U.S. Eyes Antiterror Rules for Small Jets and Boats
<http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/16/washington/16secure.html?_r=2&adxnnl=0&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1182082441-jl9rPh3KYwLXOMTYSvyuUA&pagewanted=print> The New York Times June 16, 2007 U.S. Eyes Antiterror Rules for Small Jets and Boats By ERIC LIPTON Correction Appended WASHINGTON, June 15 - Acknowledging that the nation remains too vulnerable to terrorist attack by small planes and recreational boats, the Department of Homeland Security is considering new requirements to allow authorities to identify operators and passengers in millions of these vehicles as they ply the coasts and skies. Department personnel have been touring the country meeting with trade groups and elected officials to gauge their reaction to the proposed changes, to be issued by the Transportation Security Administration and the Coast Guard. "What I'm trying to do is to kind of stick my toe in the water and see if I get bit by a piranha," the Coast Guard commandant, Adm. Thad W. Allen, told a group of state legislators at a recent briefing. The Coast Guard proposals in particular are still in the conceptual stages but are already drawing protests from boat owners, who under one measure would be required to pass a proficiency test and to carry a form of government-issued identification. "These are ill-conceived solutions that will inconvenience everyone and not result in a substantial increase in security," said Michael G. Sciulla, senior vice president of the Boat Owners Association of the United States, which is already organizing to fight the proposals. The threat posed by small planes and boats has been well documented. While the United States is spending billions of dollars to screen cargo containers carried by ships, as well as passengers and baggage on commercial planes, a small private jet could be used to fly a weapon, or a team of terrorists, into the country. The first set of new rules, to be announced by the end of this summer, will most likely be for small planes. Under those rules, boarding of small private planes would continue to be allowed without X-ray screening of passengers and baggage. But passengers on corporate and fractionally owned jets would for the first time be required to undergo terrorist-watch-list checks, particularly if they are flying into the United States from overseas. A similar mandate now generally applies only to small planes flying as a charter. Under another proposal, general aviation airports, which range from a grass runway in the middle of a field to sprawling complexes with air traffic rivaling that at some major city airports, would have to conduct security assessments, identifying vulnerabilities. In addition, planes parked at those airports might be required to have ignition or propeller locks. Kip Hawley, assistant secretary of the Transportation Security Administration, said two goals of the new initiative could provoke at least some protests: ensuring that unauthorized pilots cannot gain access to small planes and that officials have a way of knowing who is at the controls of a plane in flight. A variety of options are under consideration to meet these goals, including requiring that small planes eventually have equipment that would allow the authorities to know automatically the plane's owner and the pilot's identity. "We know which pilots own which aircraft," Mr. Hawley said in an interview. "The next step would be to know who is on the runway in that aircraft." Many pilots maintain adamantly that their small planes pose only a very modest threat: a four-seat, single-engine Cessna weighs about the same as a medium-size S.U.V. And the industry is represented by a lobbying group - the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association - that is known for its campaigns to preserve liberties and that is indeed sometimes referred to as the "N.R.A. of the air." The right to captain a small boat, meanwhile, with little interference by the government is fiercely defended by organizations like the boat owners association. Mr. Hawley and Admiral Allen said they were trying to work closely with these groups to avoid a conflict. A National Small Vessel Security Summit, for instance, is scheduled for later this month in the Washington area. But Michael Chertoff, secretary of homeland security, said his department would not be shy about making new demands. "If we just need to be a little tougher," Mr. Chertoff said, "we're going to be a little tougher." -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah@ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
Aren't there a zillion ways to terrorize people. What's so special about planes and boats? --- "R.A. Hettinga" <rah@shipwright.com> wrote:
The New York Times
June 16, 2007
U.S. Eyes Antiterror Rules for Small Jets and Boats
By ERIC LIPTON
Correction Appended
WASHINGTON, June 15 - Acknowledging that the nation remains too vulnerable to terrorist attack by small planes and recreational boats, the Department of Homeland Security is considering new requirements to allow authorities to identify operators and passengers in millions of these vehicles as they ply the coasts and skies.
____________________________________________________________________________________ Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. http://sims.yahoo.com/
Sarad AV <jtrjtrjtr2001@yahoo.com> writes:
Aren't there a zillion ways to terrorize people. What's so special about planes and boats?
That's where the light is at the moment, so they're looking there. DHS insiders have told me that the next target is going to be pancakes. And after that, people who own dogs whose names begin with 'B'. After that, who knows. Peter.
I keep pointing out that, given how easy it would be to blow up the midtown tunnel, for instance (never mind just taking a backhoe out into the middle of nowhere and digging up a fiber sheath), the very fact that we don't see stuff blowing up all the time is proof that there really aren't that many terrorists out there. In other words, on 9/11 we lost a solid % of them. As a corollary, if a person is smart enough to get into the US and then be able to sustain themselves economically (never mind go to college or graduate school), the desirability of blowing oneself up goes way down. This means then that it probably gets pretty easy to run out of legitimate TERROR! to investigate and protect us poor, terrified Americans from. Look for some staged terrorist incidents by guys looking to protect their jobs ("LOOK! Someone threw a garbage with the Afghan flag on it through the window of the 7-11 last night!!!") -TD
From: pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz (Peter Gutmann) To: cypherpunks@jfet.org, jtrjtrjtr2001@yahoo.com Subject: Re: U.S. Eyes Antiterror Rules for Small Jets and Boats Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 17:05:55 +1200
Sarad AV <jtrjtrjtr2001@yahoo.com> writes:
Aren't there a zillion ways to terrorize people. What's so special about planes and boats?
That's where the light is at the moment, so they're looking there. DHS insiders have told me that the next target is going to be pancakes. And after that, people who own dogs whose names begin with 'B'. After that, who knows.
Peter.
_________________________________________________________________ Who's that on the Red Carpet? Play & win glamorous prizes. http://club.live.com/red_carpet_reveal.aspx?icid=REDCARPET_hotmailtextlink3
participants (5)
-
Bill Stewart
-
pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz
-
R.A. Hettinga
-
Sarad AV
-
Tyler Durden