New ID Requirements: The First 48
UPDATE: We're aware of reports that someone was asked their political affiliation to verify their identity and it is being looked into. Here's a response given to us by Kip Hawley: "It's unequivocally not our policy to use political, religious, or other sensitive personal topics as identity validation. If it happened, it was wrong and will not be repeated."
We're 48 hours into the new procedure and things have been smooth so far. Approximately 650 people have shown up to security checkpoints without ID and a total of 20 people have not been allowed to fly. That is .0005 percent of the approximately four million people that flew this weekend.
Of the 650 people that showed up without ID, it's taking us an average of 10 minutes to verify their identity and get them on their way. We're able to do this so quickly because of the close coordination of our officers at airports and our 24/7 ops center.
Our critics say this has nothing to do with security and it only affects people that want to exercise their rights to anonymous air travel (which Gilmore v Gonzalez ruled on) and terrorists that aren't good liars.
What these folks aren't getting is that by requiring ID, you're closing that old loophole that allowed (up until Saturday) anyone, good or bad, to show up with any boarding pass (theirs or someone else's), say they lost their ID, get a pat-down and bag check and be on their way. Now, no self respecting terrorist is going to subject him or herself to all the additional attention the new procedures brings. This includes: the possibility of interviews with behavior detection officers, calls about them to our national counter-terrorism ops center, unpredictable physical and bag screening and the real possibility of a chat with a local or federal law enforcement officer. No, now we're funneling people with bad intentions towards our expert-trained document checkers and behavior experts. Could a bad person produce an excellent fake ID and get past document checkers... sure. We know that no single layer is invulnerable, but forcing terrorists into what we want as opposed to what they prefer is just good security.
We'll continue to update the stats here and continue to thank the 99.9995 percent of air travelers that work with us to quickly and easily establish their identity.
Sterling
EoS Blog Team
Labels: mission
posted by Glen at
3:43 PM
184 Comments:
"What these folks aren't getting is that by requiring ID, you're closing that old loophole that allowed (up until Saturday) anyone, good or bad, to show up with any boarding pass (theirs or someone else's), say they lost their ID, get a pat-down and bag check and be on their way."
If they get a pat-down and bag check, who cares if they're on their way? This is the point you continually ignore as you lie to us about the supposed "security" this nonsensical policy change provides. In fact, you know as well as we do that this new policy does nothing to make anyone safer, and by diverting resources from things that WOULD make us safer, like screening cargo, actively makes us LESS safe.
Why does TSA insist on making air travel less safe?
June 23, 2008 4:26 PM
Now, no self respecting terrorist is going to subject him or herself to all the additional attention the new procedures brings. This includes: the possibility of interviews with behavior detection officers, calls about them to our national counter-terrorism ops center, unpredictable physical and bag screening and the real possibility of a chat with a local or federal law enforcement officer. No, now we're funneling people with bad intentions towards our expert-trained document checkers and behavior experts. Could a bad person produce an excellent fake ID and get past document checkers... sure. We know that no single layer is invulnerable, but forcing terrorists into what we want as opposed to what they prefer is just good security.
People with bad intentions? Just how do you know/veryify that? Chicken entrails? I-Ching? Ouija board? Psyco active drugs?
Security theater just added a new stage.
June 23, 2008 4:29 PM
Not like I'm surprised, but this doesn't explain why that process works when someone has "forgotten" their ID versus someone who refuses to show their ID, nor does it explain any of the other questions that came up in the previous thread.
June 23, 2008 4:32 PM
Here's a question: how many with ID were terrorist? You would argue 0, because no planes were high-jacked. I'd argue > 0. Just because they made in on the plane, with valid (or a good fake)ID, doesn't mean they weren't. And come on; in an average of 10 minutes, you were able to rule out each of those people as non-terrorists? I smell something fishy going on... As for those who were denied *they* terrorists? I call BS.
June 23, 2008 4:35 PM
Sterling,
Again, it's still easy to game this system. Mr. Bad Terrorist can produce a fake boarding pass with their own ID and get through the checkpoint, then use a boarding pass issued in someone else's name (presumably someone not on the no-fly list) to board an aircraft. Since you're not validating the legitimacy of the boarding pass, and you're not checking the no-fly list at the time of the document check, this threat still exists.
June 23, 2008 4:44 PM
How are you improving security by stopping people at a government checkpoint, then preventing them from passing your checkpoint simply because they assert their right to travel without first showing you their papers?
Let's consider four scenarios, two in which someone says he misplaced his credentials, two in which he politely declines to present credentials because it is his right to do so, two prior to the new rule instated by TSA on June 21, 2008, and two after:
Last week:.
scenario one:
traveler: "I'm sorry, I don't have any ID to show you, because left my ID in my other pants."
TSA agent: "That's okay. You'll be subjected to additional screening. Please step over there."
scenario two:
traveler: "I'm sorry, I don't have any ID to show you, because I know that I am not required to do so, and if we don't excercise our rights, we will lose them."
TSA agent: "That's okay. You'll be subjected to additional screening. Please step over there."
Today:.
scenario one:
traveler: "I'm sorry, don't have any ID to show you, because I left my ID in my other pants."
TSA agent: "That's okay. You'll be subjected to additional screening. Please step over there."
scenario two:
traveler: "I'm sorry, I don't have any ID to show you, because I know that I am not required to do so, and if we don't excercise our rights, we will lose them."
TSA agent: "Stop right there. You may not pass the checkpoint. You're not going to fly today."
June 23, 2008 4:46 PM
I cry for my country, my children and my grandchildren - we are done for with such agencies as DHS, TSA and "laws" such as The Patriot Act.
Can we ever reclaim what we had?
The terrorists have, indeed, won.
June 23, 2008 4:51 PM
Thank you for finally showing numbers, albeit this is the kind of situation in which they will always favor the TSA (after all people want to fly).
Could you please elaborate on those approximately 20 persons that weren´t allowed to fly?
I also would like to know why you are asking people what their political affiliation is to get clearance without ID.
June 23, 2008 4:51 PM
TSA: If the people on your blacklist are so dangerous that we must restrict their movement, why don't you send the police to arrest them and put them in front of a judge?
Instead, you plan to wait for these fugitives to show up in the airport so you can either turn them away or hassle them before they get on the flight for which they have paid? That is ridiculous.
Why is the Exectutive Branch, via TSA, acting as judge and jury, imposing the punishment of inclusion on your blacklist (and thus of restriction of their travel) with no chance for those whose liberties are being restricted to face their accusor or to defend themselves?
Fellow Americans: Why do any of you think it is appropriate for us to restrict someone's ability to travel within the country based on a secret list?
June 23, 2008 4:52 PM
So you're saying that you've been letting 10 people too dangerous to fly on planes each and every day since your misbegotten agency started?
June 23, 2008 5:03 PM
Sterling,
Some comments and questions:
1. Where is the privacy impact assessment for the new form and the obviously commercial datamining check? I don't recall seeing it on line, nor do I remember a public comment period. We wouldn't be breaking the law, would we???
2. Why would Hawley state on CNN that he was confident that his new policy would withstand a legal challenge if it weren't retaliatory in nature? Surely even he would know that it's unlikely that lawsuits are a known Al Qaeda tactic.
3. You must be really proud of the tally of 20 Americans you prevented from flying today. I hope at least one of them set you up for that lawsuit Hawley is confident he will win.
Our critics say this has nothing to do with security and it only affects people that want to exercise their rights to anonymous air travel (which Gilmore v Gonzalez ruled on) and terrorists that aren't good liars.
What these folks aren't getting is that by requiring ID, you're closing that old loophole that allowed (up until Saturday) anyone, good or bad, to show up with any boarding pass (theirs or someone else's), say they lost their ID, get a pat-down and bag check and be on their way.
Hawley, by his lawsuit comment, has stated, in his usual evasive way, that the whole purpose of this ID charade is retaliation against "people that want to exercise their rights to anonymous air travel..."
By the way, I DO "get it". I don't care who is on my plane as long as they have been screened for weapons.
Your agency and its leadership is truly pathetic. See you in court.
June 23, 2008 5:13 PM
OK, so now we know what kinds of questions travelers, even those who are lying, are asked when they say they "forgot" their ID, i.e., birthdate, previous address, political party affiliation, where are you getting the data from to ask such questions?
Can you verify that whatever data service you are using has "good" information?
Oh, shucks, I forgot: it's SSI. Silly goose.
June 23, 2008 5:24 PM
Which the Court ruled on in Gilmore? Come on, didn't Trollkiller already point out that you're wrong about that?
June 23, 2008 5:32 PM
Wintermute?
Haven't I seen you on TORC?
June 23, 2008 5:35 PM
"So you're saying that you've been letting 10 people too dangerous to fly on planes each and every day since your misbegotten agency started?"
Excellent point! Thank you.
and
"Your agency and its leadership is truly pathetic. See you in court."
It can't come soon enough!
June 23, 2008 5:38 PM
The average length of time for these ridiculous checks tells us nothing. What was the longest length of time you detained a citizen seeking to travel by air who did not have an ID? What was the shortest?
June 23, 2008 5:40 PM
"We'll continue to update the stats here and continue to thank the 99.9995 percent of air travelers that work with us to quickly and easily establish their identity"
TSA has never established my identity; TSA has only ever seen that the name on the ID I present matches that on the boarding pass I present. That TSA does not understand the difference between this and actual verification of identity, nor why verifying identity does nothing to enhance airport security, helps explain why the public hates TSA as much or more than it hates the IRS.
June 23, 2008 5:58 PM
Posted by Sterling: Could a bad person produce an excellent fake ID and get past document checkers... sure.
Sure... or they could Photoshop a boarding pass, which takes all of 30 seconds. This isn't rocket science, folks.
June 23, 2008 6:05 PM
do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
Dear TSA,
It is my sad duty to inform you that you have all violated your oath of office. You have betrayed the constition in your enforcement of this new rule.
Every member of the TSA, from Kip down to the guy who rummages through suitcases, are now traitors.
June 23, 2008 6:13 PM
What's that? It's raining in New York City? You say the Statue of Liberty is crying?
Your papers please.
I don't know which is worse-the self-righteous tone of this blog or the self respecting terrorist comment or that I have bad intentions because I don't believe I should be subjected to having to show additional identification.
And the judge was wrong in Gilmore v Gonzalez--there really aren't other travel options that are equal to that of flying. Sure--perhaps from Dallas to Houston, but New York to LA? Why does one think flying came about? It took too damn long to drive or take the train.
June 23, 2008 6:18 PM
The TSA has stopped even bothering to try and sell its ideas. They are just implementing increasingly more ridiculous security theater. This is honestly the most distrubing part. This facism (yes it is enablers, look up the definition) is amazing.
Not to mention you might have at least thought about filtering out the political affiliation question. Yes we know...blah blah blah...its only for ID purposes, but seriously its all about appearances (just like your security procedures)
June 23, 2008 6:51 PM
UPDATE: We're aware of reports that someone was asked their political affiliation to verify their identity and it is being looked into. Here's a response given to us by Kip Hawley: "It's unequivocally not our policy to use political, religious, or other sensitive personal topics as identity validation. If it happened, it was wrong and will not be repeated."
Kip, I don't care if it's your policy or not. Someone on your staff did it! And, you condoned this whole unconstitutional process. Don't you bloody get it?
June 23, 2008 6:58 PM
The question a passenger received about his/her political affiliation serves to highlight the potential for abuse.
Blacklists are unAmerican, especially when the process for the creation of the so-called "No-Fly List" is not transparent.
June 23, 2008 6:59 PM
With all of the financial issues with the domestic travel market right now this is going to cause more issues. maybe TSA will get its wish and the airlines fail so there wont be a threat, but then you will be out of a job.
Well I see that Lexis-Nexus made another sale.
Well considering the information they have on most people is incorrect this calls into question the info thats being checked. good example is my report that i pulled (along with a few others) and here is the list of errors it has on it.
Aliases - It has 5 listed for me, none of which have ever used.
associates: lets see it spelled my mothers maiden name wrong, and my fathers name is listed as john Doe. then there are names on that list i have never known. the only correct one on this list is a person i went to 1st grade with and havent talked to in 15 years.
addresses: well it has the address i live at is on i havent lived at in 8 years and have moved 5 times since then and none of those are listed.
my favorites from the report is that fact that i have a mortgage for a house in a state i have never lived for over $700K, as well as being married to someone i have never met. ROFLMAO
as for political affiliation how is that any of your concern, but in this case it has mine wrong as it says republican but Im certainly not considering what this damage this administration has done in the last 8 years.
basically 95% of the info on L-N on me is incorrect, and your going to take info as the truth? if so the number of false positives is going to go through the roof. What a great way tp waste the 9/11 security fees even more without any tangible benefit
as for the where looking into statement from kip that translates to "not a chance", and will be swept under the rug. Typical government, redirect,confuse, obsificate.
TSA you have pushed the boundaries with stupid rules for to long and now its over the edge. I hope you have time to be drug in front of congress because there are gonna be alot of letters going out to my state congress critters as well as those that provide your funding because this is beyond stupid but into the realm of retarded.
FINALLY SOMEONE FROM TSA PLEASE ANSWER ME THIS ALONG WITH MY QUESTION IN THE LAST BLOG POST ABOUT ID'S IN REGUARDS TO MY GOVERNMENT ISSUED ID THAT YOU SAY ISNT VALID. how is checking IDs add anything to security when they are not compared to any list. Also dont give me the line about expert document checkers because that doesnt fly as that skill takes years of training and experience and from reports TSAs class is very short (ie look at these samples and this info). Then If the people on the NO FLY list are so dangerous why havent they been arrested yet and gitmo'd??????? huh probably because there not.
Thats ok TSA stay the CURSE, because come January I hope congress and a new president not only neuter, but removed this circus from the earth and sends the ashes into space. That if someone doesnt challenge this in court and prove you wrong infront of the whole world.
June 23, 2008 7:31 PM
Kip Hawley: "It's unequivocally not our policy to use political, religious, or other sensitive personal topics as identity validation. If it happened, it was wrong and will not be repeated."
1. And we should believe you?
2. What guarantee do we have that it will NEVER be repeated?
3. And most important, What will happen if it does happen again?
We have already started to slide down the slippery slope, and we are only 24 hours into this nonsense.
June 23, 2008 7:52 PM
UPDATE: We're aware of reports that someone was asked their political affiliation to verify their identity and it is being looked into. Here's a response given to us by Kip Hawley: "It's unequivocally not our policy to use political, religious, or other sensitive personal topics as identity validation. If it happened, it was wrong and will not be repeated."
And the employees who did so will be reprimanded how, exactly?
And you will apologize to the victim of this ridiculous interrogation how, exactly?
June 23, 2008 7:58 PM
Approximately 650 people have shown up to security checkpoints without ID and a total of 20 people have not been allowed to fly.
What became of the 20 people that were considered "too dangerous to fly"? Arrested? Let go?
I can bet if they played your game, and produced ID, they would have flown. So just because they did not show ID, they were considered dangerous. OK, so next time they do show ID, the screener glances at their papers, all in order, and they fly. What now makes them less dangerous.
I can almost bet, those same 20 people have flown sometime after 9/11, and they were NOT considered a threat then. What now makes those people a threat?
In all seriousness, can you not see just how stupid this all is?
June 23, 2008 8:09 PM
I'm going to give Kip the benefit of the doubt here because I'm certain he had no idea political affiliation could be one of the verification questions.
However, the issue, in my mind, is that when you start a procedure such as that you open the door precisely to such things.
What's amazing to me is that we've gone down the entire "slippery slope" in the first 48 hours of the policy. I almost feel sorry for TSA that this happened so quickly, but it's exactly the sort of reason why this policy is hopeless.
I trust everybody understands that we're no longer talking about issues such as First Amendment subleties, but that the "ball was just knocked out of the park".
There are various thresholds that can be met that would allow a government to be able to "violate" some provision of the First Amendment, but there's absolutely no way you can have a situation where a representative of a government can ask somebody what political party they are registered with as a condition to do anything, whether it's ruled a "right" or a "privilege".
I think this incident has fatally damaged this entire procedure.
June 23, 2008 8:16 PM
What's so wrong with eliminating the treat to America from political parties? Certainly there are elements in both parties that seek to change the course of this great government.
Root them out!
June 23, 2008 8:22 PM
UPDATE: We're aware of reports that someone was asked their political affiliation to verify their identity and it is being looked into. Here's a response given to us by Kip Hawley: "It's unequivocally not our policy to use political, religious, or other sensitive personal topics as identity validation. If it happened, it was wrong and will not be repeated."
Why was this allowed to happen in the first place? What sort of clown training are you providing your TSOs when even a single one of them thought it was permissible to ask someone's political affiliation?
I hope you, Kip, that you are reasonable enough to find that person who was asked about their political affiliation and profusely apologized to them over and over again.
Otherwise, I have no doubt that these stories will continue to filter out.
June 23, 2008 8:37 PM
While the TSA is enacting yet another useless security procedure Sea-Tac Airport (Seattle, Washington) is letting people on the air field without a physical escort and isn't doing ID nor vehicle screening. See news article.
Tell the TSA to stop wasting time on security theater and to protect our air ports, planes, and the American public from attack. Just because Sea-Tac hasn't had a problem resulting from their almost non-existent security procedures for their air field doesn't mean they won't.
TSA: if someone gains access to Sea-Tac's air field and kills 200 people it's going to be your fault. If it happens it'll be proof you don't care about the safety of your fellow flying Americans.
June 23, 2008 9:14 PM
The court review of this "papers please" policy can't come soon enough.
And, once again, TSA has shown that it can't follow its own (often secret, unpublished) policy.
Treason, I say.
June 23, 2008 9:25 PM
Ayn R. Key said...
Which the Court ruled on in Gilmore? Come on, didn't Trollkiller already point out that you're wrong about that?
Why yes I did Ayn R. Key, I thought I had made a logical argument on why the TSA is wrong on Gilmore and tried to open up a dialog. I guess all the lawyers on the payroll were not up to the challenge.
I think for now I want to concentrate on the fact that the two sections of 49 C.F.R. PART 1540--CIVIL AVIATION SECURITY: GENERAL RULES that the TSA cites does not grant the TSA the authority or right to demand ID as a condition of granting access to a sterile area.
In fact the sections they cite when read properly with the definitions for Part 1540 limits the TSA to screening for weapons, explosives and incendiaries as the sole criteria for granting access to a sterile area.
§ 1540.5 Terms used in this subchapter.
Sterile area means a portion of an airport defined in the airport security program that provides passengers access to boarding aircraft and to which the access generally is controlled by TSA, or by an aircraft operator under part 1544 of this chapter or a foreign air carrier under part 1546 of this chapter, THROUGH the screening of persons and property.
Screening function means the inspection of individuals and property for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries.
Screening location means each site at which individuals or property are inspected for the presence of weapons, explosives, or incendiaries.
I don't see ANYWHERE in those definitions that say a word about ID. The TSA is right we must submit to SCREENINGS, they are WRONG if they think the law included ID checks and the denial of access on the unwillingness to show ID.
Kind people please excuse the following rudeness, I just want to make sure there is no chance of it not being seen. I have asked several times for them to address this issue.
ONCE AGAIN, I CHALLENGE THE TSA TO PROVE THE TWO SECTIONS OF 1540 THAT THEY CITE (§ 1540.107 & § 1540.105 (a)(2) ) GIVE THEM ANY AUTHORITY OR RIGHT TO DEMAND AN ID AS A CONDITION OF ACCESS TO A STERILE AREA
June 23, 2008 10:06 PM
Can anyone say McCarthy?
June 23, 2008 10:07 PM
Would you so kind TSA types please let me know which political parties are ok to belong to?
Also while your at it please let us know which religions are acceptable to the TSA Controllers.
I sure wouldn't want to belong to the wrong one and have my patriotism challenged.
In another post that was censored by the Blog Operators a Blog Rep indicated that TSA lawyers were ok with this ID BS.
I stated that Hitlers Generals were ok with the systematic elimination of a whole people.
The point being that the beginnings are very simular. Control the people more, and more, and more.........
TSA has made a major error with this policy.
I call for the arrest and trial of DHS/TSA leaders responsible for this illegal policy. They are in fact traitors to the United States.
June 23, 2008 10:10 PM
Apparently, this website doesn't like what I had to say or TSA's getting slammed now because it wouldn't take my original comment.
So 20 people were denied boarding because they wouldn't show an ID. How many of those were arrested? I'm guessing 0 ... else TSA would have been trumpeting it as a success rather than being thrown into damage control by asking someone his political affiliation.
How many of these people were so dangerous that they couldn't be allowed to board a plane yet not dangerous enough to be arrested? Again, I'm guessing 0.
Dave Nelson's exactly right. It doesn't matter if Kippie's against this or not. HIS decision to implement this program allowed this to happen. HIS decision allowed such a information service vendor to be contracted. HIS lack of management did not allow for proper training of the TSO's in the process. There is no excuse for NOT knowing what questions were going to be asked and what information is going to be available. If he had no clue, he that's poor management and makes me question (even more than I do now) his leadership and acumen for security.
"Do you want to fly today" has a new meaning: don't assert your rights or you won't get to fly.
This is an assault on our rights, plain and simple. This nothing but a punitive measure directed to those who would assert their rights.
TSA was probably setup today by a legal challenge. Hopefully it was the man who was interrogated today. I hope this goes to court and is struck down. It can't come soon enough.
I can't help but think about a quote on our doors at work from Abraham Lincoln: "America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." This is what's happening right now ... and TSA's in the middle of it. America is the middle of destroying itself while Osama sits and laughs in a cave. He probably never thought it would be this easy to take America down. Do we really need to completely destroy the village in order to save it?
You must be proud, Kip.
May God help us all.
Robert
June 23, 2008 10:10 PM
I always show my ID when asked, even with the TSA. But why should we show government officials documents to fly domestically? If the airlines have such a policy, I understand because they are private entities, but the government should not ask for ID for domestic travel. A passenger in just about any other mode of transportation doesn't have to show ID to a government official on a domestic trip, so why should airplane passengers? I cooperate because I want to fly with minimal hassle but the policy should change.
Again, if the airlines need to verify whether the person boarding the plane is the correct person, they could ask for ID at the gate. But why get the government involved in this?
June 23, 2008 10:30 PM
So it only took 48 hours before the first reported instance of a question about political affiliation being required.
I'll make two predictions:
1) The TSA employees who did this will never be reprimanded in any serious manner; the worst thing they will face will be some additional "training".
2) The poor passenger who was questioned will never receive a face to face apology from the questioners, the supervisors or any of Kip's minions.
The fact that this traveler was questioned at all about his politics clearly demonstrates that either A) this policy is clearly aimed at deterring citizens from exercising their right to travel without ID, or B) was so incompetently planned that no one happened to think that political affiliation should be a topic that is off-limits.
On second thought, it could be both.
T-the-B at flyertalk
June 23, 2008 10:35 PM
Just out of curiosity, do you guys run my credit report if I show up with no ID? That's the only way I can think of you'd be able to validate I am who I say I am. Every time I request a copy of my credit report online, they always ask me "validation questions". While hopefully all the inquiries won't lower my FICO score, who else besides the credit bureaus collect and maintain vast amounts of information on everybody? Maybe you should do this as a standard practice, since a photo ID really validates little.
"There are good people with bad papers; and bad people with good papers." - Bertolt Brecht
And, with "Secure Flight" or whatever comes after that, will I need a certain minimum FICO score to fly? Would make sense; the government already checks credit scores before issuing DOD security clearances.
June 23, 2008 10:46 PM
Question about the 20 people that were denied the constitutional right to travel freely within the United States.
Since all 20 must have been considered a hazard to the safe operation of the aircraft were they all arrested and charged with a crime?
If not why were they not allowed to travel.
Not about control you say, I raise the BS flag.
Enforcers of the ID policy must be charge with civil rights violations.
TSO's, you ready for what is coming?
June 23, 2008 10:53 PM
Geeez. Only a few hours and 40 negative comments. Seems like even TSA supporters aren't buying this one.
This is a HORRIBLE policy that is all about control and nothing about improving security. Heck, even the strip search machine has a little to do about security. This just plain stinks.
June 23, 2008 11:30 PM
Senator McCarthy (Sorry I mean Kip, my apologies for putting the wrong name on my black list...but you have no recourse), an apology is not appropriate. Stopping the policy until you can guarantee it won't happen again is barely satisfactory.
What should happen is you and your useless boss should publicaly apologize to the American people and cancel this absurd policy permanently and with a great deal of shame.
This is far from the only thing wrong with it, however I am more than willing to bet it will catch a whole lot more publicity.
And BTW none of this "if it happened" bs the person who originally posted it had no problem with the question and no reason to lie...however many others will
June 23, 2008 11:33 PM
Does this mean I can no longer use my Federal Prison ID Card?
June 23, 2008 11:44 PM
UPDATE: We're aware of reports that someone was asked their political affiliation to verify their identity and it is being looked into. Here's a response given to us by Kip Hawley: "It's unequivocally not our policy to use political, religious, or other sensitive personal topics as identity validation. If it happened, it was wrong and will not be repeated."
How do you get around with your nose growing longer and longer with every new comment?
June 23, 2008 11:52 PM
You guys are so full of crap I can't stand it anymore. This entire blog is nothing but a series of demonstrations that you think we are all stupid. We're not, and we all can see that you are doing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to keep us safer.
June 24, 2008 1:30 AM
"It's unequivocally not our policy to use political, religious, or other sensitive personal topics as identity validation."
A point no one is making yet...
Why do your "badged" "officers" have access to information like that?
What "other sensitive personal" information is now in their hands?
You appear to have provided one more area where our personal information is vulnerable.
Heck of a job Kippy.
Thanks.
,>)
June 24, 2008 5:44 AM
Blog guy Sterling said: "We're 48 hours into the new procedure and things have been smooth so far. Approximately 650 people have shown up to security checkpoints without ID and a total of 20 people have not been allowed to fly. That is .0005 percent of the approximately four million people that flew this weekend."
And twenty people too many denied their basic right to travel by the best available method within their means. Your BS "ID-Security Theater" policy has violated their rights, and those of the other 630 who complied with your stupid "requests" for verification/identity theft, even more egregiously than it has the 4 million people who've complied with your fascist "Papiere bitte!" demands.
Blog guy Sterling said: "Our critics say this has nothing to do with security and it only affects people that want to exercise their rights to anonymous air travel (which Gilmore v Gonzalez ruled on) and terrorists that aren't good liars."
Don't know what the latter part has to do with the former... But the critics are *RIGHT*.
Blog guy Sterling said: "What these folks aren't getting is that by requiring ID, you're closing that old loophole that allowed (up until Saturday) anyone, good or bad, to show up with any boarding pass (theirs or someone else's), say they lost their ID, get a pat-down and bag check and be on their way. "
And if the check shows that they aren't carrying what Blog Guy Chris referred to as "pointy objects", and the rest of us call "items which can actually be used to threaten the safety of the aircraft", then they're as safe to get on the plane as the meekest, most-submissive person to go through with ID in hand ready to hand to the screener.
Blog guy Sterling said: "No, now we're funneling people with bad intentions towards our expert-trained document checkers and behavior experts."
Oh, thanks, I really NEEDED a good laugh! "Expert-trained"? Who exactly do you imagine you're trying to fool, really?
Blog Guy Sterling said: "We'll continue to update the stats here and continue to thank the 99.9995 percent of air travelers that work with us to quickly and easily establish their identity."
While I, and every other American who's NOT in favor of Nazi-style fascist crap like your new "Papiere bitte!" regime, thank the twenty people who were wrongly denied their right to travel by your new policies and the other 630 people who did not have ID, for showing how ridiculous said policies are.
June 24, 2008 7:33 AM
Just a couple questions:
DHS/TSA have you no shame?
What makes you believe that you can contiue down this slippery slope of Constitutional violations while breaking other federal laws?
Stop the security theater and concentrate on what your original mission statement was. You've proven that you put half baked plans into action while neglecting to consider the full ramifications of those plans. You write inconsistant documents and post those same documents on the web and don't even bother to correct those documents when people point out those inconsistancies. Your contempt for the rights of American people is monumental.
June 24, 2008 7:50 AM
I don't know what to say that hasn't already been said. This policy is horrible, and I hope the courts overturn it quickly. Ladies and gentlemen, I urge you to contact your congressional representative and senator about this matter. I know I certainly will.
June 24, 2008 8:27 AM
Anonymous @ 0548 said:
A point no one is making yet...
Why do your "badged" "officers" have access to information like that?
What "other sensitive personal" information is now in their hands?
You appear to have provided one more area where our personal information is vulnerable.
Heck of a job Kippy.
If Kippie and the TSA had any inclination to obey the law of the land, they would have answered both of your questions -- and many others -- in a web-based Privacy Impact Assessment. Federal law requires federal agencies to publish PIAs anytime they create or change a system of records.
So, without publication of a PIA and the requisite public comment period, the TSA and its leadership are committing a felony or two or three as of June 22.
June 24, 2008 9:09 AM
What a disgusting abuse of federal powers under the disguise of safety. It's been said by many others, but let me add my voice to the chorus, TSA's implementation of ID checking does nothing to increase our safety.
My sincerest hope is that the ma & pa Kettles of this once great country of ours are finally waking up to the fact they're giving up their civil liberties one by one and in return all they're receiving is the allusion of security.
It is a sad day in Amerika. Papers Please! Those that ignore history are destined to repeat it.
June 24, 2008 10:08 AM
UPDATE: We're aware of reports that someone was asked their political affiliation to verify their identity and it is being looked into. Here's a response given to us by Kip Hawley: "It's unequivocally not our policy to use political, religious, or other sensitive personal topics as identity validation. If it happened, it was wrong and will not be repeated."
I don't see, and have not seen elsewhere, wher it said a TSO asked the question. It might have been an LEO who was brought in to talk with the passenger who refused to show an ID, just a thought. And no I'm not saying that that makes it right, asking those types of questions are way off base.
June 24, 2008 10:08 AM
Like an anonymous poster above me, I think this policy is treason. Those all along the chain, from Kip on down to the TSO who was stupid enough to ask for political affiliation, should be tried as traitors to the United States of America.
When I joined the USAF, I took an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. What am I supposed to do when part of the executive branch of the US Government acts like the enemy that I'm sworn to protect against?
(And to Ayn R. Key; Sorry. Wrong Wintermute. Kinda a common handle, but I've been using it around 20 years now... Kinda late to change.)
June 24, 2008 10:48 AM
Still have not received the DHS/TSA approved list of political affiliations or religious groups.
Would you please get it posted to your Information for Travelers pages so we may kowtow properly?
Thanks.
June 24, 2008 11:14 AM
"What these folks aren't getting is that by requiring ID, you're closing that old loophole that allowed (up until Saturday) anyone, good or bad, to show up with any boarding pass (theirs or someone else's), say they lost their ID, get a pat-down and bag check and be on their way."
Actually, the only loophole it closes is the one that got Gonzales and the TSA off the hook in Gilmore v. Gonzales. If this policy had been in place when Gilmore attempted to fly without ID, he would have prevailed in court.
"... now we're funneling people with bad intentions towards our expert-trained document checkers and behavior experts."
Now you're funneling patriots who are standing up for their rights to free assembly and free speech through government harassment.
ID proves nothing because the no-fly and watch lists are not and cannot be effective at identifying bad guys. False positives and false negatives are both way too high. The lists can, however, be altered by those in power to harass and restrict travel of innocent political targets without fear of detection.
This is exactly the type of government power the framers of the Constitution were trying to prevent.
Furthermore, the policy is completely ineffective because a terrorist doesn't need to create a fake identification card (which may be hard), he only needs to create a fake boarding pass that matches his real ID (which is trivial). The watch-list check happens when you purchase the ticket not at the checkpoint. You can use a stolen credit card to purchase the ticket in a clear name and flaunt your real, on-the-list name at the checkpoint all you want.
This sheer brokenness of this new policy proves that the TSA's motives are something other than security.
June 24, 2008 11:26 AM
The below quote says it all, taken from Confessions of a TSA Agent
Trust me, you don't want to take on the federal government when a TSA agent is abused, assaulted or intimidated.
Also note that the Federal Government can fine you $5000 - $25,000 for "abusing" a TSA agent, BUT you cannot fine the government when THEY abuse you.
The "interrogations" of ID-less passengers will only escalate. The current administration views torture as a viable means to combat terrorism.
Is this the America thousands have fought and died for?
June 24, 2008 11:33 AM
Could a bad person produce an excellent fake ID and get past document checkers... sure.
And a bad person could produce an excellent fake boarding pass that matches their actual ID and get past document checkers.
To get 20 mules past your checkpoint, the bad guys would only need to buy one cheap clean ticket and photoshop it 20 times.
TSA ID checking only makes sense for the pure commercial reason of making it harder for passengers to resell their tickets--it makes money for the airlines.
And this new ID policy of refusing dissenters but not losers is pure political discrimination.
June 24, 2008 11:45 AM
According to a poster on FlyerTalk, there are even more interesting changes coming soon to your local checkpoint or boarding area. Just wonderful. What other acts are they going to add to the dog and pony show?
June 24, 2008 11:46 AM
What is the safe answer when a badged and uniformed TSA federal officer asks: "What is your political affiliation?"
"Let me talk to your supervisor."
or:
"Supporting TSA is supporting the troops! Sir!"
June 24, 2008 11:57 AM
Government doesn't trust it's citizens - that's obvious.
And it wonders why the citizens don't trust it?
The new program smacks of McCarthyism.
Y'all are making the process worse, not better.
June 24, 2008 12:09 PM
How can anyone gripe about an ID requirement? The world is a dangerous place. With a war resolution about to be passed in both the House (Res 362) and Senate (Res 580) next week, we can expect some sort of terror attack at any time. Iran is not going to take a blockade quietly.
This ID check comes none-too-soon. I just hope TSA rachets up security everywhere.
June 24, 2008 12:39 PM
After filling out the affidavit, Laurie called a service to verify my address. The service needed me to then correctly answer three questions about myself, which Laurie relayed to me. The first was my date of birth, the second was a previous address (which I only got right on my second try), and the third was "You are registered to vote. Which political party have you registered with?" I got all three right, and only then did Laurie clear me to go through security.
June 24, 2008 12:51 PM
Dear TSA,
Can you please inform us when you plan to start improving our lives and making it LESS of an ordeal to board a plane? When will you start using technology and intelligence to generate less inconvenience to passengers? When will you stop harassing millions in the name of security with absolutely no proof of effectiveness, much less cost/effectiveness?
It seems to me a new annoying "rule" is added every month, and we have no choice but to obey, or we can´t get where we have to be. I have yet to see an inconvenience removed, except perhaps for the prohibition of nail clippers, which was absolutely completely ridiculous in the first place.
June 24, 2008 1:18 PM
So, what is the major SOP that is coming soon to airports?
June 24, 2008 1:21 PM
Has there been a mass exodus of lawyers at the TSA?
Surely by now you guys could have found one lawyer that can answer my simple question about the legality of demanding ID and requiring it as a condition of access to a sterile area. Just to make it easy here are the questions again;
Does 49 C.F.R. § 1540.107 & § 1540.105 (a)(2) allow for the demand of ID by the TSA and the willingness to show ID by the passenger as a condition for granting access to a sterile area when § 1540.5 appears to limit the screenings to strictly a search for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries as the only requirement for granting access to the sterile area?
§ 1540.5 Terms used in this subchapter.
Sterile area means a portion of an airport defined in the airport security program that provides passengers access to boarding aircraft and to which the access generally is controlled by TSA, or by an aircraft operator under part 1544 of this chapter or a foreign air carrier under part 1546 of this chapter, THROUGH the screening of persons and property.
Screening function means the inspection of individuals and property FOR weapons, explosives, and incendiaries.
Screening location means each site at which individuals or property are inspected for the presence of weapons, explosives, or incendiaries.
I know there is at least one person at the TSA that would love to put Trollkiller in his place. Now is your chance. Don't make me double dog dare you.
June 24, 2008 2:31 PM
I would bet that with this ID equired civil liberties violation that TSA has earned the distinction of being the least respected/trusted federal agency.
Good tie breaker Kip!
June 24, 2008 2:44 PM
If my ID is stolen and I have to fly out of town, why would I feel comfortable signing an affidavit giving my home address to a local TSA screener?
It's common knowledge that a small minority of TSA screeners are thieves. I would be foolish to give my address to a TSA screener. He/she would then be aware that I am out of town and could burglarize my home.
June 24, 2008 2:55 PM
Great. A government checkpoint where someone demands to see your papers. That used to be a cliche example of something so fundamentally anti-American that no one would ever think about doing it here.
I believe you are a greater threat to our freedom than the terrorists.
June 24, 2008 3:03 PM
Of the 650 people that showed up without ID, it's taking us an average of 10 minutes to verify their identity and get them on their way. We're able to do this so quickly because of the close coordination of our officers at airports and our 24/7 ops center.
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
First off, checking ID at all is a violation of ones rights.
Two, since you say the average time to clear a person with no ID is just ten minutes, what was the longest time a person was detained? If the average was 10 minutes then the longer period of time must have been a good bit longer than 10 minutes.
June 24, 2008 3:19 PM
Not a single pro-TSA comment. Even the usual chorus of "you want the terrorists to win because you won't trade liberty for security you crybabies" hasn't appeared.
Moreover not a member of the blog team have shown up to answer any comments, even with token non-answers. Even the TSOs who comment here who aren't part of the blog team are refusing to touch this one.
Perhaps you did go too far this time?
(Wintermute - now I know you aren't the same one. The one I know used to say I wasn't in the military because I was only in the USAF.)
June 24, 2008 3:46 PM
Anonymous said...
This ID check comes none-too-soon. I just hope TSA rachets up security everywhere.
Then you should have NO problem in allowing the US government to permanently station an agent in your house, to ensure you are safe and that you are never a threat.
Life has risks, the government is NOT responsible for protecting us from every threat that MAY happen.
June 24, 2008 3:49 PM
where are my other posts? Its been almost 48 hours since the first and over 24 since the second...clear the backlog its not gonna help your situation at all.
June 24, 2008 4:01 PM
"Anonymous said...
According to a poster on FlyerTalk, there are even more interesting changes coming soon to your local checkpoint or boarding area. Just wonderful. What other acts are they going to add to the dog and pony show?"
- 311 will be laxed greatly. The officers' judgment will finally be allowed instead of arbitrarily taking away all liquids.
- You get as many tries through the x-ray as necessary.
- The goal is for the biggest airports to all have an average peak wait time that is less than 10 minutes (and smaller airports to have less) I think...
Miami is batting at 7 minutes average peak time already...
I guess all the new changes are actually more convenient...
June 24, 2008 4:25 PM
Quote from anonymous: How can anyone gripe about an ID requirement?
Because it does nothing for security and barring probable cause for a commission of a crime, the government has no reason to know who I or anyone else is.
It's called privacy. Or with TSA, lack thereof.
Reminds me of the movie Dr. Zhivago (for those that don't know, it takes place during the Russian Revolution) where Dr. Zhivago is picked up and used as the Reds think necessary. They tell him there's no such thing as a private life.
Is that the kind of world you want to live in? Supporting measures like TSA's ID requirement is a step in that direction.
The world is a dangerous place.
And it was before 9/11 and will always be. Does that mean we should give up everything to be "safe an