Now Southwest thinks my husband is a terrorist
 

(Background - husband got on TSA watch list for a reason unknown or unrevealed to anyone - he followed TSA directions and submitted lots of notarized or original paperwork and has flown without problem for 1-2 years since)

Thursday SWA would not let him check-in on-line nor at the kiosk. It took him 30 minutes of questioning by 2 gate attendants and a supervisor - this time it seems they have the TSA info in their computer since they asked him for specific info about place of birth, previous residence. What was funny to me (sitting safely at home) was that they did not ask "Where were you born" but "Were you born in xxxx" and "Did you ever live in zzzzz". Any halfway brain-alive evil-doer would have of course answered yes and been on his way.

Was eventually allowed to board with only 5 minutes to spare. He expects another adventure on return tonight.

Ughhh.... poor guy! Cross my heart I never get on a list like that, and neither will DH.

"Real" terrorists aren't on the watch list as there's a danger it might be leaked to the terrorist who would then know that the US thinks he's a terrorist.

So the US doesn't think your husband is a terrorist

OMG, gail. I've been following the adventures of Mr. Gail for some time and I'm wondering if it will ever end.

I don't know if you saw this on my other thread, but a friend of ours was on the no-fly list. He endured the most ridiculous hassles when traveling so he finally changed his last name and hasn't had any trouble since. It seems like a real terrorist would think of this too and do the same. Of course, I'm not suggesting your husband should change his name, but I sure wish there were a better solution. Good luck and please continue to keep us posted.

PM - thanks for the kind thoughts and I did read your post about the name change. Since I kept my name when we were married 26 years ago, I could suggest he chnge his last name to mine, but I don't think that would go over real well.

If you're still there, gail -- or anyone else who has been placed on the TSA watch list -- how long did it take to get off the list (or been exempted or whatever it is that happens)?

I'm there now too.

I, or at least someone with the same or a similar name, am on the list (it is actually a conglomoration of multiple lists from multiple sources, from what I have read). TSA was surprisingly efficient in giving me a letter clearing me, but there was a substantial delay in the airline's fixing their records, so I went a few months having to check in at the counter, and risking the dreaded special security procedures (which TSA never applied). We usually fly the same airline, and I suspect that if I flew on other airlines, they might experience a delay in getting me cleared, but Southwest, Alaska, and American have let me through with no problems, although some of these were connecting flights where I didn't have to check in. Incidentally, this adventure was when the list was first being used, so perhaps the airlines are more practiced at handling this than they were then.

Even though TSA has cleared me, I still get invited to a private interview by, I think, customs and immigration whenever I return from overseas, but they haven't yet made me miss a connecting flight.

I would be interested in seeing something authoritative confirming that terrorists are not on the list, especially as my impression is that the media has reported instances where someone has been refused transit due to being on the list. Perhaps whoever posted that terrorists are not on the list was just trying to joke; I must have missed the punch line.

Interesting reading:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n2066624.shtml

<b>clevelandbrown</b>,

here is your answer: (as ironic as it sounds)

<i>What Kip Hawley wouldn’t tell 60 Minutes is that some of the some of most dangerous terrorists never even end up on the No Fly List, because the intelligence agencies that supply the names don’t want them circulated to airport employees in foreign countries for fear that they could end up in the hands of the terrorists.

Cathy Berrick, the Director of Homeland Security and Justice Issues for the General Accounting Office told Kroft that the lists that the airlines get have been sanitized of the most sensitive information.

&quot;They're not given all of the names for security reasons because the government doesn't want to have that information outside of the government,&quot; Berrick says.

&quot;But if the point of the system is to keep dangerous people from getting on airplanes, why would you leave some of the potentially most dangerous people off the list?&quot; Kroft asks.

&quot;Yeah, it's a concern. And I think if you talk with the Department of Homeland Security they would agree with that,&quot; Berrick says. </i>

The explanation would be that exposing some names might jeopardize intelligence sources and methods. Am sure that rationale is overused, but it is probably true in very very few cases.

so it's ok to hastle your own citizens, use the excuse that you are looking for terrorists, yet at the same time have the real terrorist's name off the list?

Please explain......

Am I missing something?

I meant &quot;hassle&quot;, not hastle.....

What AAFF said - what the hell's the use of a NoFly list if the major guys you want not to fly aren't on it?

I think we're well past the Looking-Glass, folks.

Told you so - does this mean that if you AREN'T on the list then the TSA think you ARE a terrorist?

I didn't say that it is ok to hassle your own citizens. What you are missing is that there are legitimate reasons for not disclosing terrorist names to the TSA. I AM SURE THAT IT IS OVERDONE and I am CERTAIN that the govt has screwed up on this to some extent, but there are certainly legitimate reasons for keeping a name off the list.

Suppose Moe, Larry, and Curly are a terrorist cell. The names of Larry and Curly show up on the No Fly List. They figure out that Moe is a spy and kill him.

Suppose Osama is running that terror cell and all three of the stooges show up on the list. Osama knows that he is the only one who knows about them. He figures out that it must be that NSA is listing in on his phone calls to them.

British intelligence learns that Moe is a terrorist and shares this info with the U.S. as most secret and can only be handled via the proper control channels.

People who classify information tend to classify too much info and to over-classify it when it should be. But that is not a reason to make it all unclassified. Maybe we do need to keep it secret that we know that Larry and Curly are bad guys.

.....but there are certainly legitimate reasons for keeping a name off the list........

That is the most, stupid, dumb logic I have ever read. It makes no sense. Either you have a llst or your don't. What is gained my hassling innocent citizens? Only the appearance that you are doing your job. We want the citizens believe that we are protecting you when in fact we are not protecting. It is typical BS spin that this administration has engaged in from the beginning. The focus is on the activity not the results. And then if terrorist does get through and does do something. They have the perfect cover --- Aaaaaaa.... he wasn't on the list. And we will never know if he should have been on the list --- classified. The whole Home Land security business is a disaster. Waste money and no results.

Wow, touchy subject! I guess that if you and your senator are going to go off the deep end when somebody not on the list becomes a successful terrorist then the only thing to do would be to get rid of the list. It can't be all so it has to be nothing on the list. That should help.

Make more sense than your approach. You just put up a circular arguement that no sense. We have a no-fly list with names on it that may or maynot be terrorists -- mostly likely not. But we cannot put big terrorists or major terrorists or whatever you want to call them on the list because it means that we know who they are and we don't want them to know that we know them so they can fly. But these are the guy mostly likely to do the damage but we cannot put them on the list. So why have a list of nobodies. It doesn't make any sense. It is just typical BS spin. All smoke and mirros -- no substance.

Oh yeah, we're winning the war on terror, jutst like we had been, are, and eventually will win the war on drugs.

Thousands of basically good productive citizens sitting in jails for nothing more than a few puffs of a joint so some politician can have an occasional press confrence when a ton of coke gets intercepted, while 100 tons get through. This has been going on for 40-50 years. It keeps many people employed, the police, the lawyers, the court folks, judges, jail builders, jail guards/administration, parole officers, etc.etc. Unfortunately, it's a false economy. We're spending billion$ to keep people employed to mess with mostly innocent people's lives. Imagine what we could do with all the wasted money??? As far as I can tell, we have not made even a fender bender in the drug war since it was declared. In fact the drug business is very much alive and thriving and it's probably bigger now than it ever was.


We make a big jet land in Canada so Cat Stevens (Yusuf Islam) the most feared terrorist gets turned around and send back to UK. Isn't UK our biggest ally in the war on terror? UK doesn't seem to be too much concerned with him, so why are we?

I'm sure the Homeland Security idiots thought this will make them look good because they finally caught somebody.

??????????????????????????

If that's the best we can do we are in trouble.........

My husband has missed two flights due to being pulled out for extra security screening. His understanding from the airport people is that there's another person with his name on the list that he gets confused with. He is always eventually cleared, but has at least once stayed overnight unexpectedly after being detained &amp; missing last flight of the day. On the other hand, he has a nuclear materials license (as a physician) so who knows!