Ted Kennedy put on No Fly List

[Roger Long]

Yes, really! It took him several phone calls before he could get on his
flight.

Now, I know that the political leanings of most of you in this group will
lead you to think that keeping people like Kennedy off of airplanes and away
from Washington is good for the nation. However, if it can happen to him,
it can happen to anybody.

Considering some of my posts here, I won't be surprised if I can't get on my
next commercial flight either. The days when we have to stop by the police
department before we leave town can't be very far off.

--

Roger Long

[James Robinson]

Roger Long wrote:
>
> Yes, really! It took him several phone calls before he could get
> on his flight.

Knowing how the no-fly lists are set up, someone with a similar name has
been added to the list, and he simply got snagged in the net.

[Roger Long]

I guess we won't be meeting many more people named Bob Smith on commercial
airline flights.

--

Roger Long



"James Robinson" > wrote in message
...
> Roger Long wrote:
> >
> > Yes, really! It took him several phone calls before he could get
> > on his flight.
>
> Knowing how the no-fly lists are set up, someone with a similar name has
> been added to the list, and he simply got snagged in the net.

[Peter Gottlieb]

"James Robinson" > wrote in message
...
> Roger Long wrote:
>>
>> Yes, really! It took him several phone calls before he could get
>> on his flight.
>
> Knowing how the no-fly lists are set up, someone with a similar name has
> been added to the list, and he simply got snagged in the net.


Well, good luck if you can't call Ridge to help you. If your job depends on
traveling commercial and you get mixed up in a situation like this, you are
toast.

[SeeAndAvoid]

LOL, HAHAHA, I'm bustin a gut on this one.
His liver is a ticking time bomb, it could explode at any time
and with any change in pressure. The alcohol fumes seeping out
of his pores could be some kind of biological weapon. He's
already used a car as a weapon of at least one womans
destruction. Maybe him being on the list isnt such an accident
after all. Oh, the picture of him on Yahoo's news report,
looks like he's gonna bust a vein in his face, or he's trying
to push out a really big one. Ow, my side is starting to hurt.

Chris

Steve Bosell for President 2004
"Vote for me or I'll sue you"
www.philhendrieshow.com

[Peter MacPherson]

Ted Kennedy? You must have been flying on a C-5! Do you see
him fitting in anything smaller??!! ; - )


"Roger Long" > wrote in message
. ..
> Yes, really! It took him several phone calls before he could get on his
> flight.
>
> Now, I know that the political leanings of most of you in this group will
> lead you to think that keeping people like Kennedy off of airplanes and
away
> from Washington is good for the nation. However, if it can happen to him,
> it can happen to anybody.
>
> Considering some of my posts here, I won't be surprised if I can't get on
my
> next commercial flight either. The days when we have to stop by the
police
> department before we leave town can't be very far off.
>
> --
>
> Roger Long
>
>
>
>

[G.R. Patterson III]

Peter Gottlieb wrote:
>
> Well, good luck if you can't call Ridge to help you.

And Ridge didn't take the opportunity to stick it to Kennedy?! That's it -- Bush'll
fire him for sure!

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

[lance smith]

I'm not the biggest fan of Kennedy but he raises a good point- if it
took a senator weeks and many calls to get off the list, what would it
take and how long would it take an ordinary American to get off the
list?

-lance smith


Here's the link and the text of the Reuters story:

http://news.excite.com/odd/article/id/422423|oddlyenough|08-20-2004::08:48|reuters.html

Aug 20, 8:46 am ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Sen. Ted Kennedy, the archetypal liberal
Democrat from Massachusetts, is often called names by Republicans. But
until this year he had never been viewed as a threat to U.S. air
travel.
Kennedy -- one of the most recognizable figures in American politics
-- told a Senate committee hearing on Thursday he had been blocked
several times from boarding commercial airline flights because his
name was on a "no-fly" list intended to exclude potential terrorists.

The Senate Judiciary Committee heard Kennedy was eventually allowed on
the flights, but it took numerous calls to the Department of Homeland
Security to clear up the mistake and get his name off the list.

Noting it had taken him weeks to resolve the matter, Kennedy wondered
aloud how difficult it might be for ordinary Americans to have their
names removed if they were also mistakenly placed on the watch list.

A Kennedy spokesman said the whole thing had resulted from a simple
error and had not been politically motivated.

Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge personally called Kennedy "to
make sure that the situation was remedied," said a spokeswoman for
Ridge's department.

[Roger Long]

It only took him a few minutes but he has the most recognizable face in
politics, the phone numbers for everyone in DC, and he's been taking that
flight nearly every week for 43 years (as he pointed out).

It would take you and I weeks, if we were ever able to fly again at all. If
it happens to one of us, they will probably yank our pilot certificate at
the same time. Good luck ever getting off the ground again.

--

Roger Long



"lance smith" > wrote in message
om...
> I'm not the biggest fan of Kennedy but he raises a good point- if it
> took a senator weeks and many calls to get off the list, what would it
> take and how long would it take an ordinary American to get off the
> list?
>
> -lance smith
>
>
> Here's the link and the text of the Reuters story:
>
>
http://news.excite.com/odd/article/id/422423|oddlyenough|08-20-2004::08:48|reuters.html
>
> Aug 20, 8:46 am ET
>
> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Sen. Ted Kennedy, the archetypal liberal
> Democrat from Massachusetts, is often called names by Republicans. But
> until this year he had never been viewed as a threat to U.S. air
> travel.
> Kennedy -- one of the most recognizable figures in American politics
> -- told a Senate committee hearing on Thursday he had been blocked
> several times from boarding commercial airline flights because his
> name was on a "no-fly" list intended to exclude potential terrorists.
>
> The Senate Judiciary Committee heard Kennedy was eventually allowed on
> the flights, but it took numerous calls to the Department of Homeland
> Security to clear up the mistake and get his name off the list.
>
> Noting it had taken him weeks to resolve the matter, Kennedy wondered
> aloud how difficult it might be for ordinary Americans to have their
> names removed if they were also mistakenly placed on the watch list.
>
> A Kennedy spokesman said the whole thing had resulted from a simple
> error and had not been politically motivated.
>
> Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge personally called Kennedy "to
> make sure that the situation was remedied," said a spokeswoman for
> Ridge's department.

[Robert Briggs]

lance smith quoted:

> Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge personally called Kennedy "to
> make sure that the situation was remedied," said a spokeswoman for
> Ridge's department.

Was Ridge *really* making sure that "the situation was remedied"?

Or was he merely interested in avoiding a repeat incident for Ted?

IMWTK

[Gig Giacona]

And if he was headed back to DC for a session of the Senate that may have
well been a Constitutional violation.



"Roger Long" > wrote in message
. ..
> Yes, really! It took him several phone calls before he could get on his
> flight.
>
> Now, I know that the political leanings of most of you in this group will
> lead you to think that keeping people like Kennedy off of airplanes and
away
> from Washington is good for the nation. However, if it can happen to him,
> it can happen to anybody.
>
> Considering some of my posts here, I won't be surprised if I can't get on
my
> next commercial flight either. The days when we have to stop by the
police
> department before we leave town can't be very far off.
>
> --
>
> Roger Long
>
>
>
>

[Wallace Berry]

In article >,
"Roger Long" > wrote:

Putting Kennedy on a no-drive list would make more sense...

> Yes, really! It took him several phone calls before he could get on his
> flight.
>

--
Take out the airplane for reply

[Dave Stadt]

"Robert Briggs" > wrote in message
...
> lance smith quoted:
>
> > Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge personally called Kennedy "to
> > make sure that the situation was remedied," said a spokeswoman for
> > Ridge's department.
>
> Was Ridge *really* making sure that "the situation was remedied"?
>
> Or was he merely interested in avoiding a repeat incident for Ted?

I think the proper term is "sucking up."


> IMWTK

[Clay]

The airline has a right and responsibility to not board Ted Kennedy.
The FAA has a FAR which prohibits the boarding of an intoxicated
passenger. Besides, any aircraft, short of a C5A, would be over max.
ramp weight with that lard butt on board.

Wallace Berry > wrote in message >...
> In article >,
> "Roger Long" > wrote:
>
> Putting Kennedy on a no-drive list would make more sense...
>
> > Yes, really! It took him several phone calls before he could get on his
> > flight.
> >

[Neil Gould]

Recently, lance smith > posted:

> I'm not the biggest fan of Kennedy but he raises a good point- if it
> took a senator weeks and many calls to get off the list, what would it
> take and how long would it take an ordinary American to get off the
> list?
>
It may not be possible.

> Here's the link and the text of the Reuters story:
>
How can some of this just "slip by" people?

> A Kennedy spokesman said the whole thing had resulted from a simple
> error and had not been politically motivated.
>
How would a Kennedy spokesman know this? It sounds like a political
appeasement to me.

> Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge personally called Kennedy "to
> make sure that the situation was remedied," said a spokeswoman for
> Ridge's department.
>
Why would Ridge have to check with Kennedy to make sure of such a thing?
He should have complete access to the system that created this "simple
error", and should know for a fact whether the situation (obviously not
the ability to make such "simple errors") was remedied. Calling the victim
of such errors should yield no useful information whatsoever, as the
victim would only know whether they were stopped on a particular flight,
not whether the "situation was remedied". Are we really that gullible a
people?

Neil