"ID Rules Exist, But Can't Be Seen"

[Tyler Durden]

John Kelsey wrote...

>Maybe.  I guess the thing that's confusing about any of these answers is 
>that the rules as they're >applied must be propogated to thousands of 
>people.  It's not like they could easily hide guidance >like "no more than 
>10 Arabs per flight" or "double-screen anyone with brown skin and a 
>Koran"-->someone would leak it.  Perhaps the written rules include things 
>like this that they don't want to >subject to court scrutiny, but then how 
>do they get that down to the people doing the screening >at the gate?

That's a good point. And those screeners ain't exactly the cream of the 
crop, if ya' know what I mean. A year ago they were making minimum wage, so 
if someone wanted a copy of those guidelines, it'd be easy as hell to con it 
out of one of em. (INVOKE SPIRIT OF TIM MAY HERE)...dress all official-like 
with a clipboard and some random badge, and start quizzing the locals about 
the current rules. Maybe that wouldn't work at JFK, but go to the airport 
at, say, Lexington So Carolina or Bumfuck Idaho and you'd get the 
information faster than a hillbilly can skin a possum for dinner.

So no way they could keep such a big secret, and I would suspect that the 
Brazil-factor is not so great that the TSA doesn't already know that.

I think you may be onto something w.r.t the Profiling issue. That may have 
more to do with it than anything. In other words, they don't want the thing 
contested in court, and the powers that be may not want to be personally 
liable.

So in other words, this law is basically secret so that it can be secret. If 
nothing else, the Iraq WMD debacle should teach that they really don't have 
some deep, secret and "justifiable" information.

-TD

_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee. 
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963