Airline passengers welcome new U.S. "no fly" rules

[sabra]

Source: Reuters

NEW YORK, Nov 1 (Reuters) - Airline passengers in New York welcomed stricter safety rules that went into effect on Monday, especially in light of last week's interception of U.S.-bound parcel bombs sent from Yemen.

The rules, originally prompted by the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks but delayed by privacy concerns, require airlines to collect a passenger's full name, date of birth and gender on all flights to and from U.S. airports.

The program is aimed at ensuring that passengers on the "no fly" list are kept off planes -- and that innocents are not wrongly barred from flying. It is meant to prevent airlines from issuing a boarding pass if the information is incomplete.

Passengers interviewed at New York's John F. Kennedy airport overwhelmingly supported the rules, which major airlines had largely been implementing anyway before their formal introduction.



Read more: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N01240420.htm

[truebrit71]

1. How very Winston Smith of them...

:eyes:

[MineralMan]

5. Do a white pages search for Winston Smith.

There are hundreds of Winston Smiths in this country. No doubt, some of them are felons. Some may be fugitives. Some may be almost anything. Why would you not want to identify yourself as a unique individual before going to the airport? I do not understand this at all.

[truebrit71]

8. You know who Winston Smith is right?

..

[MineralMan]

15. Of course I do. Do you recognize my point?

There are many non-fictional Winston Smiths, too.

Thanks for asking, though. I'm reasonably well-read.

Do you know why Orwell chose that name? It helps make my point, you see.

[truebrit71]

17. Yes I know why he chose that name, and you seem to miss my point..

..it's about giving up one's right to privacy over the fake promise of security...sort of like 'discovering' that you love Big Brother...

[MineralMan]

18. No, I take your point. However, most people just want to get on

their plane with the least amount of hassle, so they don't mind providing their full name and DoB. I'm with that group. It has nothing to do with Big Brother. It has to do with flying from here to the other place. If that's what I aim to do, then I want to just do it. So far, that has worked out very well for me, and for almost everyone else.

You may do as you please, of course. I'll wave at you as I head for the departure gate while you're arguing about your privacy.

[TheWatcher]

26. "I don't want to be incovenienced or hassled, so I'll go along with whatever

believe whatever I'm told, lick all the boots necessary, and praise and promote the Police State as "good" whenever I can, so that my little comfortable bubble world isn't affected."

Enchanting.

:eyes:

[truebrit71]

52. Right? Those who surrender essential liberty for temporary security deserve neither...

...

[barb162]

54. I consider it an essential liberty to stay alive

and keeping terrorists off of planes. So if it takes an extra few minutes for security checks to stay alive, I'm ensuring my essential liberty.

[truebrit71]

58. ..by surrendering your personal privacy..way to completely miss the point...

..

[barb162]

59. BS. If you fly to France tomorrow, no one's going to ask your DOB?

Are you surrendering your "personal" privacy? I think not. I guess you never will go out of this country as you'll need a passport showing your DOB. And when a hotel employee in this or any other country wants to see ID, such as your driver's license, I guess you don't show it as it shows your DOB? Do you show your driver's license with your address and DOB when you rent a car? How about your auto insurance card? Without showing a driver's license you are not renting a car.

Sorry, your point holds no water at all.

[truebrit71]

60. Again you miss the point...it is the thought that by giving up this info that makes you SAFE...

..that is ridiculous...

[barb162]

64. It does make us safer

and to try to pretend it doesn't is pretty silly. Maybe we should let people with AK47s or explosives of various kinds on planes and not bat an eyelash?

[truebrit71]

73. I'm talking about giving up personal privacy and you talk about people walking on planes fully armed

Seriously :wtf:

[muriel_volestrangler]

62. Does the list only consist of convicted terrorists, then?

I was under the impression it had far more people on than that.

Mind you, as a person interviewed in the article points out:

"I'm not worried about the no-fly list or having to provide information. It's the ones that they don't know about, at all, that concern me. None of the 9/11 hijackers were on a no-fly list," said Bryan Pettit, 30, a teacher.

You can either restrict civil liberties in a big way by stopping anyone you think might just possibly be a future terrorist, and including tens of thousands of completely innocent people, or you can aim at actual terrorists - of whom there are probably a handful outside prison in the US (and those outside won't get let in).

[LanternWaste]

74. Flying on an airplane from Lauderdale to Toronto...

Flying on an airplane from Lauderdale to Toronto is an "essential liberty"

[JDPriestly]

32. I understand your point of view, MineralMan

But I am older and remember how our teachers used to tell us that "In America, we have freedom of travel." They contrasted our "freedom to travel" with the Russians who had to show ID an get passes and permission to travel even within their country.

Yet another freedom gone -- taken away by fear and paranoia. It's really sad.

No, I don't mind showing my ID, and it has my name, my birthdate, everything needed to find out precisely who I am.

The next step: We will have to fill out forms explaining where we are going, our ultimate and interim destinations, who we will visit (their names, addresses and birthdates of course), why we are going, and, of course, how long we are staying and when we will return.

And after that . . . . well, then comes asking permission to travel before you even buy your ticket. That will be the next generation of lost rights of course.

[MineralMan]

36. You're older than me? I'm 65.

You don't mind the current procedures. Neither do I. I don't see what you describe as anything that is coming.

[JDPriestly]

69. Yes. I'm older than you.

[Billy Burnett]

49. Black Americans used to have to have an interstate travel pass.

Jim Crow laws. Then it took until 1962 for the desegregation of interstate busses and interstate travel accommodations.

I always cringed in school to hear teachers pronounce that America has been a shining democracy since 1776.
America has never been a bastion of freedom, equality or democracy. It took 188 years until 1964 for all Americans to be fully enshrined w/the right to vote.

[barb162]

55. If you travel outside the US, you basically have to provide that info

when you get to other countries. It's no big deal and not another freedom gone.

[JDPriestly]

70. True, but the US never required us to tell our own government.

I have lived in other countries. They expected me to register as a foreign national in their country. But, we always prided ourselves on our "freedom." It's gone now. The freedom to move anonymously is gone.

[rayofreason]

67. "fill out forms..."

You wrote

The next step: We will have to fill out forms explaining where we are going, our ultimate and interim destinations, who we will visit (their names, addresses and birthdates of course), why we are going, and, of course, how long we are staying and when we will return.

Actually, countries that issues visas (like India) want that kind of info. In fact, with India, they want to know where you stayed last time you were there. Hotels in non-visa countries like Germany and Japan ask for your passport and make a copy when you check in. Israel has a detailed exit interview where they ask about relatives you might have in Israel, where you went, etc.

I don't have a problem putting things like DOB along with my passport number and sex (as often as possible!) into my travel profile, anymore than I have a problem putting my credit card and driver's license numbers into my Hertz gold account.

[Gormy Cuss]

20. And if none of the Winston Smiths are on the watch list, why should they prove who they are?

There's no reason for making this a global screen other than to hide the deficiencies in the watch list.

[No Elephants]

30. Good point.

[IScreamSundays]

2. Wow, All those bombs and this is the only aftermath???

We could all be dead by now and these little air travel inconveniences are all we are to have?? Geez, I wonder what independent airline security company is prepared to assist us in our ongoing threat from Al Queda. I am soooooooooooo grateful the adults are at the helm.

[Posteritatis]

10. If they ban anything else they'll have to store passengers sedated in cargo. (nt)

[IScreamSundays]

39. Well...

I WILL volunteer for the sedation. Hopefully it is that good stuff you get when you are afraid of dentists. :evilgrin:

[pasto76]

3. how about a recourse for people erroneously put on the list?

cause currently there is none. Get on this list, and you're on it for life.

[MineralMan]

4. If you have a common name, like I do, there are many, many

people who share your name. The additional information helps identify you more completely. Nothing wrong with that at all. I remember very well having to deal with an annoying collection agency that was trying to collect money from someone with my same first name, last name and middle initial. It took me a good deal of time and trouble to make it clear to them that the guy had a different middle name and that I was not that guy. Now, imagine if I went to the airport and that guy had done something to target him for additional security stuff. I'm happy to supply my full name and birth date if it will help prevent that kind of confusion. I don't need the hassle.

So, if your name is common, it's a good thing.

[Daemonaquila]

6. Nonsense.

It's NEVER a good thing. How many bombing attempts do we know of were foiled by a No Fly list? Zero. The ones that were foiled were all foiled by lots of work by criminal authorities around the world long before a person ever stepped on a plane, or by fellow passengers/crew. If a determined group wants to commit a terrorist act on a plane, they can always find an angry and passionate no-name fanatic patsy to get on board.

Don't care about your rights? Don't care about REAL aviation security rather than this idiotic security theater? Then hey, I guess that's just too much hassle.

[Posteritatis]

11. Unless you get a power-tripping security type who doesn't want to believe your DoB/etc

And winds up running you through the system anyway "just to make sure."

It's also fun if you're like me and coincidentally share your name with an A-list celebrity. Oogh.

[MineralMan]

16. I haven't encountered any such thing, so I don't know about that.

All of my flights involve breezing through security. I guess I do everything right or something.

[CreekDog]

23. then what on earth do you know about it?

i go through the full search everytime i fly.

since it's all fine with you, since you never experienced the search, i don't really feel comfortable with you deciding what's okay in terms of what *i* go through.

[MineralMan]

35. What do you think is the reason for that?

I see very few people who are in your situation, so there must be some sort of reason. Do you have an idea of why?

[CreekDog]

43. based on your post i don't do everything right

based on the truth however, the answer's a lot different.

i'm an extremely conscientious traveler who gets stopped no matter how hard i try to follow the rules.

i know exactly why. and i've done nothing wrong nor have i been accused of anything (TSA agents occasionally bark things at me thinking i'm breaking a rule which i'm not, but most are friendly while doing their jobs).

whatever's okay with you may just make it more difficult and time-consuming for me to go through. and i don't want to do the body scanner --certainly not everytime i fly.

just don't encourage them to make it worse, please.

[CreekDog]

42. .

.

[Gormy Cuss]

21. Yet you're happy to require those of us with low-frequency names to be hassled.

If your name is on a terror watch list, they can ask for your DOB and other identifiers at the airport as part of your checkin process. That represents a small hassle for you, no hassle for the rest of us. Doesn't that make more sense?

[CreekDog]

24. he's an apologist for the system, yet again.

nevermind that the system is often unfair to people, either arbitrarily or based on societal biases.

[Gormy Cuss]

28. Unfair, biased, and utterly useless as a security tool but excellent as a 1984 tool. n/t

[MineralMan]

38. How has it affected you, personally?

[CreekDog]

41. i get a thorough inspection everytime I try to get on a plane

every single time.

i'm glad it's fine with you since you haven't been stopped.

[MineralMan]

37. Actually, doing it when you make the reservation makes more

sense. Less chance for error or confusion.

[Gormy Cuss]

40. More chance for error and confusion because no ID was provided.

That's why doing the check at point of service makes more sense.

[CreekDog]

22. what a happy little world you inhabit

lots of happily ever afters and stuff like that.

[donco6]

7. Would this have stopped the bombs?

I don't see how. Maybe I'm missing something.

[Posteritatis]

12. There's a Mr. Printer Cartridge Stuffed With PETN on the list, so perhaps so! (nt)

[donco6]

19. But does he LOOK muslin?

Because it's the clothing that's extra SCARY!

[boppers]

25. Is Mrs. Printer Cartridge still allowed to fly?

The idiocy of this is astounding.

[Posteritatis]

27. Only under her maiden name. (nt)

[SoCalDem]

53. Maiden name: Typewriter Ribbon.. n/t

[stuart68]

33. TSA's sole purpose is to pacify the public

and make them think they are secure. When we have someone like Janet N who declares that the "system worked" when passengers have to defend a plane and capture a terrorist, then we need to take her at her word. The system DID work, it made everyone FEEL safe, it was never intended to actually make them safe.

[txaslftist]

9. Screw the TSA.

I've given up flying anyway.

[damntexdem]

13. Those incorrectly listed on the "no fly" list are less overjoyed, however.

Just wait till it bites you.

[TheWatcher]

14. The American public. The most reliable dupes, marks, and Rubes on Earth.

Of course they welcome these new things that keep them "safe", but I am sure deep down they are still manically depressed because all of their rights haven't been taken away yet.

We just have to hope the "terrorists" will come through for us somehow.

I know, I know, having any freedom or rights sucks in this day and age, but if we have enough faith, they'll be gone soon.

Hopefully after the next "scare" the Police State will be complete, and we'll never have to worry about it ever again.

:eyes:

[24601]

29. Just be grateful they haven't found a suppository bomber, yet...

This way Ma'am, the TSA Proctologist will see you now.

[depakid]

31. More change we can believe it!

:rofl:

The cowardice and paranoia really is getting to be embarrassing.

"What happened last week shows that terrorists would still like to attack an airplane. It's scary, so whatever precautions they feel like taking, I'm OK with," said Lawrence Varner, 75, a retiree who had just arrived from Tennessee.

[bemildred]

34. On the other hand, some of us avoid flying because of this horseshit. nt

[soryang]

44. I'm with you I won't fly at all

I won't put up with this faux terrorist bs.

[barb162]

57. Faux? Was the Christmas Day bomber faux?

How about the shoe bomber?

[soryang]

61. both were sponsored by state intelligence agencies

if you don't know that, you don't understand black ops and how to read them.

[barb162]

63. You mean the USA?

Got any backup for that? And since when does "black ops" call for certain suicide? The people on the plane with the shoe bomber got very lucky that the fuckoff couldn't light the explosive in his shoe.

[soryang]

66. Shoebomber was handled by Mossad

The so called bomb couldn't be lit off with anything other than a detonator, which was never provided to the stooge, I mean "terrorist." The underwear bomber was escorted through customs by the CIA. US intelligence admitted that they let him on the plane as an "investigative" measure. They knew his "device" was harmless and couldn't be detonated. This is all psyops designed to manipulate public opinion. It's propaganda to accept the police state and the so called war on terror.

Anyone who studies these matters knows the symbiotic relationship between terrorist cells and state security agencies. Visas and explosives are the trappings of state. Al qaeda in Arabia is a CIA/Saudi intel mechanism to inject a permanent US military presence on the peninsula. There is a civil war in both North and South Yemen, it has noting to do with "Al qaeda."

[muriel_volestrangler]

71. A Briton travelling from Paris to Miami on an American Airlines was handled by Mossad?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1729022.stm

Wow, I guess you either think the world has outsourced security (including the passengers sitting next to any terrorist) to Mossad, or you think they really do control the world.

[Name removed]

72. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JCMach1]

45. And this is going to affect air cargo inspection how??? We blew 1Trillion on a war

and left our biggest vulnerabilities, well VULNERABLE!!!

[ixion]

46. who the hell 'welcomes' a further erosion of their liberties?

That's one of the reasons I no longer recognize this country. Land of the Free and the Brave? Not anymore.

[Javaman]

47. Coming soon! Full cavity searches for everyone!

I can only imagine the various cottage industries that would inspire.

[Bragi]

48. Cognitive dissonance marches on to victory! /nt

[enlightenment]

50. Damn.

The Onion couldn't have done better.

I wish it WAS satire. *sigh*

[wordpix]

51. geesh, I thought after 9-11 that the no-fly list meant those people couldn't fly

Guess I was wrong. Privacy won out over common sense once again.

[Posteritatis]

56. What are you talking about?

Do you seriously think it'd be preferable for a John Smith on the no-fly list to forbid every single person with that name from flying?

[sofa king]

65. If crying babies were on the list, I'd be happier about it.

[awoke_in_2003]

68. We have nothing to fear but...

oh, wait- dems like that don't exist anymore.

[pinniped]

75. A swab for a DNA sample will be coming soon.

.