Censored! Department of Justice Demands That I Stop Talking About Leaked TSA Document

I received a call from the clerk’s office of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals stating that opposing counsel (the government) has complained to the Court that I am violating the order sealing the documents upon which my brief is based by talking about their contents — even though the contents of those documents were (accidentally) published by the Court, and then reproduced in the media. I called the attorney on the case, Sharon Swingle of the U.S. Department of Justice, who confirmed that the government’s position is that I have violated court order and must take down the blog post in question.

I tried explaining to Ms. Swingle that the document had been published by a third party and that I was simply discussing that now-public document. I tried explaining to Ms. Swingle how absurd it would be to say that any third party can talk about anything in that document they wanted, but that I was somehow barred. I tried explaining to Ms. Swingle the Streisand Effect, and that she will now be drawing more attention to the documents that the government wants hidden from the public. Ms. Swingle continued to insist that the government’s position was that I must take the comments down, and so I have.

I will file a motion with the court to clarify whether I may comment on a public document, and if permission is granted, I will re-publish my statement. Until then, you’ll have to read through the documents at the article published by Infowars or any of the others who have picked the story up.

Here is the order that the government says I’m violating by talking about a document that was found and published by a third party: Corbett v. TSA – Gag Order

Want to donate to the fight against TSA assholery? PayPal or Bitcoin: 15ftA2938sp7Mnsi8U7wYVmEtd4BRbFnkT

26 thoughts on “Censored! Department of Justice Demands That I Stop Talking About Leaked TSA Document

Add yours

  1. You know Sharon Swingle too?! What is she the TSA’s resident legal goon? The 4th cir court of appeals actually used an unpublished citation (which she was a party to that case as well as mine) which stated that the courts “Have” to uphold the decisions of the TSA unless they’re arbitrary, capricious, against the law, or contrary to the US constitution (I know, I want to laugh every time I read it).

    They basically upheld the TSA’s own stance that it doesn’t need evidence, a witness, or even standing to support their complaints.

    1. I sometimes wonder if, when these attorneys went to law school, they had grand dreams of using their law degree for the greater good rather than becoming a tool of government oppression. It must require heavy delusions, perhaps medically-induced, to go home every day and not focus on the fact that your day job is defending the downfall of our civil rights.

      1. They don’t care (or don’t think about it). It’s sociopathic behavior. Otherwise they would feel some level of sympathy or empathy for the pain and suffering they are inflicting upon others. These people do not. I literally have in print from federal judges that the unpublished rulings (not standing as case precedent) of the DHS/TSA administrative process, outstrip and outweigh those of the SCOTUS and the US Constitution (Documents upon which, I also have in writing, the DHS/TSA claims to derive its authority). They are their own judge, jury, and executioner, and no one operating from within or using the system will stop them. The free market would not allow this kind of abuse to become prevalent. It’s a good thing we don’t live in a free market.

  2. If you wanna convince people that the TSA is not about safety, all you gotta do is say, “THE FACT THAT 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB IMPLIES THE TSA IS NOT ABOUT SAFETY!” And where is the proof that 9/11 was an inside job? The PROOF is all explained in the youtube video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2AfT8bD–M from 1:15:40 to 1:17:48

  3. There is no basis for the claim. You cannot gag someone from speaking publicly about a document that has become a public document and was made a public document by the very entity that claimed they went through the security process of redaction when they did not. The document speaks for itself.

    It is a case of sour grapes on their part. Any and all parties globally have seen and reviewed the documents and they then think that they can place a gag order on the plaintiff? The document speaks for itself. The process of filing it is as dysfunctional as the TSA itself. There is no legal basis for the corrupt DOJ or any flunky working for it to claim everyone else can comment on it except you.

    It is total theater of the absurd now. To appease them for a brief period out of some nebulous courtesy you can refrain because they are operating in a manner outside the boundaries of Federal law. How unfortunate that you are tantamount to an Inspector General working with friends and associates and they feebly want to suppress you and the exposed truth. It draws more attention to their gross malfeasance and gross neglect and gross disregard for the law, Constitutional and other.

    You have the entire TSA naked under their own scanner. There is no legal basis to gag here. There is no reason for the TSA to exist. You speak for taxpayers and the harassed.

    How many millions of people in wheelchairs, elderly, children and women as well as regular passengers went through invasive pat downs on a false premise? Cui bono? The lie is exposed. How many thousands of TSA screeners suffer from cancer and other illnesses as a result of exposure to unprotected x-ray contamination? They cannot protect themselves from the health effects not the legal effects of the idiocy they have promulgated.

    1. My post was nothing — the Infowars article has the actual .pdf file with all the information, and that’s what hits hard. I’m sure the Ministry of Truth is working on that, but for now, gagging me is just silly.

  4. Interesting. Have you tried claiming that you are NOT discussing the document you were ordered to not discuss, but are instead discussing a different document, published by Infowars? They would have to admit that it was the same document in order to get you to stop. Either that, or try to get a gag order prohibiting you from discussing a public document; that is, prior restraint. I wish them good luck in doing so — everyone deserves a dream beyond their reach.

  5. It’s just my opinion, but the information in that PDF is damning to the TSA. It makes it clear that the TSA has been virtually strip-searching people with scanners, when they aren’t conducting full-body (including the contents of one’s pants) pat-downs. They do this (so they claim, but admit otherwise) that this is necessary to keep terrorists from making airplanes drop out of the skies like so many bird turds. The document itself says that “terrorist threat groups present in the Homeland are not known to be actively plotting against civil aviation targets or airports.”

    Well duh! How can the TSA defend its actions after admitting that? Surely Congress and the general public have been misled about the threat and the justification for unConstitutional searches (remember, a search must be effective in order to be Constitutional; a search for something which doesn’t exist MUST be ineffective) The terrorists that the TSA has made the country fear do not actually exist.

    As George Carlin said, “And don’t give me this shit ‘well the terrorists know their bags are gonna be searched so now they’re leaving their bombs at home’. There are no bombs, the whole thing is fucking pointless!”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: