Airline security to increase -- attempted terrorism Amsterdam-Detroit

[Neil_M]

so then don't take a vacation people will put up with this crap just so they can get a meeting in hong kong. stupid. instead of spending our tax dollars on security that won't do much spend it on highspeed trains that can go from chicago to L.A in 24 hours.

So what happens when the nasty terrorists move along to blowing trains up? Just stay in your house and hide under the bed and cry like a baby.

 

[stlouielady]

like another member said why why why do people insist flying is is great and amtrak sucks when you can't do nothing on a plane.

Because not everyone has 4 days to cross a country.

so then don't take a vacation people will put up with this crap just so they can get a meeting in hong kong. stupid. instead of spending our tax dollars on security that won't do much spend it on highspeed trains that can go from chicago to L.A in 24 hours.

Some people don't fly just for vacation. Some of us HAVE to fly in order to do our jobs. I frequently have to go from St Louis to Las Vegas, or to Pendleton, OR, or to Miami, FL, or to Northern California, or to Puerto Rico (not many trains from St Louis to San Juan), etc, etc, etc. Some of us have ONE day to get to these places, and do not have the ability to take the train, provided there is even a train station nearby. When you do consulting for a living, you travel to where the work is; whether that is 20 miles aways, or 1200 miles away. I would LOVE to take the train everywhere, but, the timing required with work does not allow that. I have to be at a customer site on Monday, return home on Fridays, and have to travel again on a Monday, 3 weeks a month. I have NO choice except to fly. The only option I have to eliminate flying is to quit my job, and I'm not able to do that.

 

[Bob Dylan]

like another member said why why why do people insist flying is is great and amtrak sucks when you can't do nothing on a plane.

Because not everyone has 4 days to cross a country.

so then don't take a vacation people will put up with this crap just so they can get a meeting in hong kong. stupid. instead of spending our tax dollars on security that won't do much spend it on highspeed trains that can go from chicago to L.A in 24 hours.

Some people don't fly just for vacation. Some of us HAVE to fly in order to do our jobs. I frequently have to go from St Louis to Las Vegas, or to Pendleton, OR, or to Miami, FL, or to Northern California, or to Puerto Rico (not many trains from St Louis to San Juan), etc, etc, etc. Some of us have ONE day to get to these places, and do not have the ability to take the train, provided there is even a train station nearby. When you do consulting for a living, you travel to where the work is; whether that is 20 miles aways, or 1200 miles away. I would LOVE to take the train everywhere, but, the timing required with work does not allow that. I have to be a customer site on Monday, return home on Fridays, and have to travel again on a Monday, 3 weeks a month. I have NO choice except to fly. The only option I have to eliminate flying is to quit my job, and I'm not able to do that.

Used to be among the crowd youre in with, I feel for you the way things are going, as a business traveler you soon won't be able to get any work done while on the plane, probably not @ the airport either'there's talk of making all baggage checked with NO carryons and increased fees to cover the costs!

I was fortunate to be able to stop flying for business and ride the NEC trains, and now I'm retired dont have to fly! It's a great world, and our cousins across the sea will suffer if they want to come here to visit, I'm not saying that everyone should stay home, just put some heat on the politicians to not give catre-blanche to Homeland Security to create an oppressive/police like state @ airports and on planes, let alone trains! We are fast heading that way,

if responsible business travelers and in fact all travelers do become involved politically we can remake the system to where it's somewhat safe (no-one is ever completely safe except when dead!)and sensible and affordable! A fine balance, the essence of our country and society! Good traveling, take trains when you can!

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Lots of varying reports on this one! The big thing to me is how did he get the materials for the so called "bomb" past security? And I've heard that pax were the ones that grabbed this fanatic, other reports say it was flight crew?Sounds like Flight 51 on 9-11, glad no-one was seriously injured except hopefully this cretin! :angry:

Look for lots of "tightening up" by TSA @ the airports even though this idiot got on in a foriegn country!

"Friday’s incident brought to mind Richard C. Reid, the so-called shoe bomber, who attempted to blow up an American Airlines flight between Paris and Miami in December 2001 by igniting explosives in his shoes. ... Since then, airline passengers have had to remove their shoes before passing through security checkpoints in American airports."

"Mr. Abdulmutallab told law enforcement authorities, the official said, that he had had explosive powder taped to his leg"

Does this suggest the new security measure airline passengers must remove their pants to anyone else?

I just watched pictures of the bomb on CNN-- it was apparently taped inside of his underwear... So taking off your pants might not be enough for this one... :blink:

 

[DET63]

I just watched pictures of the bomb on CNN-- it was apparently taped inside of his underwear... So taking off your pants might not be enough for this one...

Yes, we'll all have to wear dresses and go commando (i.e., without underpants) whenever we fly.

So much for the "Friendly Skies."

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Yeah, that was quite clever. You could use a kid's diaper or a "feminine" product, and get the same kind of effect... the pair of underwear were only a tight pair of briefs.

 

[jis]

Used to be among the crowd youre in with, I feel for you the way things are going, as a business traveler you soon won't be able to get any work done while on the plane, probably not @ the airport either'there's talk of making all baggage checked with NO carryons and increased fees to cover the costs!

Fortunately as of today the last hour curfew on international flights have been relaxed and made at the discretion of the Captain in Command, an authority that s/he already has for the entire flight, not just the last hour anyway. Also people will be allowed to keep pillows and blankets through the period. One carry on is allowed though it will be hand searched for flight to the US. Passengers will be hand searched at the boarding gate for flights to the US. This is of course almost the same as what was pretty much common practice for nonstop flights to the US originating in India even before the incidents last week.

Eventually some semblance of sanity will prevail I think.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Used to be among the crowd youre in with, I feel for you the way things are going, as a business traveler you soon won't be able to get any work done while on the plane, probably not @ the airport either'there's talk of making all baggage checked with NO carryons and increased fees to cover the costs!

Fortunately as of today the last hour curfew on international flights have been relaxed and made at the discretion of the Captain in Command, an authority that s/he already has for the entire flight, not just the last hour anyway. Also people will be allowed to keep pillows and blankets through the period. One carry on is allowed though it will be hand searched for flight to the US. Passengers will be hand searched at the boarding gate for flights to the US. This is of course almost the same as what was pretty much common practice for nonstop flights to the US originating in India even before the incidents last week.

Eventually some semblance of sanity will prevail I think.

Thanks Jis, sanity might prevail yet! They got the President involved today because the Homeland Security honchos were putting out contradictory statements and people on planes were making up rules as they went! (leaving the lights on during night flights, no electronic devices, no getting up to go to the bathroommetc.) Good to hear they are tightning up boarding procedures, I still am glad I dont have to fly anymore,Amtrak travel is heaven in comparison!

 

[jis]

Thanks Jis, sanity might prevail yet! They got the President involved today because the Homeland Security honchos were putting out contradictory statements and people on planes were making up rules as they went! (leaving the lights on during night flights, no electronic devices, no getting up to go to the bathroommetc.) Good to hear they are tightning up boarding procedures, I still am glad I dont have to fly anymore,Amtrak travel is heaven in comparison!

One should keep in mind that the strictest part of the rules apply only to International flights destined for the US and departing from the US. It is not clear to me which of those additional rules apply to US domestic flights at the present time. It is indeed quite possible that individual airlines or airports are doing silly things. For example apparently yesterday even at CDG (Paris) they were insisting on no hand baggage. But I am hoping that things will settle down in a week or two to something resembling a level of sanity.

In effect except for Canada to US flights these seemingly most obnoxious rules apply only to flights that cannot be substituted by an Amtrak journey.

 

[GG-1]

Aloha

As small as Honolulu Airport is Today's KHON news announced that the recommended time to go through "Security" was being increased from 1 hour to 1.5 hrs. That is longer than most inter-island flights. This does not include going from your car to airline checkin or to the gates so now incuding that It will take about 9 hours to get to Los Angeles.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Aloha
As small as Honolulu Airport is Today's KHON news announced that the recommended time to go through "Security" was being increased from 1 hour to 1.5 hrs. That is longer than most inter-island flights. This does not include going from your car to airline checkin or to the gates so now incuding that It will take about 9 hours to get to Los Angeles.

Still faster than the train

 

[jis]

Here is a blog my friend Bob Blakley posted on this matter. I found it interesting reading. Here is a short excerpt:

Just to be perfectly clear, it looks to me like these rules are DHS's (specifically TSA's) attempt to protect the people on the ground, not the people on the plane. The underlying assumption is that terrorists who try to smuggle a bomb onto an airplane will succeed, at least some of the time.
Given the failure of TSA screening to detect pretty much all hazardous materials, this assumption is depressingly realistic.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Here is a blog my friend Bob Blakley posted on this matter. I found it interesting reading. Here is a short excerpt:

Just to be perfectly clear, it looks to me like these rules are DHS's (specifically TSA's) attempt to protect the people on the ground, not the people on the plane. The underlying assumption is that terrorists who try to smuggle a bomb onto an airplane will succeed, at least some of the time.
Given the failure of TSA screening to detect pretty much all hazardous materials, this assumption is depressingly realistic.

Excellent points jis, you hang out with smart people! I'll predict that Janet will be leaving the cabinet in the near future for health reasons or be "promoted" to a position that means nothing and sounds iumportant, opps, guess she already has that job! :lol: But your friend is correct,

much pr, little action! As GML said we don't need security theather in our airports, we need security that prevents kooks from getting dangerous items on the planes period! I prefer that on international flights that sky marshalls be on all flights, thought that was their purpose all along?Everyone knows I'm no fan of the Bush gang but this one is on Obama and company, we don't need anymore!

 

[Ryan]

From the posting:

What tipped me off was the weird restriction of the new rules to the last hour of the flight - what DHS apparently really doesn't want is a plane exploding in an urban area on TV, because that would look too much like 9/11. If we're going to lose one, let's make sure it goes down over a farm - like United 93.

I think that Bob's giving too much credit to the TSA/DHS. I think that this is nothing more than a knee jerk, futile method of trying to look like they're "doing something" to keep Americans safe. Instead of doing the easy thing and making silly little rules like this, they should mandate that those 3D body scanners be put into play across the country. While I'm generally sensitive to the privacy concerns being expressed by some, in this case the scans are easily avoided - just stay off of a plane!
While I'm on the soapbox, I'm also disappointed that this is already being assumed to be an intelligence failure. I had a brief (2 year) stint in the intelligence community when I was on active duty, and the amazing number of data points that come in make it darn near impossible to tell which Dad walking into an embassy expressing concern relates to a kid that's going to take down an airliner someday and which is just another false alarm. In the perfect clarity of hindsight, it seems so obvious to connect the dots into the picture, but before hand it's nothing but a jumble of dots, some relevant and some not, and a near-infinite number of pictures that can be constructed from them.

Are there things that can be done better in the IC? Certainly. Is that different from any other organization (public or private)? Absolutely not.

 

[jis]

Further entertainment brought to you from DHS/TSA....

Apparently they released a Security Directive without marking it SSI. This got released by someone in TSA to a few people, who published it in their blog. This ticked off TSA and they subpoenaed those that published it trying to figure out who released it from within TSA. What a hopelessly incompetent outfit.

Here is one of the Blogs that set them off.

Here is a further Blog about what they did.

Meanwhile apparently Ms. Nepolitano's boss is not at all amused. He thinks that there was a phenomenal failure of the system essentially refuting Ms. Nepolitano's initial "Everything worked as it should have" line. Yeah of course.... people with bombs in their underwear are supposed to be able to occasionally get on planes afterall, even after their Dad notify the US Embassy that the son is a dangerous person ... Right! I wonder how long Ms. Nepolitano will continue to warm the chair at the head of DHS. She seems to have suffered from a severe case of Hoof ... er... Foot in mouth disease.

 

[PRR 60]

...Meanwhile apparently Ms. Nepolitano's boss is not at all amused. He thinks that there was a phenomenal failure of the system essentially refuting Ms. Nepolitano's initial "Everything worked as it should have" line. Yeah of course.... people with bombs in their underwear are supposed to be able to occasionally get on planes afterall, even after their Dad notify the US Embassy that the son is a dangerous person ... Right! I wonder how long Ms. Nepolitano will continue to warm the chair at the head of DHS. She seems to have suffered from a severe case of Hoof ... er... Foot in mouth disease.

Of course, Ms Nepolitano's boss only became incensed when the publicity got a little to negative. For three days he was silent while his underlings went out and tried to put a positive spin on the situation. Do you think that the head of DHS and the White House press secretary went on the Sunday news shows without clearing it with the boss? Once that didn't work, it's time for Plan B: go public and blame someone. He'll throw somebody, likely Ms Nepolitano, under the bus, and claim he was shocked, shocked at the failure.

Maybe they should have sent Oprah to the Sunday news shows instead.

 

[jis]

Good point. So far this seems to have been handled exemplarily poorly by all concerned.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Good point. So far this seems to have been handled exemplarily poorly by all concerned.

Wan't going to comment anymore till I read the blog and postings! Hate to say it but it's a perfect example of what's wrong in WAS no matter who's elected! A bunch of unqualified political hacks are appointed to policy making positions, the keystone cops are placed in security positions and when people attempt to express their first ammendment rights the ***** is sent out to their home to third degree them! And in the mean time pr flacks hold meetings to come up with press releases that put the correct "spin" on Monty Python type fiascos! Finally when the American people awaken and start lampooming these clowns the elected officials are all SHOCKED! SHOCKED! and will get to the bottom of this! Heads will roll, yes, heads surely will roll!It's Alice in Wonderland meets Con Air brought to you by TSA and HS! Get ready for more crowded trains and highways, if you have to fly, I feel your pain!

SIGH :blink:

 

[Ryan]

This isn't a hit on the politicians, this is a hit on the people that are paid to advise them and make recommendations (both appointed and career, but mostly career).

 

[AlanB]

I think that Bob's giving too much credit to the TSA/DHS. I think that this is nothing more than a knee jerk, futile method of trying to look like they're "doing something" to keep Americans safe. Instead of doing the easy thing and making silly little rules like this, they should mandate that those 3D body scanners be put into play across the country. While I'm generally sensitive to the privacy concerns being expressed by some, in this case the scans are easily avoided - just stay off of a plane!

There's a pivotal point that escapes me here. How does a full body scanner installed at all US airports stop someone from Amsterdam, which is not a US airport, from getting on a plane with explosives?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the technology, especially since they've perfected things to a point where it isn't as intrusive as the original ones, yet it still lets you see things like the explosives that were on this terrorist's body.

While I'm on the soapbox, I'm also disappointed that this is already being assumed to be an intelligence failure. I had a brief (2 year) stint in the intelligence community when I was on active duty, and the amazing number of data points that come in make it darn near impossible to tell which Dad walking into an embassy expressing concern relates to a kid that's going to take down an airliner someday and which is just another false alarm. In the perfect clarity of hindsight, it seems so obvious to connect the dots into the picture, but before hand it's nothing but a jumble of dots, some relevant and some not, and a near-infinite number of pictures that can be constructed from them.
Are there things that can be done better in the IC? Certainly. Is that different from any other organization (public or private)? Absolutely not.

This I would agree with whole heartedly. It's always easier to armchair quarterback once all the pieces of the puzzle are in place, than it is before you have all the pieces.

 

[Ryan]

Of course, Ms Nepolitano's boss only became incensed when the publicity got a little to negative. For three days he was silent while his underlings went out and tried to put a positive spin on the situation.

Or perhaps he kept his mouth shut while waiting for information to come in before breaking out the "jump to conclusions" mat, which is a welcome breath of fresh air.

 

[Ryan]

I think that Bob's giving too much credit to the TSA/DHS. I think that this is nothing more than a knee jerk, futile method of trying to look like they're "doing something" to keep Americans safe. Instead of doing the easy thing and making silly little rules like this, they should mandate that those 3D body scanners be put into play across the country. While I'm generally sensitive to the privacy concerns being expressed by some, in this case the scans are easily avoided - just stay off of a plane!

There's a pivotal point that escapes me here. How does a full body scanner installed at all US airports stop someone from Amsterdam, which is not a US airport, from getting on a plane with explosives?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the technology, especially since they've perfected things to a point where it isn't as intrusive as the original ones, yet it still lets you see things like the explosives that were on this terrorist's body.

That points to a larger issue that we as a country need to figure out - while ultimately we can't control security at non-American airports, we can deny entry into US airspace any flights originating in countries that don't have security standards that are up to snuff. That'll inconvenience a hell of a lot of people, be difficult and expensive to enforce, and probably upset the Canadians when we start diverting "unsecure" flights to land in their territory instead.

 

[Neil_M]

I think that Bob's giving too much credit to the TSA/DHS. I think that this is nothing more than a knee jerk, futile method of trying to look like they're "doing something" to keep Americans safe. Instead of doing the easy thing and making silly little rules like this, they should mandate that those 3D body scanners be put into play across the country. While I'm generally sensitive to the privacy concerns being expressed by some, in this case the scans are easily avoided - just stay off of a plane!

There's a pivotal point that escapes me here. How does a full body scanner installed at all US airports stop someone from Amsterdam, which is not a US airport, from getting on a plane with explosives?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the technology, especially since they've perfected things to a point where it isn't as intrusive as the original ones, yet it still lets you see things like the explosives that were on this terrorist's body.

That points to a larger issue that we as a country need to figure out - while ultimately we can't control security at non-American airports, we can deny entry into US airspace any flights originating in countries that don't have security standards that are up to snuff. That'll inconvenience a hell of a lot of people, be difficult and expensive to enforce, and probably upset the Canadians when we start diverting "unsecure" flights to land in their territory instead.

Why not just build a big wall around the US and put a roof over it all? That will keep all the bad guys out, apart from the ones already in.....

Whatever you do, you will always be one step behind the bad guys. You just have to learn to live with that because you can never be ahead. This latest guy got on the plane despite all the precautions your government demands being in place, but somehow he was not picked up. Makes you wonder how efficient and worthwhile all the checks are.

Surely not just a bit of theatre?

Even if you check all passengers 100% all the time, then fine, super extra safe and secure.

Just don't ask how much airfreight is screened for things that go bang, that might make you have a little toilet related accident.......

 

[PRR 60]

..That points to a larger issue that we as a country need to figure out - while ultimately we can't control security at non-American airports, we can deny entry into US airspace any flights originating in countries that don't have security standards that are up to snuff. That'll inconvenience a hell of a lot of people, be difficult and expensive to enforce, and probably upset the Canadians when we start diverting "unsecure" flights to land in their territory instead.

I believe we already do that. No USA-bound flight can depart until released by DHS. All airports originating USA-bound flights must meet security requirements. That is not as big a deal as it seems since most airport security is pretty thorough.

NW 253 was released from AMS since the individual in question was not on the no-fly or even the watch list. The latter would have subjected him to a full screening which, in all likelihood, would have found the explosives. AMS has full body scanners. They are now being used to screen all USA-bound passengers.

 

[Bob Dylan]

..That points to a larger issue that we as a country need to figure out - while ultimately we can't control security at non-American airports, we can deny entry into US airspace any flights originating in countries that don't have security standards that are up to snuff. That'll inconvenience a hell of a lot of people, be difficult and expensive to enforce, and probably upset the Canadians when we start diverting "unsecure" flights to land in their territory instead.

I believe we already do that. No USA-bound flight can depart until released by DHS. All airports originating USA-bound flights must meet security requirements. That is not as big a deal as it seems since most airport security is pretty thorough.

NW 253 was released from AMS since the individual in question was not on the no-fly or even the watch list. The latter would have subjected him to a full screening which, in all likelihood, would have found the explosives. AMS has full body scanners. They are now being used to screen all USA-bound passengers.

That's the point, this should have been SOP on all international flights to and from the US, we are not exempt from our own terrorists, should every guy who looks like Tim McVey be checked extra close when going taround Govt. buildings?Everyone should be checked closely, those that have not been in combat zones or dangerous places such as Israel or London during "the troubles" don't understand this! It's totally a failure of the system and no amount of spin and pr bs with "New speak" will change that fact!