TWA884

According to The New York Times, there was more to it:

TWA884

Folks,

The Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate forum is the place to discuss and debate travel security policy, not politics.

We realize that there is a fine line between debating security policy and discussing politics, however, we are venturing into OMNI/PR territory.

Messages injecting commentary and opinion about the Trump administration or politics in general belong in OMNI/PR.

Such posts will be summarily deleted and violators will be subject to a suspension of their posting privileges for a minimum of one week.

Please consider this to be your only warning.

Thank you for understanding,

TWA884
Travel Safety Security co-moderator

artemis

They probably are, but they acted too late. The time to kill this in favor of more sensible alternatives was when the Middle East electronics ban was initiated. But the big 3 US airlines said nothing then because they benefitted financially from that action, and never seriously considered that the ban could spread and affect their business. Now they are stuck.

kchoya

I don't think that's true. Heck, I live in Idaho and I have my GE interview scheduled down the street.

GUWonder

Something I mentioned days ago in this thread when people wanted to claim it had to do with US boots on the ground in Yemen earlier this year, even as it didn't.

Silver Fox

It's a bit like finding the WMD - just trust us, we know what we are doing.

Fredrik74

That and the muslim ban makes it an uphill battle for the US administration to persuade others this is a credible threat unless they actually share the intel they have. They would also need to explain how flights originating in the US can be safe...

GrayAnderson

Which seems to be why things are going the way they are with Europe: Unlike most other measures, this sort-of needs the non-objection of other countries. If the US were to impose this unilaterally, considering the cargo hold safety issues it's quite possible to envision an impasse wher Europe won't permit large amounts of batteries in the hold while the US won't allow them in the cabin. My guess is that you would very quickly end up with lawsuits to the effect that the US was effectively engaging in an unfair restraint of trade (since knocking load factors on TATL flights by 3-5% could, for example, cause serious problems for a few EU-based airlines like Norwegian or Virgin Atlantic...but I don't think there are US-based airlines likely to take the same sort of hit).

One thing that's hitting me: I can see why a few Asian countries might not be hit with the ban (for example, terrorists going through SIN would do so at their very grave peril...there is a reason why I love SIN...and yes, I know how that phrasing sounds;-)) but for example I am surprised that Russia isn't on the list (yet).

GUWonder

It's already been shared. But it doesn't mean the recommendation/demands of the US Admin are great.

My bet is that the US Admin thinks there are more terrorists and more capable terrorists in Europe and the MENA than there are in the US; that and that European security services are worse than American ones when it comes to security. In part I would agree with the US Admin, but the responses by the US Admin are wacko. And it's not reassuring to me when the US is relying upon the Saudis and Emiratis for "intelligence" to supposedly secure flights. It's ironic in ways that the Saudis and Emiratis and the joint vassal state of Jordan had their carriers hit by the bans first too..

I'm not surprised that Russia got a pass so far. The US Admin is one of Russia's fanboys, at least on "security".

SIN is a sort of police state, and more manageable given its circumstances. Russia is more complicated. But the UAE has a rather robust police state infrastructure too, more so than Russia. Go figure, based on where the ban has hit. Sort of interesting exclusion of Russia, given Russia has a huge population of extremists of various sorts and its police state forces have to contend with far more difficult circumstances than SIN or DXB/AUH.

GrayAnderson

I've mentioned it before, but AUH is a bit of a sore point in my mind because of the Pre-Clearance facility (which I want to say loops in all AUH-US flights, though I could be wrong there). I very much expect that items being discussed in the US-EU "chats" this week are going to include why if the US is so confident in its own security and customs folks AUH is on the "bad list".

Singapore and Israel both make sense to get a pass (though I am now envisioning various sorts of insanity such as connecting to Europe via Ben Gurion...which to be fair is on some level no crazier than doing so via Istanbul unless you ever wanted to visit Syria) and I can see a few other places getting one as well.

GUWonder

Connecting to Europe via IST isn't crazy. TK has had a booming -- no, not that kind -- business in getting IST to be used as a hub by passengers going to/from the EU.

TLV isn't as much of an international transit airport as IST. The TK route network out of IST is amazing compared to the route network of LY out of TLV.

Silver Fox

The one good thing, possibly, is that when the ban does come into effect it might stop the ridiculous amount of "carry-on" luggage that seems to be the norm these days. This morning at LHR I saw a guy with a "carry-on" that was expanded to the max and is bigger than my checked luggage bag.

Silver Fox

And I have to say there is absolutely no way I am going to take two flights where I can take one just to have my laptop with me. It can get checked and if it goes missing so be it. All a bit crap though I have to admit. The terrorists don't even need to plant a bomb to disrupt travel, they have already done it.

GUWonder

Most of the "and the kitchen sink" cabin baggage passengers whom I see at LHR don't seem to be pulling out laptops and tablets out of their bags at LHR, and so I wouldn't expect the ban to do much good in that regard.

aidy

i'd like to see what happens if the rule (not sure which yet) becomes global.

As im getting married in 2 months, my Canadian wife will then move back to the UK, and how do we move all of her PED's, if restricted to a certain amount in total (the option 8)