Update on husband being on TSA security list

Jul 13th, 2005, 02:16 AM
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 22,165
Update on husband being on TSA security list

(For some reason was unable to post a reply to my message from May). Husband has contacted TSA to find out why he is on AA security list - and no other airline - and how to get off. They want him to send them passport and original birth certificate and say they will give him an answer and his documents back in 45-60 days. They admitted it might take longer and there was a good chance he would still be on "the list" after all this.

Because of his travel schedule, he does not feel comfortable being without these documents for this long, so he has decided to put up with extra security hassles for the time being.
gail is offline  
Jul 13th, 2005, 05:40 AM
  #2  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,049
When I was dancing this dance, TSA sent a letter to me advising that they wanted notarized copies of the documents, not the documents themselves. I wonder if their policy has changed, or your husband's circumstances differ from mine? I'd be very reluctant to surrender original documents, even with a promise that they will be returned.
clevelandbrown is offline  
Jul 19th, 2005, 06:46 PM
  #3  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 814
Gail, in the old days Congressional offices often had people whose job it was to help speed issues like this along for constituents. It is worth a try to call your Congressman's office, especially if this listing hampers your husband's ability to do business.
tashak is offline  
Jul 20th, 2005, 03:48 AM
  #4  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 22,165
So funny - why did I never think of that - and our daughter is a summer intern in the local office of our Congressman!
gail is offline  
Jul 21st, 2005, 07:00 PM
  #5  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,602
Gail-I said this before when you posted. It won't make a whit of difference that his clearance process is "speeded up" by a Congressional letter-what I said, and what TSA told your husband is true-even if he gets a clearance (and mind you we are NOT talking the "no fly" list here-but the "selectee" list-which subjects the listed persons to secondary screening procedures-but they STILL fly)-he will STILL have to be "cleared" off the clearance list-meaning, the air carriers can't just take your husband's word for it that he is the person with the same name on the clearance list-they will have to verify it, of course, and that will take a bit of time. You wouldn't really want that any other way would you?

He probably won't be able to use the self-serve kiosk, even if he makes the clearance list (and until he goes through the process, you don't know whether he will be cleared-there could be a valid reason he is on the selectee list).

Spygirl is offline  
Jul 22nd, 2005, 03:08 AM
  #6  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 22,165
Thanks again. For some reason, it is only at AA that he can not use self-serve kiosk, and that is only reason he really cares about this - since he travels on business frequently and is always late getting to the airport - it adds time to each trip on AA.

Of course I would not want people removed from such a list without careful consideration. But I am a little confused about what you (Spygirl) means about there perhaps being a valid reason he is on "the list". Are you suggesting that after 25 years of marriage I might unknowingly be married to a terrorist?
Maybe all those trips to Home Depot are really some clandestine activity. Or when he says he is driving our daughter to softball, he is really somewhere else.
gail is offline  
Jul 22nd, 2005, 06:36 AM
  #7  
Cassandra
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
You may have to grant spygirl a certain amount of professional gungho-ness, but here I think what she might have meant is that "there may be a valid reason why your husband's name is on the list," rather than your husband himself.

If so -- if there is a dubious someone else with his name, or someone who has used his name or a variant of it -- then it would certainly be good if you knew it, but thanks to the Patriot Act, you may never know. Keep on the issue, and be wary if this kind of thing comes up in any other context.
 
Jul 22nd, 2005, 06:40 AM
  #8  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,049
Widely believed rumor is that not just terrorists are on the list, but no one knows for certain what all the categories are.

What's puzzling to me is that you initially said TSA wanted documents to ascertain that he was not one of the people on the list. If that is so, then he should have the same problems with all airlines, not just with AA, unless he is using a different variation of his name with AA that draws a hit on the list. i.e., J. Smith may produce a match, while Jules Smith may not.

In any event, the only way to resolve this is to comply with the TSA procedures; they will then (assuming he is not legitimately on the list) send him a letter stating that, and will also notify the airlines. When I went through this, the TSA clearance came fairly quickly, but it took months for my frequently flown airline to figure out how to disembargo me.
clevelandbrown is offline  
Jul 22nd, 2005, 11:20 AM
  #9  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 22,165
It indeed makes no sense to us that it is only on AA that he has problems. He regulaly flies USAirways, Delta and AA - and less frequently several other airlines, including Independence, AmericaWest, Continental, Northwest - all these he has flown since first encountered problem at AA. No problem anywhere else.

At first he thought it was some AA problem - but they told him it was TSA list.

He does have a common first and last name, but always makes reservations under full first name, no middle initial and last name - just habit so if he ever flies internationally it matches passport. In past 12 months he has been to Moscow, Mexico, Canada - for out of US travel. We all went to Egypt 4 years ago.

We will work on this - glad to hear that someone else was able to disentangle themselves from TSA list. (Our teenagers think this is all very funny)
gail is offline  
Jul 28th, 2005, 11:08 AM
  #10  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 22,165
My husband has now gotten a new raised-seal copy of his birth certificate and is sending, as requested, a notarized copy of his passport. We will see if it actually works.
gail is offline  
Jul 28th, 2005, 11:33 AM
  #11  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,885
First - I work in the security business and I'm directly involved in the war on terror. I travel to many places all over the world to secure US interests.

And now my "rant" -

The "no-fly list" is so useless, so ridiculous and most importantly, so un-American! Please folks, write your congressperson and ask for this stupidity to stop.

I will say it again. Who cares if Osama Bin Laden is sitting next to me on the plane if TSA does it's job with physical security. Protect the planes, physically check the passengers (the usual stuff) and I don't care if 10 of them are sitting on my plane. What are they going to do? Attack us with their bad breath?

Wake up folks, stop this madness. It's useless and also a waste of your tax dollars.

And as reported by gail it can become a nightmare for an innocent AMERICAN!

end of "rant"...
AAFrequentFlyer is offline  
Jul 28th, 2005, 03:09 PM
  #12  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 19,419
AA, I respectfully disagree.

If Osama is flying into US to recruit, to lecture, to open up a sleeping cell - I don't want him on that plane and I do want him on the no-fly list.
FainaAgain is offline  
Jul 28th, 2005, 06:12 PM
  #13  
cfc
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,426
Faina, don't you think the consulate issuing the entry visa to Osama might catch him before he even books on an American carrier?

I think there's a way to sift through people bound for the US without having a standing list that's unreviewable, ironclad, unexplained, and subject to easy but permanent error. A terrorist bomb can destroy innocent lives and families, but so can mindless blacklisting. We need before-the-fact intelligence far more than we need these clumsy, high-profile and low-efficacy blunt tools. If you were on the security list for no reason, and your bank and employer caught wind of that (suppose your livelihood depended on flying a lot), imagine what could happen to you before you even began the frustrating and costly process of trying to get back off the list.
cfc is offline  
Jul 29th, 2005, 05:05 AM
  #14  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 299
Not the only "hammer to crack a nut" policy, I'm afraid.
Here in the UK anyone who has ever been arrested, for whatever reason, even if no conviction resulted, MUST travel to the US Embassy in London, paya non returnable £65 ($100) to be interviewed and told whether or not they are to be allowed to APPLY for a visa.
There is, of course, no guarantee that they will receive a visa after all that.
Why should, for example, a DUI arrest as an 18 year old result in the refusal of a visa 30 years later? (Not me, I hasten to add) Where is the threat to US security? Or worse, an arrest that never made it to court having the same effect?
Anyone care to enlighten a puzzled Scot?
doonhamer is offline  
Jul 29th, 2005, 07:32 AM
  #15  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 22,165
Does anyone have the address for Osama - maybe he can get my husband off "the list" (which fortunately is not a no fly list but just an check carefully list and make it difficult to make tight connections list)
gail is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy -

FODOR'S VIDEO

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:58 PM.