Paperwork? We ain't got no paperwork. We don't need no paperwork. I don't have to show you any stinking paperwork!
Posted on 11/20/2006 8:25:10 PM PST by khnyny
Marshals kept off plane at Reagan By Audrey Hudson THE WASHINGTON TIMES November 20, 2006
A team of federal air marshals was prevented from protecting a recent flight from Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport because a gate agent erroneously said they did not have the correct paperwork, say marshals familiar with the incident. Officials with Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA) were called in to remove the marshals from US Airways Flight 3464 departing Nov. 8 for Bradley International Airport in Windsor Locks, Conn. "Right now we know, obviously, that federal air marshals were denied boarding," said Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS) spokesman Conan Bruce.
Marshals knowledgeable about this case and others told The Washington Times on the condition of anonymity that the gate agent demanded paperwork which is required of other law-enforcement officials, but not from federal air marshals who are on duty to protect the plane from a terrorist attack.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
They need paper work to board the plane? They should be cleared long before they board the plane.
Well, I would say the employee erred on the side of caution. If the Marshals couldn't get someone in their own airport, outside of this person, to authenticate these men with weapons who wanted onto a plane at the Capitol, they should have been restricted.
Imagine anyone else showing up claiming to be an air marshal saying, in effect, "I don't need no stinking badges", because, in fact, they apparently don't.
I'd say that is a problem with the air regulations. All air marshals should have appropriate ID and papers, don't you think?
Marshals say this isn't the first time they have encountered animosity from airlines and the flight crews whom they protect.
"There were hundreds of incidents like this," one air marshal said of the period shortly after the September 11 terrorist attacks. "Air marshals finally stopped filing reports because the air marshal usually ends up being investigated for not being able to cooperate."
From the Article:
[The marshals were first rousted from their seats to report to the jet bridge, where the gate agent demanded paperwork intended for off-duty law-enforcement officers carrying weapons. The marshals told the gate agent that they were on mission status and the paperwork was not required, and they returned to their seats.
The marshals were called to the jet bridge a second time to speak with the captain, and the marshals then returned to their seats.
Minutes later, the marshals were called again to the jet bridge a third time, where MWAA officers ordered the marshals to exit the plane.
Even the intervention of higher-ups in the Homeland Security Department could not persuade the airline to allow the armed law-enforcement agents aboard, and the plane departed unprotected an hour and a half late, the sources said.
Calls for comment to Republic Airlines, which owns US Airways, were not returned.
Air Marshal Director Dana Brown has pledged to rewrite the boarding rules, which marshals say are defined differently by airlines and often exposes their undercover identities.
Mr. Bruce said the agency is working with the airline to review the incident, "get the facts and find out what happened."]
bump
If the Air Marshals showed what is required, and the gate agent 'invented' a bogus requirement, that gate agent should be fired.
Perhaps they did. I find it far more likely that this employee of US Air would be unfamiliar with the ways to properly identify and verify said IDs and papers.
The brilliamce of airline redtape.
It appears that the Marshals showed their appropriate ID.
[The flight arrived late, and passengers were immediately boarded while marshals showed their identification to the gate agent and head flight attendant. They asked to brief the captain then boarded the plane.]
Paperwork? We ain't got no paperwork. We don't need no paperwork. I don't have to show you any stinking paperwork!
I think that five years after 9/11 there should be a foolproof system in place to allow marshals to travel on any flight they choose. I don't blame the airport employees for being overly cautious in allowing armed personnel on flights - there should be a system in place that doesn't depend on a high level of competence or discretion of the person using it.
Find out who it was and send them to Timbuktu (Tomboctou).
LOL....Bullseye !
If what you're saying about the airlines animosity toward the Air Marshals is true, we have a serious, serious, problem.
IMHO, the airlines have really gone downhill and the employees that have remained after all the bankruptcies, reorganizations and layoffs, leave much to be desired.
Complete background checks should be part of the hiring process for every airline and airport employee. We have to stop dic**ing around. If the airlines and airports don't implement these types of security measures and something happens, I see lawsuits and probably much more.
[The brilliamce of airline redtape.]
Yeah, more like the brilliance of airline stupidity.
"Even the intervention of higher-ups in the Homeland Security Department could not persuade the airline to allow the armed law-enforcement agents aboard, and the plane departed unprotected an hour and a half late, the sources said. "
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.