Aloha

Entry #624
Monday, March 24, 2003

I'm goin' to Hawaii for a week in early April. The Center for Women's Welfare is releasing the Self Sufficiency Standard for Hawaii and Lisa's the lead researcher on the project. Good state to be the lead on, I must say.

Just got my ticket on Orbitz for $439. Pretty good, especially considering that I'm flying back to San Francisco instead of Seattle. Gonna stop at the NORML Conference and do some I-75 outreach and fundraising work. Then I'll head back to Seattle with Charlie, an I-75 board member who's driving down to the conference.

I'm going to attempt to fly without showing a government-issued photo ID. (This is the point where my mom exclaimed, "Ben, no! This isn't funny!") It can be done; one generally isn't required to show photo ID. Rest assured I'll bring my ID because, hey, I'm not completely stupid.

Since I started following John Gilmore's court case challenge to (non-existant or existant?) federal ID requirements, I've wanted to give the no ID thing a shot. So far about 95% of those I've told think it's a bad idea, that they'll never let me board. But, as I said before, I'll have my ID just in case.

Most people think that I'm just trying to be difficult. Actually, I would agree with that if the word "just" was stricken. I know I'm being difficult. Most things in my life are made more difficult than they need to be, usually because I want to prove or adhere to some seemingly insiginificant principle. It's just one of my quirks. We've all got quirks.

Comment on this entry

Well, my response to you is still. Ben, that isn't even funny. I realize you don't think of it as funny, that you are trying to prove a point but from my job experience dealing with airlines and airline employees, they are not going to take kindly to your stubborness. It will depend on the person you get at check in, what is going to transpire. You might get someone nice or you could get someone not ready to deal with the situation. If you get the not ready for Ben person, you will probably find yourself with security there and possibly denied boarding altogether. I realize you are going on the principle of this matter, which I am all for principle but I also dont want to get a phone call from you sitting in airport JAIL. Showing ID is probably one of the few things the airline does that I do agree with. There are reasons for showing ID. Please do not give them to much static about this issue and be aware of how far you are pushing the agent behind the counter. PS. and you are stubborn, have been since your were born.

Could also get you strip searched. Good story to tell your grandkids.

you may be trying to prove a point but missing a bigger one. I Do NOT want to be on a plane with you unless you have proved who you are. it's My right as a fellow passenger to at least have the aura of feeling that all the other people I am locked up with for several hours are there for the same reasons as me and required to identify themselves. If you wish to not be identified by your government who provides you the opportunity to 90% of the things you do a day you should go by foot/row boat/bicycle/other means of transportation and/or find a place to live that suits the need you have to play the game but not follow the rules.

and yes i have been a bit grumpy the last couple weeks if anyones wondering.

Ben, your brother is right. I as a passenger on the flight would like to know that the airline is relatively certain that the other passengers have been screened and are not part of some militia group wanting to crash into some building. As I stated before, the airlines do alot of things I totally disagree with but showing ID so they know who is on their flights not only serves as a security for the other passengers but also a record for the families should anything ever happen to that flight. Gawd forbid that flight should go down. They would have no absolute proof if you were really the one on that flight or not. As an agent, I have also had concerned family members call me because grandma, who is not altogether some of the time, has not been heard from and was not on her connecting flight. This really helps in finding someones lost grandma or aunt or loved one. You might argue that "Well I gave them my name" but you as well as everyone else in this world should know that not everyone is honest and truthful. Hence my belief that showing ID is the ONE few things the airline does right. Please reconsider your choice to stand in the way of someone just trying to provide security for everyone on your flight.

Trevor, I disagree that it is your right to know that everyone you're flying with has been required by the government to show ID. I have no problem with airline security and am fine with being searched, as they do with every selectee (passengers flying without ID).

And please don't ever use the argument "if you don't like it, move somewhere else." That's a logical fallacy -- an argument that can't be seriously debated because it's bullshit. I love my country more than most people, which is why I'm willing to do silly little things like this. To suggest that I should leave my country because I have a differing opinion or because I know the law better than most shows a lack of understanding of american ideals.

And I am playing fully within the "rules" of the game. If a federal law requiring ID existed, I would show ID (unless I was ready to mount a court challenge to that law). But such a law does not exist, nor does my contract with United Airlines state that I am required to show ID.

The reason I want to go through such silliness is because I fear my country is becoming more and more like pre-war nazi germany. The requirement that people show their papers before travelling by air is but one more needle on the haystack. To know that most of the populace thinks ID requirements are a good thing concerns me even more. From my point of view, mom's concerns aren't very persuasive.

Don't worry though. As I said before, I'm bringing my ID. I plan on making my flight and if that means I'm forced to show ID, I'll do it.

Two words: False Identification. *thumbs up*

Actually I think it's amusing to do stuff like this. For example: I am a US citizen but right now the United States government has NO clue where I am. Oooh, sneaky. Didn't tell anybody I was leaving the US, and certainly haven't been in contact with the US embassy since I've been here. Yay for dual citizenship. ;)

If the airlines dont have it in their ticket contracts that ID is required that is their fault and i believe it should be fixed to require it but remember that they are publicly owned companies, not goverment owned and have the right to ask for just about anything they want to allow you to use thier service.

I am just getting a tad bit tired of the whole thing. People protesting everything mostly for the sake of protesting. They also seem to think that because they are americans they have the right to do whatever, wherever, whenever they want and that my american rights dont matter because their right block the road is more important than my right to get to work. well its just not right anymore. I am really more interested in running them over now than learning about their cause because they choose to piss me off rather than be civil and stay on a sidewalk. sorry for rambling but its getting old.

If I had a contractual agreement with them that required me to show ID, I would show ID. But I don't have such a contract.

The reason most airlines ask you for ID is because of a directive (96-05) from the Federal Aviation Administration which suggests they do so. For more info, see:

http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~daw/faa/

My life is all about little things. I've mentioned this numerous times in my journal. When uninformed people try to stop me from gathering signatures, I could easily leave and de-escalate the situation. But I know I'm in the right and I know this situation happens to numerous people who aren't as knowledgable or principled as myself. It only takes one person (me) to fix the problem for many people to come.

When I started filing small claims against telemarketers, the court clerks simply would not accept my filings because I was suing out-of-state defendants. I knew they had no authority to deny my filings, so I basically gave them an ultimatum -- I'm not leaving until you accept my filing. Since that small bit of activism, everyone who came after me had no problems.

Most things are little, but, in my life at least, they add up. I'm willing to inconvenience myself and the court clerks -- even your commute sometimes -- for the sake of principle. I've been doing this for most of my life, mom said I was stubborn since I was born. Don't worry though, in this case I won't make you late for work. :)

I was more ranting at everything in general (protests..etc...) in the last few weeks than specifically about your trip and desire to test the system. seeing as you have a sort of forum for protest/similar here today you also get my anti-protest protest. :)

say hi to auntie snooks for me.

peace

Okay you say "It only takes one person (me) to fix the problem for many people to come." im unclear what the problem is. Does it really take a big effort to reach in your pocket and pull out your ID? It doesn't take me a long time and i know i have it a lot worse then you traveling with a two year old child. Lets not forget they are also verifing that the ticket you are using was actully bought for you to use. Think about it if we didn't have to show ID there would be alot more people tring to steal tickets.

Im not even going to touch the fact that its a comfort issue for the other people flying, because I think our brother did a good job at that.

Ben, you also do not have a contract with Sears not to take food into their store but you respect their rules!! And for crying out loud you guys if ya can't get along I am gonna send you all to your rooms. Just like when you were little.

Jaimee, when I said that one person could fix the problem, I was referring specifically to the instance of court clerks refusing to accept my small claims filings. I have no delusions that my attempt to fly selectee will do anything beyond making me feel good. If you want to know more about the issue of ID requirements, check out this page:

http://www.epic.org/privacy/airtravel/

As well as that link I posted a few comments up.

Mostly I just want to fly selectee to retain a little anonymity, which is one of those intangibles I place value on. I don't believe I should be required to have government-issued photo ID to travel. Most airlines don't require it. They ask for it because they are required to ASK for it under an FAA rule. It's about increasing levels of surveillance, disparate databases increasingly tied together, innocent until proven guilty, etc.

Why does it make you feel more secure to know I showed photo ID? Do you think a terrorist is going to be foiled by an ID check?

Damn, this is the most controversy I've seen on your site for a while Ben.

Let me just say that I'm behind you 100% with the whole ID at airports thing. I've been studiously avoiding airports since 9/11, mostly because the relatives I have that travel frequently starting coming home with horror stories shortly after all the new security regulations were put in place. Two experiences in particular stick out in my mind. One happened when my uncle was flying down to South Carolina with his wife and five year old on. The security people at the airport, for God knows what reason, confiscated my cousin's "bubble gun." The other happened when I drove my girlfriend to the Philly international airport in January. She was leaving for a four month stay in England and I'd brought some camillias (a la _Now Voyager_) to give her at the gate. Not only did security confiscate my flowers, they wouldn't let me anywhere near my girlfriend's flight. And, to top off the whole experience, after I'd finished arguing with the security guards I watched an 80 something year old man in a wheel chair get up and WALK (well, maybe not walk) through the security check point because of how bad airport security was hassling him for trying to take a wheel chair into the boarding area. (The security people had a good laugh. Bastards.)

Anyway, I know I'm bordering on a rant but what I'm saying is if you can introduce one ounce of sanity into airport security measures, I'd be very grateful.

Just because the FAA does not REQUIRE it may not mean that an airline does. you may need to check airline by airline to be sure. Agin they are not government agencies, they are publicly owned companies.

and as best I can tell, your "Remember me, yo." checkbox does not work

I don't normally post. But I saw something that Trev said, and I want to add on to it. Say hi to Auntie Snooks for me too.

Hey look all we need now is Heidi.

Hit enter twice to start a new paragraph (remove this text).

Dammit that's the second time I've done that.

Anyway.

Every terrorist on the airplanes on 9/11 showed I.D. before they got on the plane.

Wow, that did a lot of good. I bet those passengers felt really secure.

Ben, I have been looking at the different web sites regarding rules of check in and did find this, although not on the United website. United Airlines (UA)

Rule 35

United Airlines will refuse to transport or will remove at any point, any passenger: Government Request Or Regulation: Whenever such action is necessary to comply with any government regulation, or to comply with any governmental request for emergency transportation in connection with the national defense, or whenever such action is necessary or advisable by reason of weather or other conditions beyond its control (including but without limitation, acts of God, force majeure, strikes, civil commotion, embargoes, wars, hostilities or disturbances) actual, threatened or reported. Search Of Passenger Or Property: Who refuses to permit a search of his/her person or property for explosives or a concealed, deadly or dangerous weapon or article. Proof Of Identify: Who refuses on request to produce identification. Your arguement that FAA does not require you to show Government issued ID is correct although from what I can gather in the short period of time I have had to research, it does allow the airlines the ability to make their own rules and/or to use other means to obtain certification of identification for security perposes. The FAA website is so difficult to sift through so to actually find it on their website is extrememly time consuming. Individual airline websites may contain their rules requiring you to show ID but again I dont have to time to check each and every site. I see your point in that they should not be stating FAA rules that in fact are false, but this is just such a small issue when there are bigger issues dealing with the airline that would benefit so many other people. I do love you and am proud of you for standing up in what you believe in even though I totally disagree with it. I am just glad this discussion was done between you and your siblings on here instead of at my house during one of your bday parties :)

Ooops forgot to ask you if you want me to call Auntie Snook and see if you guys can crash at her condo?

Tyler, just because a system didnt work before does not justify abandoning it altogether, showing ID and security checks may not be foolproof but to not do them would make more sense? what seems wierder to me is why someone would thing they shouldnt need to identify themselves when boarding a potential weapon. granted fake ID isnt too dificult to obtain for terrorist, but not forcing them to do it only makes their life that much easier.

ben, what is the reason to not identify yourself, what do you gain by not doing it, or what do you lose by doing it? I mean other than the refernce to nazi germany which you use. this ones strange because nazi germany and iraq are not that dissimaler but the same peope using this reference oppose solving the iraq/nazi germany probem BEFORE it escaltes this time. so on a persona level what do YOU gain or lose?

What I stand to gain from not showing ID is a little personal satisfaction in knowing my rights. I don't live in a country where the government can demand my papers or refuse to allow me to travel freely.

I suggest you check out the links I've posted here. It is indeed a small issue, but small issues add up and I'm not the type of person to accept loss of a little personal freedom for a temporary, misinformed sense of security.

I believe that, through our nationalism and ignorance, we are helping the terrorists we are trying to protect ourselves from. Just like the nazi's used the guise of terrorism to introduce new laws curbing small freedoms and most people only realized just how bad things had become when hitler declared martial law. I'm not saying Bush is a nazi, but I see correlations between now and then. I read an article in some New Jersey paper that said if we ever hit that bullshit "code red" level (can you believe how easily that meme was implanted?) it basically means anybody leaving their house is subject to detention.

I'm with you ben, minus a certain amount of angst (I'm old enough to know that live and let live means "ignore the government, but stay out of their radar"), and I think that you are right.

People considered Germany a free conuntry up to *and* after Crystalnacht, and I agree that our country looks more and more like pre-WWII Germany, and also a lot like post-WWII USSR.

I cannot condone ANY circumstance where "the State" (govt) puts their interests ahead of mine (and my fellow human beings.) Period. Our country was born on the lofty new western ideals of freedom and liberty, and these things (although the U.S. is praised throughout the world for its freedom and opportunity) haven't caught on around the world, and quiet fights like Ben's need to be forced every once in a while to keep them.

As to those who say "love it or leave it", that's just complete jingoistic nonsense. As if you had the freedom to just pack up and hitchhike to another country. Jeebus, I wish people would learn a little more about how things work before spouting off.

I'd love to see true Glablization where you had the freedom to move to another country and start your life there, but currently the political state of affairs is that you still need VISAs, work permits, must pay high immigration taxes, etc. And due to the U.S. "war on terrorism", things are only getting tougher.

One of the things that made America great during the 19th century (the 1800's to you who are scholastically challenged) was the requirement that you didn't need permission to move about, no permits were needed to move to another State. One State could not pass a law against you starting a new business, or otherwise trying to "pursue happiness" as YOU define it, if you wanted to come there to make a new life.

Showing government papers to travel is wrong, and will only lead to more terrorism, goverment abuse of power and worse. I'm reminded of the story I heard recently about Mohammed, who has lived his whole live in the Gaza strip and works with a human rights agency. Mohammed told recently about how he felt on his trip to Japan when he took the train from Tokyo to Osaka.

"I had never before been such a long way without a single checkpoint, without having to show a passport or an ID card, without seeing a soldier," he says. "That was when I knew what freedom felt like."

That's what Ben's action is trying to protect. Our freedom. Thank you Ben!

....Is it safe to get on board here? This journal page now requires speed reading.

It is safe enough to get on a plane now. The policy of "would anyone care to take over the plane?" has been cancelled. Now you can't just walk into the cabin and anounce yourself. It was shocking to think that no security existed in the airline industry. People would treat each flight as a charter and redirect the plane to Cuba or some other god-forsaken place. (no slam on Cuba intended, I like the place) A decade ago when Tom Clancy wrote about airliners-as-weapons in Red Storm Rising (i think that is the correct novel) assassinating the entire House & Senate AND the President with one 747, I thought someone within the government could read and they would say "HEY! they're going to kill us all if we don't at least put a lock on the cockpit door!", but no such luck. A decade ago if you messed with the airlines in Switzerland the guards with the machine guns were very willing to cut you down. We are all in for some inconvenience when flying these days.

I support (sometimes reluctantly) everyones right to protest. It certainly brings opinions into the decision process. Shortly after the Seattle WTO riots I was speaking to a lady Intel exec type who had harsh criticism of the protesters and did not care to hear my idea that the police should not allow anarchists to trash property, then begin to tear gas the general public. She became obstinate at the very idea that anyone would disagree with her or the corporate model. I wanted to say "listen you $#@%&*! bitch, not only was my son at this protest, but he was one of the hostage negotiators at the County Jail, don't tear gas my kid, if you have a problem I'll speak to him for you".

To live in a time when we can actually make a difference is quite remarkable. Imagine living in a country where we are free to speak...and hopefully not become overly angry when others do the same.

However.... let's shoot for some more contraversy on this page that gets everyone talking.

it's very funny that you should be talking about this. i just flew to tucson last saturday. when i got to seatac, i realized after my ride drove away that i did not have my drivers license or my debit card. and seeing as i am forever late, i had no time and no ride to go home and get it. the experience wasn't too terrible, completely disregarding the two instances that day when i was waved through the "security screen" aka profiling blockade on the airport drive, i was very surprised to learn that i could just as easily fly with alaska using my voter registration card. no picture involved. they said, hey, it's government issued. i could have stolen that card from anybody. don't get me wrong, i am not entirely opposed to the profiling that goes on. there's a LOT to be said for odds. i just found it a little funny that it was so easy for me (twenty something white female) to board an airplane. but there are numerous reasons for people to prove who they are before getting on my 737. criminals and terrorists would have a much easier time evading the law if this weren't policy. although these people may not be carrying weapons onto the plane, it sure is a simple way to deny them a leisurely escape and free travel about the country or world depending on how far you want to take this no id policy. should it be no passport policy for international travel too? bottom line, these very simple rules are not in place to inconvenience the innocent or infringe on their rights, they are solely for the protection of the masses and at this stage in the game, i selfishly want every bit of protection that anyone can offer.

Heidi, in Shapiro v. Thompson, Supreme Court Justice Stewart wrote:

"[T]he right to travel freely from State to State ... 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."

Americans have a right to travel about the country without state interference, and the Supreme Court has reiterated this numerous times since our country's inception. To require that citizens show ID to travel is an illegal infringement on our fundamental right of "free ingress into other states and egress from them" (Paul v. Virginia, 1869 Supreme Court Case).

The federal aviation administration has a rule that states that airlines must ask for ID. They don't say they must require ID because such a policy would be glaringly illegal under the organizing documents of our country. Yes, this allows criminals to move more freely. But, then again, so does any policy presuming innocence in absence of guilt.

This is like the family feud.

1869? until we start knocking down buildings by driving donkeys into them, i will continue to disagree with you. airline travel is a far cry from horse and buggy. if this rather outdated law specifically stated, 'free travel by ANY means', i would say you've got yourself a case. but we are a much different and very much more advanced society than we were in 1869. every instance for which this law was originally written is still upheld. we can still travel from state to state without id. they simply want to know if we have contaminated fruit, no big deal, keep the locals healthy. do you think we should eliminate checkpoints?

don't get me wrong, i agree with a lot of stuff you do, and usually find humor in a lot of it but shouldn't we possibly think about updating these free travel laws to represent more current times?

this is kind of like family feud...without richard dawson or ray combs and that giant board of course.

Ben, how difficult would it be to post a Family Feud score board on this page.....Number one answer is.....(?????????).

I know all y'all were just waiting for Uncle Bill to chime in....

So....

I don't care what the FAA regs call for or if the Airline has a contract or some USC number says do this or do that....

The Airline has a responsibility to take all prudent measures to make sure I get from my origin to destination. A fudiciary one at that because I paid money for my ticket. If they are lax about security of the aircraft and I get killed on the way, The airline SHOULD be held liable for my death -- regardless of what the government does to try to limit that liability. And if they need to ask for IDs to be held prudent in Court, then so be it!

Ben, show your damn ID. I'm still proud of you for your efforts but don't be stupid or frivolous. Although, the mayor dunking Init. was kinda frivolous, but it was a great idea. Government needs to be funny too at times.

That being said, All you older folks here.... where can we find a recording of Dirksen and Kennedy singing Wild Thing?

And did I say it... show your damn ID.

Heidi, the Shapiro case I quoted is from 1969. There are numerous other cases throughout American history where the supreme court has upheld the right to travel freely. If we want to modify this law, it will require a constitutional amendment. But until we do so we retain the fundamental right to travel without state interference.

Hey, same time stamp. Have a safe flight, Ben. Say Hey to Snooks for me too.

I don't believe those cases are relevant but must admit to not having read them. Nobody is saying you can't row a boat to Hawaii. There's your freedom of interstate travel. Or buy your own damn plane and fly there yourself. But you're using someone else's property to get there and subject to whatever the hell rules the owner of his own free will chooses to impose or feels coerced to impose. It's their plane; they're rules.

Now, I bet if you were a 10% stock holder in the airlines, they'd know you and let you on without your ID.... so there's your other ticket to anomity... oh.. darn, they'd know you before you showed your ID. Well.... you still wouldn't have to show ID.

Rats! They're should be their. My fingers are spelling on their own again.

By the way, If you did have a tenth stake in a airline, the counter would probably greet you with a "Mr Livingston, I presume."

................. :-)

Uncle Bill, you may not care that the government can't require me to show ID to travel between states, but I do.

The notion that we need ID checks to protect us from terrorists is unproven at best. As someone noted earlier, all of the September 11 hijackers showed ID. The ID requirement serves more to make people FEEL safer, to give them a false sense of security.

I'm not saying the government can't ask for ID. It's just that they can't require it. I would like to test that out by not showing them ID. As a "selectee" I will have to undergo additional security measures that will do more to ensure your safety than an ID check ever will.

I'll say it again, I am not challenging the airline's right to require me to show ID. But, as far as I can tell, most airlines do not require this. If you don't show ID, you fly selectee.

i guess that is what happened to me. they gave me my boarding pass without photo id but as soon as i got to the security check, the lady said, 'how old are you?' 26 i said. 'and you don't have a driver's license?' yes i do but i forgot it at home. 'ok step to the far right and go down that long aisle. a full security check followed.

Well, if a selectee turns out to be a terrorist, and my flight to Baltimore goes down (I really don't believe it will) because of that Selectee terrorist, I hope my wife sues the crap out of the Airline for letting him past the ticket counter. And if all the passengers did that, then the Airline wouldn't be flying anymore. Survival of the most prudent.

Actually, the ID check which happens (and has even before 9/11) at the ticket counter also happens at two other places now. 1) TSA checks it at the entrance to the concourse in most airports and again at the gate during boarding. But that doesn't stop a terrorist that they don't know about. And the search that they do at either checkpoint won't prevent a well trained terrorist from using improvised weapons on board. The real security comes when they can assess the risk of each passenger in real time and have armed marshalls on board every flight as well as armoured cockpit doors. And you might find the real time risk assessment, if it comes, even more abusive than ID checks. Essentially, they analyze your behaviour under duress imposed by interrogators as they search whatever carry-ons you have.

I believe though that if you refuse to show ID and don't have a truthful excuse like your world traveling big sister, Heidi, then I suspect the TSA agent can have you detained. You're welcome to try suing TSA but there isn't a court in the country that wouldn't throw such a case out at present.

And if you just lied about not having your ID, well.. then you'd be a liar. Might be a small thing. But your small victory would be ill gotten and you'd suffer endless guilt and fear of Pele raining molten lava on your Hawaiian parade.

I don't plan on lying to the federal security personnel. And I disagree with your statement that "there isn't a court in the country that wouldn't throw such a case out at present" if I was denied passage by federal employees because I refused an ID check. I wouldn't bet money on such a case, but thankfully, I know the law better than most of my family (and have more court victories under my belt).

i have a lot more to say about all of this but ill just start with the obvious.

"Well, if a selectee turns out to be a terrorist, and my flight to Baltimore goes down (I really don't believe it will) because of that Selectee terrorist, I hope my wife sues the crap out of the Airline for letting him past the ticket counter. And if all the passengers did that, then the Airline wouldn't be flying anymore. Survival of the most prudent."

how exactly did that terrorist get weapons onto the plane?

if they are able to bring down a plane just by getting on without id, isnt that a **massive** failure on the part of airline security?

how did they smuggle the bomb on board? the box cutter? the bradley fighting tank?

what supernatural powers do you assume people without state issued id have?

and of course... the question that is so obvious that it gets brought up over and over again (even though no one seems to listen):

what makes you think a terrorist cant get fake id?

or even better:

what makes you think that terrorists will only be people we know, people we have on watch lists, people with a history of being involved in terrorism?

what makes you think they will fit a profile?

what makes you think we can know exactly who they will be before even they do?

what makes you think that terrorist sitting next to you on the plane wont be some clean cut choir boy or the girl next door?

why do you assume that a would-be terrorist needs to either have fake id or no id?

why not just go right down to the dmv and get an honest to goshness, "im not a terrorist cause my id says so", piece of laminated state issued paper (or plastic), that lets them get on that plane so much easier than going through all the extra security checks of flying without id?

as someone who avoided being in the immediate area of the world trade center only by make a split second decision at 6 am that morning to sleep late, instead of going to help with election day get out the vote efforts... i dont personally think we can afford to lie to ourselves about our safety, or delude ourselves into thinking all terrorists will play by whatever rules we expect them to.

i ask no one for 100% assurance. i am positive that they can't give it to me. but like i said before. there is a LOT to be said for odds. i can only assume that there are more middle eastern terrorists than choir boy terrorists. but alas, i have yet to run the studies.

yes, a terrorist CAN get fake id and the security is not always going to be perfect or in some cases, awake. there will always be flaws in any system but there are just too many people on this planet to eliminate them altogether.

My car is supposed to get 32 MPG but its only getting 28 so im going to abandon it on the side of the road. My savings account was supposed to get 3.75 % interest last year but it only got 2.25% so im gonna toss it. if things dont work 100% perfectly its just time to do away with them and cut off our fingers to spite our hands

its extremely easy to get or make a fake id. ive known dozens of sources for high quality id in the past few years and im not a terrorist. people who devote themselves to our death and destruction can invest the tiny amount of money needed to make their own id. its not just a small chance.. its a 100% certainty that if a terrorist wants to blow up a plane, it wont be an id check that will stop them -- unless they are immensly stupid (which i wont put past them).

you dont cut off your fingers to spite your hand, but that is not what either me or ben are suggesting. it is however what all of the posts in favor of this "compromise" between freedom and security are proposing.

id requirements on domestic travel do not make us safer. the only value in requiring id is to maintain a database of personal movement patterns in order to track the movements of terrorist organizations. that could be useful yes, but it is not necessary, and can be done in a way that is much less harmful to the rest of the public. it ensnares every other living human being in an all-encompassing system of personal surveillance. if your movements fit a profile, any profile chosen by the class of people who find themselves administering these systems, you are royally fucked.

rather than do real harm to our own security by implementing total surveillance and the institutionalized ability to have control over every little detail in our lives, or by giving americans a false sense of wellbeing which will do nothing but distract attention from the very real needs of air travel security overhauls, why dont we actually imrove our ability to fly and travel with real security?

if we have to reengineer our 40 year old flying passenger missles into something more effective, more fuel efficient, more comfortable, more profitable, more secure, and less likely to be used as weapons against us, then that is exactly what we must do. if we have to speed up the development of real bio-chemical, radiological, explosive, and other sensors, then lets actually do that instead of thinking id checks will keep shoe bombs or SARS or small pox off of planes. lets get UWB full body scanners market tested and installed in all of our airports so none of us have to get stripsearched or sodomized in order to satisfy the underpaid, undertrained, nailclipper and bubble gun seizing security guards that get to decide whether we fly or not.

we cannot shrink from the challenge and hide behind the idea that requiring id from our citizens will make us even one bit safer in our world.

the airline industry is on the verge of collapse as it is. there have been serious talks about nationalizing at least parts of it.

some heavy investment in making it functional again would do a world of good for our safety, our freedom, our mobility, and our economy.

the costs of retrofitting and redesigning our entire air travel industry are the necessary costs of increasing our security in the face of the very real threat of terrorism and asymmetric warfare, while guarding the freedom that security is meant to serve.

to suggest that we can have security without such basic freedom is just as bad and wrong as to suggest that we can have freedom without the basic security of keeping ourselves alive. it is not, and cannot be, a choice between one or the other. there is no such thing as freedom without security or security without freedom.

if you dont think total surveillance is a real threat then do some more reading about just what exactly the DOJ under ashcroft is developing, look into TIA and all the rest, or read up on what the private sector is cooking up and has already put in place in so many areas.

i dont think there is cause to be alarmist, but we cannot pretend that tracking every movement of every person is a good thing either. there is an honest middle way, and the status quo isnt it.

if on the other hand you just dont think the freedom to travel is all that important, i wonder how long exactly it would take for you to walk from one side of the country to another just so we can meet up in person and talk more about all of this.

I'm gonna ignore the (bad) analagies about miles per gallon or annual percentage rates and use one more relevant to terrorism and ID checks. One hundred percent of the September 11 terrorists showed ID. It does NOTHING to stop terrorism.

I believe putting our faith in security measures with no proven usefulness (and proven uselessness) makes us less secure, not more secure. To have a populace that is willing to do away with their constitutional rights in exchange for a false sense of security frightens the hell out of me. I'm not going to be one of those people.

that makes two of us ben. well said.

I think I said that ID checks aren't the whole answer to Airline Security. They are a part though, however small. It acts as a deterent, just not a very effective one. Nevertheless, it does raise the bar slightly.

The ID checks done for the 9/11 terrorists cannot be used as an excuse for not doing it though. Remember back then, very few people thought that a plane might be used as a missle. They took advantage of our trusing nature. The same thing is happening in Iraq over the last week, trusting US/British troops getting shot by white flag waving Iraqi soldiers. Presense of an ID is like the white flag. You have to know when to trust the person holding it. To say that the ID check was proved useless by 9/11 is not a logical conclusion.

The root cause is misplaced trust. The real solution is learning when to trust and when not to trust.

A terrorist also needs to travel safely. If you stop them from traveling all the time, then you might miss out on learning who he or she associates with. When do you stop one vs. risk being able to stop five. But in order to know they are going somewhere, an ID whether it be government issued or a facial recognition system needs to alert us to their movements.

There are trade offs for everything.

---

Rabbit asked about weapons on board. I'd be really stupid to start talking about how to improvise weapons. But people trained to improvise can make a weapon out of just about anything. I can tell you that Special Ops people are very creative and not just in movies. So, not having more secure cockpits and not having people on board that can respond is an issue.

---

As for doing away with constitutional rights, if those constitutional rights enable successful terrorist strikes, then what do you propose we do? Let them happen and prosecute afterwards? Security is a balance between prevention, detection, and response. Sometimes, certain activities must be curtailed in order to allow for successful healing. I've been told constitutional rights were curtailed during WWII. If they were, then we didn't loose them permanently. Once the threat of abuse of freedom is removed, the freedoms return. I don't suppose my sister ever grounded you (or sent you to your room as she said somewhere in the massive forest of words above) for abusing your freedom? You eventually got ungrounded or let out of your room, obviously. (While the analogy to child raising may seem insulting, it's only an analogy, so spare me the comment about governments treating citizens like children.)

Are you frightened of having people giving up freedoms for a false sense of security or are you really frightened that you personally will lose freedoms, permanently. I suggest that you will not lose them permanently and that you ought not be so frightened of what sacrifices others are willing to make.

I do hope you'll enjoy your trip regardless of whether you succeed in your effort or not. But do remember your ID or you'll have to have your girlfriend drive you everywhere, 'cause unless you show your driver's license at the rental car counter, you won't legally be able to drive while there.

:-) hmmm.... maybe you should be afraid... we seem to have lost the freedom to drive without a license somewhere along the line.

But hey, you know, when I go to do prison ministry, not only do I have to show my driver license, I have to part with it in exchange for a volunteer badge. So, it could be worse.

And if you're looking for more causes to protest, here's one worthwhile cause. Get colleges to stop using Social Security Number for Student ID numbers.

Techad Noted:

"As for doing away with constitutional rights, if those constitutional rights enable successful terrorist strikes, then what do you propose we do? Let them happen and prosecute afterwards?"

No, we shouldn't "let them happen", but we do deal with the terrorists as if they are criminals, and not some "landless quasi regime" that can have "WAR" declared on it.

I for one, and not willing to give up ANY of my rights, for the false security promised by the current Justice Dept. cronies. Since we've never been truly safe, and cannot be safe no matter HOW MUCH oppressive security and govt. surveillance, I say skip it, deal with tragedy, build community around the world in an effort to suppress this type of terrorism, and start living our lives as free men again.

I am so tired of mindless sheep telling me "things have changed", "it's necessary". Nothing has changed! Except that some people finally woke up to the realities many of knew about long ago. We're ALL going to die someday! Let's hope that does not happen in a violent way, but do NOT, under any circumstances, give up your right to live FREE now!

Bhagwan - Climbing off his soapbox now.

In case you forgot, in this country you are innocent until proven guilty. How do you propose we treat them like criminals unless we have evidence of a crime?

So, if we treat them like criminals before their crimes, we are giving up freedoms.

No, you got my point exactly. Unfortunately, you don't understand. Police investigate the possibilty of criminal behaveor before the crime happens all the time. That has nothing to do with surveillance of *ALL* private citizens movements, and information database warehousing, ala the "total information awareness" initiative being spearheaded in the Justice Department by convicted iran-contra felon John Poindexter. (A man who went to jail, you all remember, for illegally giving WEAPONS TO TERRORISTS!)

For the record, I don't think we should give up an inch of our freedoms in an effort to catch criminals "before they break the law." Neither do I support the harsh crackdown on people (from Arab and Islamic counrties, mainly) who may have small technical violations of America's extremely restrictive immigration and visa policies.

Techad wrote: "I suggest that you will not lose them permanently and that you ought not be so frightened of what sacrifices others are willing to make."

You are the people Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin warned us about.

I support and usually find the humor/irony in most of the things you do and protest ben. And i am also completely aware of this presidential administrations ability to remove freedoms and add new rules and invent stupid useless code oranges and crap. i dont like them most of the time and support your opposition to them. I would love to see a transportaton industry where we did not have to go through a bunch of extra crap to use them. the unfortunate reality is that we dont have one. people like to blow us up and make political, religious and warning statements by using our transportation industry. I know we have beefed up the security on the planes. i know we have more air marshalls. I know ID checks 9 times out of 10 wont foil potential crimes. but as a piece of the security system i do believe it is a fair thing to do. as an airline i want to know who ( and yes even who is pretending) to be on my plane. i need to know who it is in case something goes wrong. identities to inform family and such. i need to know that someone isnt flying on a stolen ticket. there are many more reasons than "averting terrorism" involved in security at the airport. ignorting the terrorist side of it just knowing who is on your plane is of huge inportance. without ID ( again yes some could be fake) youi actually have no idea who is on your plane. " hi im bob smith and im here to fly on your plane" woulkd be as easy as pie. as easy as getting a fake id is for a few of you its not easy for the general populace. 99.5% of us everyday people whould not even know where to start looking. then when bob smith died in a giant fireball crashing into the pacific and hadnt mentioned to his wife that he was going to see his girlfriend all of a sudden he dissapears into non-exsistence.

anyways i just think showing ID at the airport is not an unreasonable thing. i don't think the "liberties" you lose by not showing it are anywhere near the value of the potential benefits to all involved.

another note, after all this crap bush has instated in the last couple years ( and he started the stuff before 9/11) i sure hope the democrats can put up a decent candidate against him next year or that mccain can go again on the replub side so i am not forced to vote for him again. if i could fix the white house today i think i would hire a brit. Tony Blair is a pretty smart guy :)

/me wanders off to sleep tired and groggy

Jehosaphat wrote:

"another note, after all this crap bush has instated in the last couple years ( and he started the stuff before 9/11) i sure hope the democrats can put up a decent candidate "

Actually, some of the US Patriot Act stuff Congress passed (with Democrats in control of the Senate) and that Bush signed was first proposed during the Clinton administration as "Know Your Customer." It didn't make it into Law without being watered down into GLBA. And it wasn't a Democrat President that got it watered down either. It will take getting better Representatives and Senators. The President does not make law all by himself. Often times the Executive branch takes the lead but the two houses need to temper it when necessary. If they don't, shame on those two branches.

Jestapher wrote: "You are the people Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin warned us about."

There were lots of things they wrote. One claimed quote is: "Of liberty I would say that, in the whole plenitude of its extent, it is unobstructed

action according to our will. But rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to

our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within

the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when

it violates the right of an individual." --Thomas Jefferson to Isaac H. Tiffany, 1819.

from - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7842/archives/quote072.htm

So, Jefferson did not say that whatever freedoms (liberty) one wanted even if supported by Law, were valid. They were valid only in the context of equal rights of others. So your "right" to not show your ID is only valid if it doesn't impinge on other's rights to safety (Life) and peace of mind (the pursuit of happiness).

Sorry, no Franklin references - it's way past lunch time now, mine not yours.