Practical Travel Safety Issues - Canada - U.S. "Carry-on" Rules January 9th

I hope this doesn't get 'merged' but this is the latest info (including illustrative pictures) for ALL passengers for ALL flights for ALL carriers ex-Canada to the U.S. as stupid as it is:

http://www.catsa-acsta.gc.ca/file/library/71/english/Exempt%20Items%20-%2008jan10(2)%20-%20EN.pdf

This does not apply for flights into Canada.

The TSA will not relax its 'search-all-passengers-and-all-carry-on-rules' for Canadian flights to the U.S and thus to expedite processing particulary in YYZ this is the 'solution' as asinine as it may seem. Perhaps if some of our American friends were to contact their politicians some change might take place....

I am SO glad I am not covering the Winter Olympics! I can't even begin to imagine the complaints/lawsuits from all the stolen camera gear (naturally all in rolling cases) that will arise from this. I hope sanity hits someone between now and the start of the games.

:confused: Not really new news:

Temporary emergency measures include no carry-on bags to U.S.A.

The exempt items are the same: camera, laptop and medicines, it's been this way since the beginning. Even worse, those "new rules" since Jan 8th are inconsistent, according to what some FTalkers have been reporting since then, some can carry a "purse", some cannot, others have seen backpacks allowed, and even rollaboards, others were sent to check their laptop or messenger bag.

Since there are no Olympics related items in that list, I assume rules are going to change sooner or later again, which is alienating, some people reported they had to carry their belongings (cameras, lenses and laptop) in their bare hands. :mad: Insane. I'm flying tomorrow, but the other way around (the US to Canada), I worry about my flights from Canada to the US later this month though, because I carry cameras, lenses, 2 laptops, hard drives and other related items, chargers, and more. :(

Cameras may be allowed at the moment but there are a lot of conflicting reports as to lenses. When you are covering sports events you are carrying multiple bodies, lenses, chargers, card readers, computers, remotes, etc. Some has to go as checked baggage but the most vital ALWAYS travels with you. That was my point. It will be chaos if all of the media leaving Canada is expected to make decisions on checking gear that is worth 10's of thousands of dollars (or euros).

I would imagine a lot of people in this position, with a lot of sensitive gear, are simply re-booking their return flight home through SEA instead of YVR, and will simply make the one way drive to SEA on the way home rather than surrender their sensitive gear to the whims of checking.

Forget SEA vs YVR, BUF vs YYZ...

I hope Cana-duh and the United Stupidity Alliance both lose a fortune due to boycotted travel.

A pox on both their (our) houses. Idiots! :td:

Wow, "unless otherwise stated, items must be carried on the person, and not inside a larger bag."

I think these multi-pocket travel vests are going to become very popular:
http://www.scottevest.com/v3_store/New_Travel_Vest.shtml?gclid=CPD7w6b4mp8CFSIjagodAR ezig

I would imagine a lot of people in this position, with a lot of sensitive gear, are simply re-booking their return flight home through SEA instead of YVR, and will simply make the one way drive to SEA on the way home rather than surrender their sensitive gear to the whims of checking.

Gear? Forget the gear, I'll make the hike down to Seattle on sheer principle and they can forget my money.

Again, we should all just boycott Canadian travel. When unemployment spikes during one of the worst financial crisis in history perhaps their "Parliament" will reconsider this stupidity. I for one will stay, rent a car, and fly all within the U.S. when conducting any Canadian business in the near future.

CATSA also managed to scare the heck out of an 85-year-old woman by allegedly making her unzip her pants and then poking her in the abdomen (http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Airport+search+leaves+year+terrified/2425567/story.html).

I get a little less pessimistic when I see pieces like this in the MSM pointing out the ludicrous extremes of airport screening. I think the panty bomber incident was a tipping point. We've been taking off our shoes and undergoing all sorts of petty indignities to board a plane while this nut virtually waltzes on board. More and more people are saying "Enough!"

CATSA also managed to scare the heck out of an 85-year-old woman by allegedly making her unzip her pants and then poking her in the abdomen (http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Airport+search+leaves+year+terrified/2425567/story.html).

I get a little less pessimistic when I see pieces like this in the MSM pointing out the ludicrous extremes of airport screening. I think the panty bomber incident was a tipping point. We've been taking off our shoes and undergoing all sorts of petty indignities to board a plane while this nut virtually waltzes on board. More and more people are saying "Enough!"

The article brought up an interesting point regarding the whole body scanners that I haven't seen brought up a whole lot yet. How does the an adult diaper or a sanitary napkin look like on those images, and how would they be resolved?

The article brought up an interesting point regarding the whole body scanners that I haven't seen brought up a whole lot yet. How does the an adult diaper or a sanitary napkin look like on those images, and how would they be resolved?

Probably with ETD, which should be used instead of the perverse and disgusting WBI. :rolleyes:

Again, we should all just boycott Canadian travel. When unemployment spikes during one of the worst financial crisis in history perhaps their "Parliament" will reconsider this stupidity. I for one will stay, rent a car, and fly all within the U.S. when conducting any Canadian business in the near future.

Unemployment has already spiked, yet remains well below US levels thank you. Perhaps you should push your elected officials in the "Land of the Fear and the home in a Cave" to drop their chicken-little requirements regarding entry into the USA.

The Vancouver cruise ship business will really take a hit on this. Most cruise passengers have a ton of stuff going home and just will book cruises that either round trip Seattle or finish in Seattle.

The article brought up an interesting point regarding the whole body scanners that I haven't seen brought up a whole lot yet. How does the an adult diaper or a sanitary napkin look like on those images, and how would they be resolved?

Diapers and explosives show up differently on the regular xrays, I would assume it would be the same for the walk throughs.

Unemployment has already spiked, yet remains well below US levels thank you. Perhaps you should push your elected officials in the "Land of the Fear and the home in a Cave" to drop their chicken-little requirements regarding entry into the USA.

Both nations' elected officials suck and deserve to be sent to North Korea.

Cana-duh and Uber Scaredy-cat Asshats really are no longer representative of free societies. :td:

The Vancouver cruise ship business will really take a hit on this. Most cruise passengers have a ton of stuff going home and just will book cruises that either round trip Seattle or finish in Seattle.

Or hopefully decide not to cruise.

All aspects of tourism are likely to be hit by this stupidity. I sincerely hope they start shaking the throats of the elected officials of the country(ies) they belong to.

Both nations' elected officials suck and deserve to be sent to North Korea.

I wholeheartedly agree. When our governments over-react and disrupt trade and a large portion of our populations blindly agree with them, the terrorists have indeed won. :td:

I hope this doesn't get 'merged' but this is the latest info (including illustrative pictures) for ALL passengers for ALL flights for ALL carriers ex-Canada to the U.S. as stupid as it is:

http://www.catsa-acsta.gc.ca/file/library/71/english/Exempt%20Items%20-%2008jan10(2)%20-%20EN.pdf

This does not apply for flights into Canada.

The TSA will not relax its 'search-all-passengers-and-all-carry-on-rules' for Canadian flights to the U.S and thus to expedite processing particulary in YYZ this is the 'solution' as asinine as it may seem. Perhaps if some of our American friends were to contact their politicians some change might take place....

This link does not have a date on it, do you know when this was published. I know for a fact last week on Wed, Jan 6 I saw everything going through as carry ons, laptop roller bags, backpacks, etc. I asked TSA, gate agents and they said the bags were all fine. i wishe they would make up there mind which way to go here. Just frustrating you travel one day and see one thing and the news tells you something different. Anyone validate this recent document, just flying out again on next Sunday and just bought a small wheeled laptop bag to replace my larger one. Last week I just used a sleeve but when I saw all the other bags I bought a new smaller one.

I saw the CATSA 2-pager -- the one with the pink polka-dot purse on page-2 -- first appear on 8Jan... in fact, the first iteration of that 2-pager had the date of 8Jan2010 at the bottom near the location of the page number, but at some point thereafter, the date disappeared.

I saw the CATSA 2-pager -- the one with the pink polka-dot purse on page-2 -- first appear on 8Jan... in fact, the first iteration of that 2-pager had the date of 8Jan2010 at the bottom near the location of the page number, but at some point thereafter, the date disappeared.

You can still tell it is from Jan8 -- when you go to the link, the tab title on your browser reads "Exempt Items - 08jan10(2) - EN.pdf" It would appear the (2) may indicate a revision from the original 08jan10 document.

Good detective work CdnTraveller... Here's a link to the original posting... Notice the date at the bottom:

http://www.catsa.gc.ca/file/library/71/english/Exempt%20Items%20(08jan10)EN.pdf

Cameras may be allowed at the moment but there are a lot of conflicting reports as to lenses. When you are covering sports events you are carrying multiple bodies, lenses, chargers, card readers, computers, remotes, etc. Some has to go as checked baggage but the most vital ALWAYS travels with you. That was my point. It will be chaos if all of the media leaving Canada is expected to make decisions on checking gear that is worth 10's of thousands of dollars (or euros).


You're overreacting, no? The PDF clearly states that lenses and cameras can be brought on board, and in a camera bag to boot. I carried just that on 1/1/10, leaving from YYC: two bodies and four lens in my Domke bag. Carried it all on with no problems while others were carrying their laptops in their hands.

I wanted to go to Vancouver this upcoming weekend. However, with all the stupid nonsense about carryons, Vancouver will not be getting my money - San Diego will instead.

I wanted to go to Vancouver this upcoming weekend. However, with all the stupid nonsense about carryons, Vancouver will not be getting my money - San Diego will instead.

Fold it twice and put it in your pocket. Screw them.

I wanted to go to Vancouver this upcoming weekend. However, with all the stupid nonsense about carryons, Vancouver will not be getting my money - San Diego will instead.

Be sure to let the Canadians know about it.

Fold it twice and put it in your pocket. Screw them.

Right. You can eventually to get rid of the temporarily security measures immediately. I do not likes it new security measures from Canada. It should being relaxed these rules. It won't have anymore cause the problems at all. The restrictions will be eased. You can stand whatever if you want go to restroom and 1 hour ruled is no longer existed.

Diapers and explosives show up differently on the regular xrays, I would assume it would be the same for the walk throughs.

Don´t assume. Many sanitary products contain gels for absorption. WBI detect densities, and they cannot distinguish between explosives or non-explosives with similar densities. The question about how alarms on WBI involving items in intimate areas is still unresolved here. None of the resident TSOs has explained to us what will be done. Of course, the problem is that WBIs do not detect explosives, therefore being the wrong kind of technology for the job at hand.

You have to love that CATSA list. It is a wonderful comedy item: Notice how knitting needles are rendered harmless by the presence of wool!!

Also, these guys do not understand the plight of the small person. Why allow only laptop bags that are not wheeled, instead of limiting the size? I use a small wheeled laptop bag (kind of like this one (http://www.flickr.com/photos/kate/3789234272/), maybe even smaller) primarily because I am small and carrying a heavy laptop for long hauls makes me sore, and gives me black and blue shoulders (seriously). Can I get a doctor´s note and keep my wheeled bag for medical reasons??

The Vancouver cruise ship business will really take a hit on this. Most cruise passengers have a ton of stuff going home and just will book cruises that either round trip Seattle or finish in Seattle.Finishing in Seattle will work, but no cruises will round-trip from Seattle because cruises that begin and end in the U.S. are subject to onerous U.S. rules that don't apply to "international" cruises.

Bruce

Good detective work CdnTraveller... Here's a link to the original posting... Notice the date at the bottom:

http://www.catsa.gc.ca/file/library/71/english/Exempt%20Items%20(08jan10)EN.pdf

Yup - that's the same as the hard copy I made the day it came out. Line by line comparison shows no changes made between v.1 and v.2 except for the date removal from the bottom black line (where the page # is indicated). Why make a change just to remove the date???

Unemployment has already spiked, yet remains well below US levels thank you. Perhaps you should push your elected officials in the "Land of the Fear and the home in a Cave" to drop their chicken-little requirements regarding entry into the USA.

Canadians still having difficulty making independent decisions, are we? :p :p

Canadians still having difficulty making independent decisions, are we? :p :p

We tried once....then your leader didn't mention us as friends any more. That still hurts today.

You're overreacting, no? The PDF clearly states that lenses and cameras can be brought on board, and in a camera bag to boot. I carried just that on 1/1/10, leaving from YYC: two bodies and four lens in my Domke bag. Carried it all on with no problems while others were carrying their laptops in their hands.

Anecdotal reports have shown that Canadian security is as "predictably unpredictable" as the TSA, and in some cases have denied lenses in carry-on.

Don´t assume. Many sanitary products contain gels for absorption. WBI detect densities, and they cannot distinguish between explosives or non-explosives with similar densities. The question about how alarms on WBI involving items in intimate areas is still unresolved here. None of the resident TSOs has explained to us what will be done. Of course, the problem is that WBIs do not detect explosives, therefore being the wrong kind of technology for the job at hand.

That is exactly my issue. It's going to look like a gel. If assumptions are made about gels in certain areas, then security is easily by-passed. If these gels need to be resolved, then every woman on her period who uses sanitary napkins rather than tampons runs the risk of embarrassment/harassment every time she flies.

They should just do away with pre-clearance for now. Flights from Canada could arrive in the US just as any other international flights. That way at least people would still be able to carry on (and yes, yes, longer waits for everyone at immigration...)

They should just do away with pre-clearance for now. Flights from Canada could arrive in the US just as any other international flights. That way at least people would still be able to carry on (and yes, yes, longer waits for everyone at immigration...)

Pre-clearance has nothing to do with this big problem. There are two issues at heart:

1. PROFILING
Canadian charter does not permit the profiling that the DHS requires on international flights. Put more simple, the Canadians cannot discriminate against those folks from those 14 countries the U.S. has designated. Thus, every passengers gets the royal treatment.

2. CARRY-ONS
The reason the Canadians are not allowing carry-ons is because CATSA does not have the staff to do the required hand inspection of each bag. Their "solution" is to just require everyone to check it.

Pre-clearance has nothing to do with this big problem. There are two issues at heart:

1. PROFILING
Canadian charter does not permit the profiling that the DHS requires on international flights. Put more simple, the Canadians cannot discriminate against those folks from those 14 countries the U.S. has designated. Thus, every passengers gets the royal treatment.

2. CARRY-ONS
The reason the Canadians are not allowing carry-ons is because CATSA does not have the staff to do the required hand inspection of each bag. Their "solution" is to just require everyone to check it.

The fact that Section 33 of The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms contains a provision that the Federal Government can, by an Act of Parliament (thus by an amendment to the legislation governing CATSA) make a declaration that Section 15 (the one that invokes 1 above) can be, in effect, overridden has not been advanced by our useless government. And since Parliament has been prorogued until at least March by our disgraceful so-called leader to avoid facing the Opposition over a number of issues, it looks grim. Harper would seem to prefer to kowtow.

The only way out of this conundrum would be an exemption for Canada from the U.S.

Pre-clearance has nothing to do with this big problem. There are two issues at heart:

1. PROFILING
Canadian charter does not permit the profiling that the DHS requires on international flights. Put more simple, the Canadians cannot discriminate against those folks from those 14 countries the U.S. has designated. Thus, every passengers gets the royal treatment.

Interesting. How to Canada-Israel flights get around this then?

The fact that Section 33 of [i]The
The only way out of this conundrum would be an exemption for Canada from the U.S.

As if that's going to happen -- it wasn't long ago that a high ranking US officials were still suggesting that there was a link between Canada and 9/11 (and then later apologizing when corrected).

Canada getting an exemption -- I think not.

Interesting. How to Canada-Israel flights get around this then?

Question of the thread.

Question of the thread.

Simple. The Israelis do their own profiling and a blind eye is turned.

The Israelis also deny entry to lots of people.

The U.S. could simply deny entry from Canada of anyone from its list of 14 countries.

If these gels need to be resolved, then every woman on her period who uses sanitary napkins rather than tampons runs the risk of embarrassment/harassment every time she flies.

Or, in my case, my period is due on the day I fly. Therefore I'll have a pad on, but no tampon because I only use tampons once the flow starts. Since I can't tell when during the day the flow will start, nor when I'll be permitted to go to a bathroom to deal with it once the flow does start (what is this 8th grade again with washroom passes?), I'll be wearing a pad.

How suspicious does that look, no sign of the period but the woman has a pad. Expect the threat level to go up this week!

Simple. The Israelis do their own profiling and a blind eye is turned.....

I see - so turning a blind eye to one practice deemed illegal in Canada is OK, while declaring the very same practice illegal and inconveniencing hundreds of thousands of people is also OK when it's another country.
:confused::confused:

That is exactly my issue. It's going to look like a gel. If assumptions are made about gels in certain areas, then security is easily by-passed. If these gels need to be resolved, then every woman on her period who uses sanitary napkins rather than tampons runs the risk of embarrassment/harassment every time she flies.

Diapers, adult and otherwise, are a different issue, but I'm not aware nor have I ever encountered any brand of sanitary napkin that uses gels -- they all use fibers. If you are truly concerned, wear one of the ultrathin types, at least while you are clearing security. Those definitely don't have any gels in them.

Diapers, adult and otherwise, are a different issue, but I'm not aware nor have I ever encountered any brand of sanitary napkin that uses gels -- they all use fibers.

Just a few Googled examples:

http://www.evergreen.com.br/ingles/eg_pa_ng.htm
http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/260192417/Sanitary_napkin_sanitary_pads_cotton_sanitary.html
http://www.tradekey.com/selloffer_view/id/3871333.htm

Diapers, adult and otherwise, are a different issue, but I'm not aware nor have I ever encountered any brand of sanitary napkin that uses gels -- they all use fibers. If you are truly concerned, wear one of the ultrathin types, at least while you are clearing security. Those definitely don't have any gels in them.


I think the vast majority of sanitary napkins are a combination of fiber and polyacrylate superabsorbent gels. Fiber to absorb, and then some sort of material that turns the liquid into a gel so that they don't leak and don't feel wet. It's the same stuff used in diapers.

And again, this brings us back to how should these be resolved? On any given day, you're looking at a decent number of women who might be wearing a pad and therefor needing to be resolved. Are we going to ask the women to remove the pad to prove that it's really a pad and not an explosive gel? Somehow I don't think that's going to go over all that well.

The fact that frequent flyers feel the need to discuss such topics as the recent comments is unfortunate. It's past time to let the politicians know on whichever side of the border that hysterical security has become both a joke and an outrage.

I was surprised to hear of the added security measures on the Canadian side when the bomber attempt originated in Europe. I asked my husband, who works for DHS, why Canada would suddenly impose such rash restrictions. He has no knowledge of the details since he was on leave while all this happened, but his opinion is the fact the bomber was heading to Detroit, close proximity to Canada, that the authorities may suspect he had help or an accomplice in Canada or was planning to head there. For something to be SO quick and far sweeping made him think the authorities or intelligence had some info that has not been released. They don't do this just for the helluvit. There has to be a reason.

Once he explained it, it made much more sense. Although, I have seen on Canadian TV that the rules are arbitrarily and inconsistently applied.

I just hope it all clears up by the time we go to Canada in Feb.

The fact that frequent flyers feel the need to discuss such topics as the recent comments is unfortunate. It's past time to let the politicians know on whichever side of the border that hysterical security has become both a joke and an outrage.

Amen. I could have lived a very long and happy life without ever thinking about some of these topics.

So if one were taking a short trip to the USA what is to stop one from wearing 3 shirts, two pair of pants a couple of pair of socks and of course a couple of pairs of underwear onto the plane, you could then go into the washroom, don't stay too long, and take off all but one of the shirts, pants, underware and socks and go sit down. Wonder if security could stop you from doing this and demand you "disrobe" adn leave them at a pile at the gate.

I was surprised to hear of the added security measures on the Canadian side when the bomber attempt originated in Europe. I asked my husband, who works for DHS, why Canada would suddenly impose such rash restrictions. He has no knowledge of the details since he was on leave while all this happened, but his opinion is the fact the bomber was heading to Detroit, close proximity to Canada, that the authorities may suspect he had help or an accomplice in Canada or was planning to head there. For something to be SO quick and far sweeping made him think the authorities or intelligence had some info that has not been released. They don't do this just for the helluvit. There has to be a reason.
It's not just Canada. The US has insisted on more intensive screening for everyone flying into the US, not just for people flying from Canada. The US then "relaxed" this slightly by insisting on extra screening for all people who are citizens/residents of 14 countries, and random extra screening for everyone else.

These measures hit Canada especially hard because (a) Canadian airports have a high proportion of flights to the US, hence a high proportion of passengers that must be screened in depth and (b) apparently Canadian policy prohibits discriminating against the 14 countries so CATSA are giving the super-dooper extra screening to everyone.
Once he explained it, it made much more sense. Although, I have seen on Canadian TV that the rules are arbitrarily and inconsistently applied.
I haven't seen anything suggesting that Canada is a particular threat or that the proximity to Detroit is a factor.
I just hope it all clears up by the time we go to Canada in Feb.
Given the cause of the problems as described above, I wouldn't count on it. :(

So if I read all of this correctly, next week I'm better off flying to BUF rather than YYZ?

So if I read all of this correctly, next week I'm better off flying to BUF rather than YYZ?

Flying into Canada from the USA isn't a problem, just flying out of Canada to the USA. So I guess it depends if its a o/w trip.

It's not just Canada. The US has insisted on more intensive screening for everyone flying into the US, not just for people flying from Canada. The US then "relaxed" this slightly by insisting on extra screening for all people who are citizens/residents of 14 countries, and random extra screening for everyone else.

These measures hit Canada especially hard because (a) Canadian airports have a high proportion of flights to the US, hence a high proportion of passengers that must be screened in depth and (b) apparently Canadian policy prohibits discriminating against the 14 countries so CATSA are giving the super-dooper extra screening to everyone.

I haven't seen anything suggesting that Canada is a particular threat or that the proximity to Detroit is a factor.

Given the cause of the problems as described above, I wouldn't count on it. :(

Yes, but flying domestically in the US is supposedly a piece of cake right now when you would think security would be tightened following Xmas Day. After all, the 9/11 terrorists were all on domestic flights.

I'm going to have to research further about the policy in Canada prohibiting profiling. Section 1 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms nicked 'The Reasonable Limits Clause' would apply in cases like this.

1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

The intent is on one hand to guarantee all rights, but to have the authority to limit them... as in national security and profiling.

As I stated earlier, it was my husband's opinion. He works for Dept of Homeland Security. What is important is the quick reaction and that in his experience, he surmised there is a reason for it. Not everything is publicized. It's not that Canada is a threat, because we aren't. What he thought is there were possibly links between Christmas Day Terrorist and someone in Canada, not the country itself.

Think about it, though. They did have intelligence and he thinks that some of it pointed to having an accomplice or link in Canada. If the public is not well aware, DHS certainly is that Detroit is viewed as an easy access point to Canada and vice versa.

You have to love that CATSA list. It is a wonderful comedy item: Notice how knitting needles are rendered harmless by the presence of wool!!

Also, these guys do not understand the plight of the small person. Why allow only laptop bags that are not wheeled, instead of limiting the size? I use a small wheeled laptop bag (kind of like this one (http://www.flickr.com/photos/kate/3789234272/), maybe even smaller) primarily because I am small and carrying a heavy laptop for long hauls makes me sore, and gives me black and blue shoulders (seriously). Can I get a doctor´s note and keep my wheeled bag for medical reasons??

I wish I knew the answer to your question. Presently, I have an even more serious problem. I fell down the stairs and broke both my right elbow and scapula in November. Even though the cast and sling are now off, my right arm is practically useless and I cannot carry anything heavier than about 1/2 pound. I have a trip booked to the U.S. for the end of January and am wondering how I am ever going to manage carrying my netbook, medications, wallet, iPhone etc.

Since I cannot bring my laptop bag with wheels, do I dare bring a "regular" laptop bag (as suggested on the CATSA site) to carry everything or, like others have already stated, will I be required to check it? The security theatrics in Canada have gone beyond ridiculous and heaven help anyone who cannot use both arms/hands to carry everything required onto the plane.

The restrictions are due to lack of CATSA mall cops available to search all the bags. There's no secret "intelligence" involved. They couldn't find enough former burger flippers in time to do the searching.

...the fact the bomber was heading to Detroit, close proximity to Canada, that the authorities may suspect he had help or an accomplice in Canada or was planning to head there.

Considering that he was a would-be bomber, my opinion is that he was planning to die in a flaming wreck and head to heaven. Perhaps he has an accomplice up there?

Yes, but flying domestically in the US is supposedly a piece of cake right now when you would think security would be tightened following Xmas Day. After all, the 9/11 terrorists were all on domestic flights.
They clamped down on all international flights into the US because the underwear bomber was on an international flight into the US. The truth is that this applied to ALL international flights into the US, not just the ones from Canada. You're right, of course, that a logical reaction would have included domestic flights, but (with all due respect to your husband), it wasn't a logical reaction, it was a kneejerk reaction. And it was a reaction specifically to the underwear bomber of Christmas 2009, not a kneejerk reaction to 9/11. ;)

My guess is that someone at TSA thought briefly about applying the restrictions to domestic US flights, weighed it against the huge public-relations disaster that would ensue, and decided against it.

As I stated earlier, it was my husband's opinion. He works for Dept of Homeland Security. What is important is the quick reaction and that in his experience, he surmised there is a reason for it. Not everything is publicized. It's not that Canada is a threat, because we aren't. What he thought is there were possibly links between Christmas Day Terrorist and someone in Canada, not the country itself.
Kneejerk reactions are always quick. If you go here (original rules) (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travel-safety-security/1032617-tsa-security-directive-sd-1544-09-06-a.html) and here (revised rules) (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travel-safety-security/1035026-new-tsa-directive.html) , you'll see that this was a TSA response to the underwear bomber that applied to EVERY flight into the US, not just to Canada, starting on Christmas day, so there's no deep dark conspiracy about Canada or about the speed of the response.
Think about it, though. They did have intelligence and he thinks that some of it pointed to having an accomplice or link in Canada. If the public is not well aware, DHS certainly is that Detroit is viewed as an easy access point to Canada and vice versa.
I did think about it. Quite a lot. The fact that ALL countries had to implement these policies is hard to reconcile with "an accomplice or link in Canada." While DHS had "intelligence", it came from the underwear bomber's father and they failed to act on it. You are assuming that Canada is the only country involved, which is just not true, and then extrapolating a reason involving a Canadian link.

All flights out of Canada have these restrictions. All flights out of the UK, Germany, Australia, and EVERY OTHER COUNTRY also had these restrictions. The only differences are that a lot of Canadian international flights go to the US, whereas only a smaller proportion of UK, German, Australian, etc, flights go to the US, so Canadian airports had to deal with extra screening for a much higher proportion of passengers. And other countries have since backed off on the 100% secondary screening, which Canada hasn't, because of their national policy.

I saw the CATSA 2-pager -- the one with the pink polka-dot purse on page-2 -- first appear on 8Jan... in fact, the first iteration of that 2-pager had the date of 8Jan2010 at the bottom near the location of the page number, but at some point thereafter, the date disappeared.


And magically today we are back to the original version with the date at the bottom... not that there was any difference except for the date, but strange that they keep switching it back and forth between the two versions. :confused:

Considering that he was a would-be bomber, my opinion is that he was planning to die in a flaming wreck and head to heaven. Perhaps he has an accomplice up there?

Hmmm that is a good point. lol

Look, I'm only telling you what my husband told me. In his experience, these things are done for a reason, not to be stupid and cause inconvenience.

They clamped down on all international flights into the US because the underwear bomber was on an international flight into the US. The truth is that this applied to ALL international flights into the US, not just the ones from Canada. You're right, of course, that a logical reaction would have included domestic flights, but (with all due respect to your husband), it wasn't a logical reaction, it was a kneejerk reaction. And it was a reaction specifically to the underwear bomber of Christmas 2009, not a kneejerk reaction to 9/11. ;)

My guess is that someone at TSA thought briefly about applying the restrictions to domestic US flights, weighed it against the huge public-relations disaster that would ensue, and decided against it.


Kneejerk reactions are always quick. If you go here (original rules) (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travel-safety-security/1032617-tsa-security-directive-sd-1544-09-06-a.html) and here (revised rules) (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travel-safety-security/1035026-new-tsa-directive.html) , you'll see that this was a TSA response to the underwear bomber that applied to EVERY flight into the US, not just to Canada, starting on Christmas day, so there's no deep dark conspiracy about Canada or about the speed of the response.

I did think about it. Quite a lot. The fact that ALL countries had to implement these policies is hard to reconcile with "an accomplice or link in Canada." While DHS had "intelligence", it came from the underwear bomber's father and they failed to act on it. You are assuming that Canada is the only country involved, which is just not true, and then extrapolating a reason involving a Canadian link.

All flights out of Canada have these restrictions. All flights out of the UK, Germany, Australia, and EVERY OTHER COUNTRY also had these restrictions. The only differences are that a lot of Canadian international flights go to the US, whereas only a smaller proportion of UK, German, Australian, etc, flights go to the US, so Canadian airports had to deal with extra screening for a much higher proportion of passengers. And other countries have since backed off on the 100% secondary screening, which Canada hasn't, because of their national policy.

Minor correction. It is not DHS who had the intelligence and dropped the ball. The CIA, the state department for not revoking UB's visa and the entity that is supposed to put people on the no fly list all dropped the ball. Not DHS.

I asked him this a day or two after Christmas when I was confused as to why Canada would take such extreme measures. Apparently, alot of countries have followed suit. I was just posting what he told me, what his opinion was at the time.

I did not say there was any conspiracy theory coming from Canada, only that perhaps intelligence indicated UB had contacts in the Detroit area or in Canada.

I wish I knew the answer to your question. Presently, I have an even more serious problem. I fell down the stairs and broke both my right elbow and scapula in November. Even though the cast and sling are now off, my right arm is practically useless and I cannot carry anything heavier than about 1/2 pound. I have a trip booked to the U.S. for the end of January and am wondering how I am ever going to manage carrying my netbook, medications, wallet, iPhone etc.

Since I cannot bring my laptop bag with wheels, do I dare bring a "regular" laptop bag (as suggested on the CATSA site) to carry everything or, like others have already stated, will I be required to check it? The security theatrics in Canada have gone beyond ridiculous and heaven help anyone who cannot use both arms/hands to carry everything required onto the plane.


In your situation, wheelchair assistance is VERY helpful. Just give yourself extra time... They are quite slow in YYZ...

And magically today we are back to the original version with the date at the bottom... not that there was any difference except for the date, but strange that they keep switching it back and forth between the two versions. :confused:

Maybe their load balancing servers don't have the exact same copy of the file?

Fear-mongering by the Transport Minister probably means this is going to stick around, if not expand.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/remain-vigilant-while-travelling-baird-tells-canadians/article1427832/

Fear-mongering by the Transport Minister probably means this is going to stick around, if not expand.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/remain-vigilant-while-travelling-baird-tells-canadians/article1427832/

I tend to agree here. however, with the Olympics only a month away, i wonder if this is the typically Olympic type threats that he is really refering to.

In your situation, wheelchair assistance is VERY helpful. Just give yourself extra time... They are quite slow in YYZ...

Thanks very much for your advice! I may just do that... get wheelchair assistance so that I do not have to try and carry everything around the airport with one arm.

Thanks very much for your advice! I may just do that... get wheelchair assistance so that I do not have to try and carry everything around the airport with one arm.

Go for it! My Grandma once used the wheelchair assistance and says that is absolutely the best way to travel. I will add a wish of good luck.

Go for it! My Grandma once used the wheelchair assistance and says that is absolutely the best way to travel. I will add a wish of good luck.

Thanks very much for the good wishes and I will keep you posted on what I decide to do! I am not a grandma yet but I guess there is no age requirement for wheelchair use, right?!

You know, I am new to the FT board but a couple of you have already made me feel right at home. :)

Thanks very much for the good wishes and I will keep you posted on what I decide to do! I am not a grandma yet but I guess there is no age requirement for wheelchair use, right?!

You know, I am new to the FT board but a couple of you have already made me feel right at home. :)
Jetbee, welcome to FlyerTalk. You might also look for advice at the Disability Travel Forum over here: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/disability-travel-224/

I used wheelchair assistance for two trips in 2008 before I had a hip replacement. It eases the stress on the body, but you need to be aware of some of the procedures. As it's not really on topic for this thread or this forum, I'll just say you can find lots of good advice at the forum above.

Minor correction. It is not DHS who had the intelligence and dropped the ball. The CIA, the state department for not revoking UB's visa and the entity that is supposed to put people on the no fly list all dropped the ball. Not DHS.

I asked him this a day or two after Christmas when I was confused as to why Canada would take such extreme measures. Apparently, alot of countries have followed suit. I was just posting what he told me, what his opinion was at the time.

I did not say there was any conspiracy theory coming from Canada, only that perhaps intelligence indicated UB had contacts in the Detroit area or in Canada.
Agreed on the minor correction.

But as to your other points, it was not the case that Canada took measures, followed later by other countries. The TSA in the United States imposed these measures on all countries simultaneously. Air Canada was one of the first airlines to post the regulations (possibly it was still daytime in Canada but already night in Europe), but they were applied to all countries equally. And a day or two later, Canada imposed the 1-bag rule to try to deal with the workload of implementing TSA's rules. (So did several other countries.) So I still say that there's no reason to think Canada was singled out.

I would love to see how much BUF's numbers go up this year. I absolutely refuse to use YYZ until this madness is over.

Since I cannot bring my laptop bag with wheels, do I dare bring a "regular" laptop bag (as suggested on the CATSA site) to carry everything or, like others have already stated, will I be required to check it? The security theatrics in Canada have gone beyond ridiculous and heaven help anyone who cannot use both arms/hands to carry everything required onto the plane.

This is my concern as well. I am used to travelling one armed and usually carry a small handbag and Titan laptop bag with no wheels, both of which are well under the European limit. But on a 'bad' day I struggle, and unlike in many airports in Europe there usually are not baggage carts at Canadian airports airside for carry on luggage.

But at the same time I personally don't feel the need nor want 'extra assistance'.

My experience in past with CATSA was that they were usually pretty patient on bad days, but I don't know if this will continue to be the case, especially as there seems to still be quite a bit of variance as to who is enforcing which rules depending on the individual and the Canadian airport.

Jetbee, welcome to FlyerTalk. You might also look for advice at the Disability Travel Forum over here: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/disability-travel-224/

I used wheelchair assistance for two trips in 2008 before I had a hip replacement. It eases the stress on the body, but you need to be aware of some of the procedures. As it's not really on topic for this thread or this forum, I'll just say you can find lots of good advice at the forum above.

Thanks so much for the link and the suggestions! Still trying to decide what to do...

This is my concern as well. I am used to travelling one armed and usually carry a small handbag and Titan laptop bag with no wheels, both of which are well under the European limit. But on a 'bad' day I struggle, and unlike in many airports in Europe there usually are not baggage carts at Canadian airports airside for carry on luggage.

But at the same time I personally don't feel the need nor want 'extra assistance'.

My experience in past with CATSA was that they were usually pretty patient on bad days, but I don't know if this will continue to be the case, especially as there seems to still be quite a bit of variance as to who is enforcing which rules depending on the individual and the Canadian airport.

Yeah, I am still struggling whether to get extra assistance or not but still have two weeks to make up my mind. Have to see the orthopedic surgeon and will see what he has to say, as well.

Despite some problems in the past with security personnel in Canada, I may just go with the laptop case and small purse and hope for the best. Ideally, the Canadian government will wake up very soon and realize that these new regulations are ridiculous. But I won't hold my breath! ;)

Ideally, the Canadian government will wake up very soon and realize that these new regulations are ridiculous. But I won't hold my breath! ;)

Canada AM just reported they're not planning on easing the restrictions until after the Olympics.

Canada AM just reported they're not planning on easing the restrictions until after the Olympics.

I hope Canadian tourism and the Olympics take a bath over this stupidity. :td:

I tend to agree here. however, with the Olympics only a month away, i wonder if this is the typically Olympic type threats that he is really refering to.

Huh? CATSA is increasing "security" on passengers leaving the Olympics, yet the TSA, the masters of knee-jerk, "horse left the barn security" is not doing anything extra going into the Olympics?

Wait until we hear the stories about athletes not being able to keep their medals on their person.

Huh? CATSA is increasing "security" on passengers leaving the Olympics, yet the TSA, the masters of knee-jerk, "horse left the barn security" is not doing anything extra going into the Olympics?

Wait until we hear the stories about athletes not being able to keep their medals on their person.

Probably not my best typing. Anyway, what i meant to say is that TC raising the threat level on all flights because there is information that terrorists may be coming to Canada so they can enter the US. However, I really think the reason he is saying that is that the Olympics tend to be a "target" every time they are held, but they don't want to admit that they are targets. So make it look like it is some other reason.

CATSA worrying about folks leaving the Olympics and thus increasing their security for departures doesn't really make a lot of sense. I agree with that. I think they are afraid to change anything until after the Olympics as they don't want to look "soft". As much as we have kettles here in the US, i know there are kettles in Canada too.

TSA isn't really concerned with security at the Olympics. As far as they are concerned it is Canada's problems, because no terrorist could ever sneak anything in from the US. (sure :rolleyes:)