US demands air passengers ask its permission to fly-If you're not on the list, you're not getting on

[babylonsister]

US demands air passengers ask its permission to fly
If you're not on the list, you're not getting on
By Wendy M. Grossman
Published Friday 12th October 2007 13:18 GMT


Under new rules proposed by the Transport Security Administration (TSA) (pdf), all airline passengers would need advance permission before flying into, through, or over the United States regardless of citizenship or the airline's national origin.

Currently, the Advanced Passenger Information System, operated by the Customs and Border Patrol, requires airlines to forward a list of passenger information no later than 15 minutes before flights from the US take off (international flights bound for the US have until 15 minutes after take-off). Planes are diverted if a passenger on board is on the no-fly list.

The new rules mean this information must be submitted 72 hours before departure. Only those given clearance will get a boarding pass. The TSA estimates that 90 to 93 per cent of all travel reservations are final by then.

The proposed rules require the following information for each passenger: full name, sex, date of birth, and redress number (assigned to passengers who use the Travel Redress Inquiry Program because they have been mistakenly placed on the no-fly list), and known traveller number (once there is a programme in place for registering known travellers whose backgrounds have been checked). Non-travellers entering secure areas, such as parents escorting children, will also need clearance.

The TSA held a public hearing in Washington DC on 20 September, which heard comments from both privacy advocates and airline industry representatives from Qantas, the Regional Airline Association, IATA, and the American Society of Travel Agents. The privacy advocates came from the American Civil Liberties Union and the Identity Project. All were negative.

The proposals should be withdrawn entirely, argued Edward Hasbrouck, author of The Practical Nomad and the leading expert on travel data privacy. "Obscured by the euphemistic language of 'screening' is the fact that travellers would be required to get permission before they can travel."

more...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/12/flying_into_data_hell/

[IDemo]

1. "known traveller number", nothing chilling about that now, is there?

"KTN, please!"

[NutmegYankee]

33. Papers Please Comrade! n/t

[robinlynne]

34. It looks like this already exists, from the language (?) after reading, no it does not.

It would create this "known traveler id".

[kurth]

2. Full throttle fascism

America as the world's premier police state.

[whistle]

3. Dear Mr. President: May I fly please? Also may I take a pee please?

...Also, may I evacuate my bowels please? etc. I know but seeking permission for everything I plan to day each day, I am making the country more secure from terrorist acts.

P.S. May I stand on my head and shit nickles please?

[IDemo]

4. The Right to Travel

As the Supreme Court notes in Saenz v Roe, 98-97 (1999), the Constitution does not contain the word "travel" in any context, let alone an explicit right to travel (except for members of Congress, who are guaranteed the right to travel to and from Congress). The presumed right to travel, however, is firmly established in U.S. law and precedent. In U.S. v Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Court noted, "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In fact, in Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), Justice Stewart noted in a concurring opinion that "it is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all." It is interesting to note that the Articles of Confederation had an explicit right to travel; it is now thought that the right is so fundamental that the Framers may have thought it unnecessary to include it in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.

http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#travel

[babylonsister]

5. No one listens to that ole thing anymore. nt

[IDemo]

8. Maybe somebody needs to give it a MySpace page?

[havocmom]

22. Helluva idea!

:thumbsup:

[Yael]

27. myspace.com/US_Constitution

I'd be its friend.

[IDemo]

30. Done :)

Be my friend -> http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog&pop=1

[Yael]

32. Bwahahaha!!

Nice. :evilgrin:

[Jim__]

7. ...the Framers may have thought it unnecessary to include it in the Constitution or the Bill of

Rights.

Amendment 9
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed
to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

It is a ploy by the right that rights that are not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, e.g. the right to privacy, are thereby not protected by it. The Constitution explicitly calls their claim bullshit.

[SergeyDovlatov]

24. is not in the bill or rights.

and it is good for general welfare.

You can't fight the constitution bro

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

6. And the beat goes on.... nt

[TheCentepedeShoes]

9. IMHO

"The new rules mean this information must be submitted 72 hours before departure. Only those given clearance will get a boarding pass. The TSA estimates that 90 to 93 per cent of all travel reservations are final by then."

What about the anguished parent rushing to the ticket counter at the last minute after a phone call saying his/her child had been in a serious accident? What about the job-seeker trying to get to a hurriedly called interview?

New rules like these are, in my opinion, designed to create uncertainties and anxiety in the average citizen, leading to frustration and "incidents" which lead to the manufactured "need" for more and tighter rules.

Welcome to Police State Amerika, don't forget your papers.

[babylonsister]

10. Yes, this is another way to ramp up the terra. What about the sudden

death of a loved one? If you wait 72 hours, you could miss the funeral. This really doesn't sound well thought out.

[MADem]

11. People WILL miss funerals. I'll bet the wiggle room on this will come down to time.

Three days is workable only for a preliminary list, but they'll probably go back to finalized list within an hour of takeoff, or some such. You get almost ten percent of your pax as people who are flying at the last minute.

The Canadians are rolling over totally on this. The AIRLINES are griping, because they will have to do the work, but the governments are fine with it.

After all, they all share the same lists, both watch AND no-fly.

I'm not a real fan of this--the reporting requirements are onerous. They need to find a way to do their damned jobs in real time, not with a bucketload of advanced notice.

[ThomCat]

15. You're right. No more bereavement flights.

If someone in the family dies suddenly, you can't get there.

If they're Jewish, and must be buried within 24 hours, then you just missed the funeral. That is not going to go over very well.

[earth mom]

12. You call this freedom?

:puke:

[babylonsister]

13. I don't know what to call it, but freedom is not the word I'd use. Fascism?

Now they really do want to see everyone's papers.

[Richard Steele]

14. K&R

[flyarm]

16. so a family member with a death in a family would not be allowed to fly

or people called that they got an adopted baby would miss the first days of the baby's birth..or grandparents called that their grandchild is going to be born will miss those precious days..
this is total bullshit!!

or a family member who has a parent or child dying could miss out on saying their final good byes..because they wouldn't have the 72 hour clearance..

this is utter bullshit..this is to data base the people of the world..

many people fly at the last moment..only VACATIONERS and people with alot of advance notice fly with advance reservations..

the airlines make big buck's on the last minute people..usually business fliers..

this is the New World Order folks..and it is utter bullshit..

and any countries people that allow this and allow their government to allow this is nuts!

fly retired flight crew.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

17. Well, this was inevitable.

I have long thought that the ultimate aim of this maladministration was to stop free travel of its citizens. Now, we have the proof of that aim.

[flyarm]

18. it is only inevitable if people allow it to be..when do we the people say enough?

and what are we willing to do about it??

sit in our congress peoples offices?? or senators offices..make the calls daily about it??

or do we just keep going along with it??

fly

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

40. I would love to have a congressman I could call.

Alas, this district is represented by one E. Scott Garrett. No bigger moron has ever walked the earth.

[nadinbrzezinski]

42. Still call him, I intend to call mine in the moring

DLC tool that she is

:-)

Not as bad, but there are days

[OneBlueSky]

19. these restrictions have little or nothing to do with combatting terrorism . . .

rather, they're being put in place to exert ever more undue control over the American populace . . . conditioning us to submit to the power of the state . . . it's all about fascism, and how the government can continue to tighten its control over the individual . . .

under fascism, individual rights and liberties weaken government power, dont'cha know, and must be curtailed at every opportunity . . . controlling access to airline flight is one such opportunity . . . there will be more and more in the coming years unless we can rid our government of these war-mongering control freaks . . .

[starroute]

20. And what about weather delays?

I remember the Christmas vacation when my son's flight back to college was delayed by light snow just long enough to keep it from meeting the connecting flight in Chicago. After a lot of frantic calculations, they finally figured out an alternative route for him to go by way of Las Vegas. It wasn't fun, but he got there.

Would these new regulations have forced us to make another three-hour round trip to retrieve him from the airport, then yet another trip three days after that -- not to mention making him a minimum of three days late for the start of classes?

The same considerations apply when the airlines overbook but are able to put the extra passengers on the next flight out. I guess that would become impossible -- sorry, buddy, come back in three days. No wonder the airlines aren't happy.

I would think that business people, who probably do the greatest amount of last-minute and urgent deal-making travel would be the most natural opponents of this. Why weren't they at the hearing?

[MADem]

26. This is directed at 'furriners' you see. People who fly over US airspace.

The US, UK and Canada already share a Terra List. The only ones griping are the airlines, the governments are already in love with the plan....

[KG]

21. but, we don't live in a police state.

nope. :eyes:

[frogcycle]

23. on the up side

it should encourage use of Amtrak, reduce air travel congestion

:sarcasm: (partial)

[Yael]

28. No sarcasm here. Love me some Amtrak.

Street to seat as fast as you can navigate to it. Nice, wide, comfortable seats with plenty of leg room. Electrical outlets for when the phone/laptop need a boost. The ability to connect to the internet or place a call. Rarely delayed. 2.5-hour drive in 1:10 flat...

If only we had invested in the infrastructure.

I will take Amtrak over any other form of transportation.

[frogcycle]

31. yeah, me too

we need an enlightened leadership - get rid of all the Inhofes and start doing some actual planning for the future - as in beyond the next frigging election cycle.

most of us read science fiction stories as kids, with futuristic cities with moving sidewalks and underground tubes to whisk one across the country. If one projects far enough into our future, presuming we have not destroyed ourselves, to a time when the US population is, say, 500 million, there is no frigging way that more airports and more airplanes and more cars and more expressways will be the transportation solution.

Getting from here to there requires doing things that represent first steps. Beef up the tracks, reinstall double track where its been torn up, add third tracks, put rapid transit lines in the medians of major coast-coast expressways, build more cars and locomotives, add service...

Same goes for moving people around in cities. Provide a clean, attractive, available, fast way to get across town and you can lure commuters onto mass transit from the burbs.

That is all expenditure that cannot demonstrate a short-term ROI. Neither did going to the moon. But the "if you build it they will come" philosophy applies - big time.

[KamaAina]

43. There is only one slight problem with Amtrak...

the trans-Pacific trestle has been out of service for quite some time now :-) , rendering service to Hawai'i impossible. Unless Matson brings the Lurline out of mothballs, we're pretty much stuck with the friendly skies. :sarcasm:

edit: spelling

[kimmylavin]

25. "Only those given clearance will get a boarding pass."

Somehow I think this will lead to a lot of "oops! You were accidentally on the no-fly list. What's that? You were headed to Washington for a massive protest? That's too bad..."

[TalkingDog]

29. Buh-bu-but....Their MISSION STATEMENT!!!!

"Transportation Security Administration protects the nation's transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce."

wait...."to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce."...there, fixed that for ya'.

And why the F*CK do I have to find out about this in a foreign paper!!!???

ARRGH!!! It's too freckin' early in the mornging for hair-pulling and cloth rending!!!

Go AWAY!




My Favorite Master Artist: Karen Parker GhostWoman Studios

[HCE SuiGeneris]

35. Just another slice of the freedom pie devoured by these power gluttons.

All on the fear factor card. :mad: :puke:

[soothsayer]

36. They don't want us traveling. Easier to control if we're at home. Global Warming will be the next

excuse for why we can't fly (and we'll sheepishly go along with it)

[JustAnotherGen]

37. Lovely

They are so hell bent on keeping us right under their thumbs - now aren't they? Man, I hate these people.

[fortyfeetunder]

38. This has to be a joke,

And pardon the pun, this cannot fly.
This will potentially cripple commercial aviation, as if 9/11 hadn't done enough damage.

And of course that can't stop someone from doing damage using another type of aircraft (helicopter, executive jet, etc.)....

edited for clarification

[nadinbrzezinski]

39. Closing of borders

oh never mind...

[rockymountaindem]

41. That's horrifying

We have got to get these crazy authoritarians out of power as soon as possible.

[MindPilot]

44. "Sorry, you're not on the list, and that ticket is non-refundable."

I can see where this is going; airlines will be able to sell those 7% 10% of seats at least twice.

Is it fascism yet?