Ain't nothin' here. Y'all best be movin' on, compadre.

 

 

"There's a pathology that society has to deal with. There are people who want to display their prowess in Internet technology -- but they screw up ... [big time."] ~Judge A. Howard Matz

FACIALLY LAWFUL SINCE 1998

MAYDAY IN AMERICA! SECRET THINGS CRIME SCENE NUTS AND EXTREMISTS
c

 

 

Unfriendly Skys

Content on this page requires a newer version of Adobe Flash Player.

Get Adobe Flash player

1/19/98

FLYING WITHOUT IDENTIFICATION

[Reprinted from "The American's Bulletin" -- May 1997]

by: Betsy Ross

 In the last two years, everyone flying on a commercial airline has stepped up to an airline's ticket counter and heard the agent recite a familiar litany. The monologue goes, "has your bag been unattended; have you accepted gifts from a stranger; can I see your identification please?" The traveler docilely murmurs answers, and produces a driver's license or some equivalent.

 As a die-hard Constitutionalist, I believe that we still have an absolute, unfettered, God-given right to travel from point A to point B without permission from the state -- in the air, as well as on land. This Nazi procedure of "your papers, please" has never been appropriate for our country.

 I have had occasion to travel a good deal in the last several months, and on those trips I decided to research and test this issue about the necessity for producing identification. I have talked with agents, and their supervisors, of several major airlines in cities across America, and have gradually pieced together a rather complete picture of the real legal situation regarding our right to travel.

 Next, I tested this finding with several airlines. When asked for identification, I produced only my Sam's Club card, or my travel agent's ID card, or a Costco card. These are all picture ID's, but they are privately issued, and do not even have a signature on them.

 The airline agents just freaked out, and demanded to see some state-issued ID. They routinely told me that "it was federal law!" The government absolutely required me to cough up an "official" ID card, without which the agent couldn't even THINK of letting me on the plane.

 I told the agents that I could not find any federal regulation mandating that type of identification, and then asked them to cure my ignorance and please cite the regulation. Now, at this point, individual airline agents have reacted differently. Some called in their supervisor. Alaska Air employees were the most gracious; Northwest agents were the worst -- they were rude, belligerent and hostile brats. But they all folded, every time.

 A particularly nasty Northwest employee marched me all the way back to the electronic detection equipment, made me pass through it a second time, and had the guard thoroughly search my carry-on bag. The same airline agent-from-hell actually made rude and demeaning remarks to me as we trudged back to the counter -- and then she let me on the plane. 

Alaska Air was much more reasonable -- the agent just issued my seat pass, and commented that some people seem tenaciously to hold the thought that they have the right to travel without producing government ID -- to which I responded, "yes, amazing, isn't it -- and I'm one of them."

 In Seattle, an agent said AS HE HANDED ME MY TICKET, "you know, if you don't show me any government-issued ID, I can't let you board the plane." I replied, Yes, I understand. But I didn't, and you are. With a smile, he just said, "have a nice trip." So I have flown several times using only my meager privately issued picture ID cards.

 Every time I used this strategy, I noticed that the agent put an orange sticker on my checked bags, and also on my seat pass on the ticket. Several agents divulged that this is the policy they are supposed to follow when a person does not show government ID. The bags simply wait in the baggage room until the person presents the matching seat pass as he/she actually boards the plane; then the bags go on board.

 On my next trip, I decided to push the envelope even further. When the Alaska Air agent made the usual perfunctory request for identification, I put on my best face, smiled sweetly, and said, "Gee, I'm so sorry, but I just don't have any ID I could show you." 

To my speechless astonishment, the agent just said, "no problem -- just fill out this simple form, and present it to the counter at the airplane gate. I watched as the familiar orange sticker again went on my bag. I repeated the same scenario with Horizon Air on another trip. I have now flown twice without producing any identification whatsoever. 

Northwest was actually instrumental in advancing my education about this issue. I was so aggravated by the insolent and hostile treatment that their employee gave me, (hopefully former employee, after the blistering letter I sent to the company president), that I demanded to see a supervisor on the spot. 

I then demanded that he produce the relevant federal regulations RIGHT NOW, or face personal liability for authorizing an unreasonable search and seizure, dereliction of duty, fraud, conspiracy, civil rights deprivation and any other legal buzz words I could think of at that moment which would justify a lawsuit against him personally, as well as his employer. 

Like everyone else, he couldn't show me any statute or regulations. He even admitted that there are none. However, he did produce a copy of Security Directive 96-05, which the Federal Aviation Agency issued to all airlines in August of 1996. 

Its wording is very instructive; it reads as follows:

 1. IDENTIFY THE PASSENGER -

 A. ALL PASSENGERS WHO APPEAR TO BE 18 YEARS OF AGE WILL PRESENT A GOVERNMENT ISSUED PICTURE ID, OR TWO OTHER FORMS OF ID, AT LEAST ONE OFWHICH MUST BE ISSUED BY A GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY.

 B. THE AGENT MUST RECONCILE THE NAME ON THE ID AND THE NAME ON THE TICKET -- EXCEPT AS NOTED BELOW. 

C. IF THE PASSENGER CANNOT PRODUCE IDENTIFICATION, OR IT CANNOT BE RECONCILED TO MATCH THE TICKET, THE PASSENGER BECOMES A "SELECTEE."

CLEAR ALL OF THEIR LUGGAGE AS NOTED IN SECTION 6, BELOW. 

[no letter] CLEAR SELECTEE'S CHECKED AND CARRY-ON LUGGAGE, AND SUSPICIOUS ARTICLES DISCOVERED BY THE QUESTIONS ASKED; 

A. IF THE SELECTEE IS ON A FLIGHT WITHIN THE 48 CONTINENTAL US STATES, OR TO MEXICO, OR TO CANADA, ITEMS CAN BE CLEARED BY EITHER OF THE FOLLOWING METHODS:

 1. EMPTY THE LUGGAGE OR ITEM AND PHYSICALLY SEARCH ITS CONTENTS BY A QUALIFIED SCREENER, [remember the actions taken by northwest] OR; 

2. BAG-MATCH -- ENSURE THE BAG IS NOT TRANSPORTED ON THE AIRCRAFT IF THE PASSENGER DOES NOT BOARD. [remember all those orange stickers] 

B. IF THE SELECTEE IS ON AN INTERNATIONAL FLIGHT -- CHECKED LUGGAGE, CARRY-ON LUGGAGE, AND SUSPECT ITEMS CAN BE CLEARED ONLY BY THE FOLLOWING METHOD; EMPTY THE LUGGAGE OR ITEM AND PHYSICALLY SEARCH ITS CONTENTS BY QUALIFIED SCREENERS. 

This document apparently goes on for ten more pages; the Northwest supervisor gave me only the first page, which contains the information printed above. The next time I refused to produce ID and the agent freaked, I told her, "just tap up Sec-Dec 96-5 on your computer, and go to Paragraph 1, Section C. Designate me as a 'selectee,' and proceed accordingly. She apparently thought I was an FAA undercover employee, because she said that she was "tired of you federal guys coming around" and literally spying on airline agents, "coercing us into lying to people, and essentially being the 'bag man' for an activity which has no legal requirement." I told her that I could not agree more. 

Another airline employee later confirmed that FAA agents often engage in such entrapment activities, to make sure that airline agents parrot the government party line about state-issued ID.

 I also hit pay dirt in a discussion with another, much nicer Northwest agent on the East coast. In a candid conversation, he told me that FAA personnel had held training sessions with all airline agents in the fall of 1996. Agents were informed directly by the FAA that they absolutely could not bar an American citizen from boarding a plane, even if a passenger refused to produce any identification at all!

 I understand Delta Airline is facing two large lawsuits because employees twice denied this reality, and actually twice kept off a plane a passenger who had only private ID to show. Anyone want to own an airline, courtesy of a judge? I have personally flown Delta with only a private travel card, so I guess they already had their hand slapped

 Yet another agent in the Midwest admitted that airline personnel were deliberately and knowingly coercing people into showing government ID by saying "it's the law." According to him the reality is that the companies are simply tired of people selling their frequent-flyer tickets.

 The airlines wanted to stem this practice by checking everyone's ID, but knew there would be BIG problems if they instituted this procedure as a private corporate policy. It was so much more convenient to say it was federal law and make the government the scapegoat.  

So this policy meets the airlines' private financial goals, and the government's goal of ever-increasing social control. If no one complains or asserts their rights regarding travel, then another freedom is "poof" gone. Our children watch this happen, and grow up thinking that the state has both the right to define our identity by issuing documents saying who we are, and also the right to require us to produce them on demand.

Reprinted from "The American's Bulletin,"

3536 N Pacific Hwy, Medford, OR 97501, May 1997, (541)-779-7709


 

 

BEAN LADEN

$PECIAL REWARD$ FOR THE$E COP$

OUTSIDE IT'S AMERICA

"what would be the capacity of law enforcement and of the courts to SUPRESS this kind of SPEECH?" -Judge A. Howard Matz, PRE-TRIAL HEARING OF KILLERCOP.COM

The Trial of Judge A.Howard Matz

A QUESTION FOR AMERICA:

Is "pretty good" pretty much like "pretty clear?" Because I'm "pretty sure" it is not. I know, it's complex. But then again, I'm officially nutzzzzzz, until certified (.pdf) un-nutzzzzzz, in a competent court of the law. So I am waiting on the law. It sure is not speedy...but it is baffled.

TORTURED COVER UP

I'm all a Twitter waiting to see your reaction, to my reaction, to your Treatment and the promised Restoration. You'll just die when you see what I have in store for everyone involved in the story in 2012. At least that's my intent! 'Till then...

ANOTHER PERSONPERSON OF ANOTHER

Look, you know you have to look, there!! ABOVE!!

It's "another person" and "the person of another.

STILL BAFFFLED?

Read the plan, promptly!! A man's life, freedom and liberty are at stake!!! And it's probably a prudent thing to do, but don't speak about it!

CROOKED COPS ON THE RUN

In fact, don't even think about it, especially the cowards and the easily frightened children!

THE END.

Your papers please:

TSA bans ID-less flight???

 

Posted by Chris Soghoian

In a major change of policy, the Transportation Security Administration has announced that passengers refusing to show ID will no longer be able to travel across America. The policy change, announced on Thursday afternoon, will go into force on June 21, and will only affect passengers who refuse to produce ID. Passengers who claim to have lost or forgotten their proof of identity will still be able to fly.

As long as TSA has existed, passengers have been able to fly without showing ID to government agents. Doing so would result in a secondary search (a pat down and hand search of your carry-on bag), but passengers were still permitted to board their flights. In some cases, taking advantage of this right to refuse ID came with fringe benefits--being bumped to the front of the checkpoint queue.

For a few years after September 11, 2001, TSA's policies when it came to flying without ID were somewhat fuzzy. The agency, like many other parts of the Bush Administration, has hidden behind the shroud of classification--in TSA's case, labeling everything Sensitive Security Information.

Seeking to clarify the rules, activist John Gilmore took the U.S. government to court in 2004. Gilmore chose to take a particularly hard line, by refusing to show ID to TSA and also by refusing to undergo the more thorough "secondary screening" search. He eventually lost his case before the 9th Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals.

While the judges were not willing to let Gilmore avoid the secondary screening search, they did at least recognize the right to travel without showing ID--providing that passengers are willing to be subject to a pat down and a bit of probing:
"The identification policy requires that airline passengers either present identification or be subjected to a more extensive search. The more extensive search is similar to searches that we have determined were reasonable and consistent with a full recognition of appellants constitutional right to travel."

Since then, in at least two letters to citizens, TSA has re-affirmed this right. In March 2008, a TSA official wrote that:

"If a traveler is unwilling or unable to produce a valid form of ID, the traveler is required to undergo additional screening at the checkpoint to gain access to the secured area of the airport."

A change in policy

In a press release issued on Thursday with little fanfare, TSA announced a major change in its rules.

"Beginning Saturday, June 21, 2008 passengers that willfully refuse to provide identification at security checkpoint will be denied access to the secure area of airports. This change will apply exclusively to individuals that simply refuse to provide any identification or assist transportation security officers in ascertaining their identity."

This new procedure will not affect passengers that may have misplaced, lost or otherwise do not have ID but are cooperative with officers. Cooperative passengers without ID may be subjected to additional screening protocols, including enhanced physical screening, enhanced carry-on and/or checked baggage screening, interviews with behavior detection or law enforcement officers and other measures."

To clarify: Passengers who refuse to show ID, citing a constitutional right to fly without ID will be refused passage beyond the checkpoints. Passengers who say they have left their ID at home, will be searched, and then permitted to board their flights.

While TSA's announcement stated that the goal of the change was to "increase safety," this blogger disagrees. The change of rules seems to be a pretty obvious case of security theater. Real terrorists do not refuse to show ID. They claim to have lost their ID, or they use a fake.

TSA's new rules only protect us from a non-existent breed of terrorists who are unable to lie.

Fixing flaws vs. security theater

In a research paper published in 2007, I outlined a number of glaring loopholes allowing the total circumvention of the much criticized no-fly lists. The two main flaws were that passengers can modify boarding passes, and that they can refuse to show ID.

In December 2007, TSA began testing out a secure, authenticated, tamper-proof boarding pass scheme. It has since been rolled out to a number of major airports around the country.

With hundreds of millions of dollars having already been spent on the various no-fly lists, it is at least interesting to see that someone at TSA is now spending time on fixing the loopholes in the system. The most glaring of this has long been the fact that passengers can refuse to show (or claim to have forgotten) their ID. Simply put, without being able to know who is walking through a checkpoint, there is no way to know that the "bad guys" have been caught by the no-fly list.

TSA's new rule, while perhaps motivated by a desire to beef up security, is significantly flawed. Terrorists will lie, and claim to have lost their ID--while law-abiding citizens wishing to assert their rights will be hassled, and refused flight.

Of course, all of this is premised on the idea that the no-fly list is actually a useful safety tool--something that I, and a number of other prominent security experts, strongly disagree with. Simply put, terrorists do not pre-register their intent.

As Bruce Schneier has noted before, the no-fly list is a collection of hundreds of thousands of people who are too dangerous to fly, but not guilty enough to be charged with a crime.

These are interesting times, indeed.

Thanks to Gary @ View from the Wing for spotting TSA's announcement.

 

Beating of Kelly Thomas

Beating of Leone

BAD COPS

Contempt Of Cop

Washingtonpost.com - 'Contempt of Cop' Continued from Page 5 New D.C. police recruits were keenly aware of what they saw as deficiencies...

Blacks are arrested on 'contempt of cop' charge at higher rate - Blacks are booked by Seattle police for obstructing a public officer eight times as often as whites when population is taken into account, a Seattle P-I investigation of six years...

Henry Louis Gates' Contempt Of Cop Emptywheel - At tonight's nationally televised press conference, a reporter asked President Obama a question about the July 16 arrest of famed Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates. Obama set off...

Contempt of Cop' by William Norman Grigg - The police are to the government as the edge is to the knife, insists sociologist David Bayley, who apparently couldn't explain why the typical...

Expert Officer displayed 'contempt of cop' reaction Internal Affairs

Contempt Of Cop II

CAMERA IS THE NEW SPEAK FOR GUN IN THE WILD, WILD WEST! - It's more about 'contempt of cop' than the violation of the wiretapping law.

Welcome to America Now step inside the jail cell - The audio exchange in this video was apparently recorded at the U.S. Canada border after a Canadian displayed contempt-of-cop towards the American law enforcement officer asking questions.

Contemptible police tactics - Cops raid the home of a licensed medical marijuana provider in Washington, handcuff the fourteen year old son and put a gun to his head, and search the nineteen year old daughter and take the contents of her mickey-mouse wallet.

How To Survive Traffic Stops in America, Submit, Instantly! - What the cops want is immediate obedience and submission. Many cops are ex-military and view the civilian motorists of America about like they viewed the hapless peasants of Iraq and Afghanistan, that is, with contempt, not as fellow citizens deserving of civility and respect. It is a possibly lethal mistake to do anything other than submit, instantly and obey! Or be ready to shoot first. But aim high.

My radio interview with Katherine Albrecht - Carlos Miller Photography is Not a Crime is interviewed by Katherine Albrecht, activist, radio host and privacy advocate, Tuesday afternoon where they discussed his blog, his arrests, the situation in the United Kingdom and the spread of contempt of cop cases that are popping up on the internet on a regular basis.

EVEN THE BRITISH ARE LAUGHING AT YA!!

COWARDS!

 

The Trial of Judge A. Howard Matz.

By Psych Ward Entertainment.

Bookmark and Share

Sign my Guestbook

Contact | Killercop.com. All Rights Reserved.

Impressum