitruvian


Your kind words have left me almost speechless.

I never asked to nor did I want to lead this fight. I just wanted to be left alone and raise my children in a world where fear didn't rule the day. However the passion for liberty and freedom runs in my family. My ancestors on my fathers side from Scotland have been credited with stopping the expansion of the Roman Empire into the British isles.

So I guess they have are having a facepalm moment right now. I will not give up this fight. The No Fly list will have due process and the TSA will go away when I am done. I will not give in to their attempts to throw money at me just to shut me up. This is way bigger than me and it strikes at the heart of the very freedom the majority of Americans take for granted.

I am glad you're back home and I'm happy AboveTopSecret.com is here for you to keep this important story going.

If you were truly put on the "No Fly List" and essentially detained because of your association with a social group and your exercising of your constitutional right to own fire arms, and responsibly prepare yourself and your family for any situation, I am appalled and I agree with you that we the people need to correct this situation.

Springer...

reply to post by SWCCFAN


Maybe if you weren't such a domestic extremist believing in nutcase ideologies like freedom and liberty, they would leave you alone. You shouldn't be stocking up on food and water, either. It's your duty to depend and rely on government to provide for you and rescue you in times of need. You also shouldn't be asking so many questions about things like 9/11, questioning things is bad. Just accept the answers you get from the mainstream media and gub'mint, k?



On a serious note, since this is what got you on the no fly list, sign me up for that list, too. We stand with you, brother.

I have a bit of a legal question, if anyone knows. I know our right to travel is protected, but they get around this by 1) arguing other means of travel exist (even though clearly in your case, stranded on an island, that was not the case,) and 2) by arguing that it is private companies (airlines) who enforce the no-fly lists rather than federal agencies (even though TSA and DHS are clearly federal in nature.) I also know that they cannot search you without a warrant or detain you without a warrant and without clearly describing to you personally the place or property to be searched.

But my question is: what does the law say, specifically, about restricting someone's movements (without directly detaining them, just restricting their travel options) without ever informing them of this before hand or describing the reason. A travel restriction isn't exactly a "search," so is this a constitutional loophole they are exploiting? Is there a law or amendment that makes specific reference - other than the freedom of travel clause - to informing citizens of federal information gathering about their life, words, and habits (do they get away with it because it's in the public domain?) and restricting their travel? It just strikes me as very unfortunate and strange that there isn't some legal recourse when this happens, other than getting the word out and complaining.

Or is there? Hence the question.

Due process is the legal requirement that the state must respect all of the legal rights that are owed to a person. Due process balances the power of law of the land and protects the individual person from it. When a government harms a person without following the exact course of the law, this constitutes a due-process violation, which offends against the rule of law.

en.wikipedia.org...

The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution each contain a Due Process Clause. The Supreme Court of the United States interprets the Clauses as providing four protections: procedural due process (in civil and criminal proceedings), substantive due process, a prohibition against vague laws, and as the vehicle for the incorporation of the Bill of Rights.

The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides:

[N]or shall any person . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law . . . .[4]

Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides:

[N]or shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law . . . .[5]

Criminal due process

In criminal cases, many of these due process protections overlap with procedural protections provided by the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which guarantees reliable procedures that protect innocent people from being executed, which would be an obvious example of cruel and unusual punishment.

en.wikipedia.org...

From every thing I have read and experienced others as well as my self are being denied due process. No legal proceedings no right to a defense... its all because "they" said so and we can't even know who "they" are.

Evidently the FBI runs the terrorist screening center : www.fbi.gov... But its all a big secret.

Eventually if left unchecked there could be a No Drive or travel list. After all the TSA thinks they have a say in all forms of transportation.

Congress created this mess and now its up to us to pressure them into fixing it.

The time has come for All Americans to be vocal and Opt out of the TSA's invasive pat-downs.

If the government had real intelligence they would know most terrorism has historically been state sponsored.

reply to post by AceWombat04

Well, that's kind of what I'm getting at. We all know we have the freedom to travel, and we have the right to due process when accused of a crime, and we have the right to be protected from unlawful search and seizure without a warrant. But is there specific mention of due process with respect specifically to that freedom to travel and the limited restriction thereof?

i.e. are they trying to argue that a loophole exists in the form of saying, essentially, "We're not charging you with a crime, so there's no due process proceedings required, we're not completely restricting your movements, so we aren't violating your right to travel, and we aren't technically searching your person, papers, or property" ? That seems to be how they think they can get away with this.

Have constitutional cases been brought against them for no fly lists specifically? (Not unlawful detention or warrant-less surveillance, but no fly lists specifically.) Because it seems like they think they somehow have carte blanche to do this.

What kind of specific legal language would be necessary to close this prospective loop hole? Or do existing amendments and laws protect us against this, specifically, and they're simply ignoring them? And if the latter, why isn't more legal action being taken?

reply to post by AceWombat04


The issue is that the "law" is left up to interpretation. The crafty linguist that can twist meanings of words to fit their needs needs to be stopped.

They told me I was not being detained but I asked Am I free to go and was told no hence the fact I was being detained.

detain [dɪˈteɪn] vb (tr) 1. to delay; hold back; stop 2. (Law) to confine or hold in custody; restrain 3. Archaic to retain or withhold

de·tain (d-tn) tr.v. de·tained, de·tain·ing, de·tains 1. To keep from proceeding; delay or retard. 2. To keep in custody or temporary confinement: The police detained several suspects for questioning. The disruptive students were detained after school until their parents had been notified.

Verb 1. detain - deprive of freedom; take into confinement
confine
keep - hold and prevent from leaving; "The student was kept after school"
straiten - squeeze together
gaol, immure, imprison, incarcerate, jail, jug, put behind bars, remand, lag, put away - lock up or confine, in or as in a jail; "The suspects were imprisoned without trial"; "the murderer was incarcerated for the rest of his life"
intern - deprive of freedom; "During WW II, Japanese were interned in camps in the West"
bind over - order a defendant to be placed in custody pending the outcome of a proceedings against him or her; "The defendant was bound over for trial"
imprison - confine as if in a prison; "His daughters are virtually imprisoned in their own house; he does not let them go out without a chaperone"
cage, cage in - confine in a cage; "The animal was caged"
trap, pin down - place in a confining or embarrassing position; "He was trapped in a difficult situation"
keep in - cause to stay indoors
2. detain - stop or halt; "Please stay the bloodshed!"
delay, stay
retard, delay, check - slow the growth or development of; "The brain damage will retard the child's language development"
3. detain - cause to be slowed down or delayed; "Traffic was delayed by the bad weather"; "she delayed the work that she didn't want to perform"
delay, hold up
decelerate, slow, slow down, slow up, retard - lose velocity; move more slowly; "The car decelerated"
stonewall - engage in delaying tactics or refuse to cooperate; "The President stonewalled when he realized the plot was being uncovered by a journalist"
catch - delay or hold up; prevent from proceeding on schedule or as planned; "I was caught in traffic and missed the meeting"
stall - deliberately delay an event or action; "she doesn't want to write the report, so she is stalling"
buy time - act so as to delay an event or action in order to gain an advantage

No matter what they called it I was not free to go as I wished.

I understand that and I agree with you. My question is about the specific letter of the law, so that we can find the loop holes that need closing specifically. I'm unaware as to whether there is a specific amendment, clause, or law that pertains to your specific situation. I know there is in principle if we take detention to mean any restriction of free travel, but if as you point out there are those with the power to enact and enforce laws that take a different reading, then there may not be enough specificity to ensure this can't happen. (Hence why we are not supposed to have vague laws.)

If there isn't, there needs to be. That's my point. And if there is and they are abusing or ignoring it, then it needs to be altered so that this cannot happen anymore in my opinion.

We'll have more of the same for at least the next four years. Yay freedom! Sorry you were a victim of the growing fascism of our country.

/TOA

reply to post by SWCCFAN


9/11 was not a conspiracy ... though, I am confused on why they put you on a no fly list.

2nd.