Still everyday, weekdays and weekend, there is a massive traffic jam already starting before the tunnel. Think like cars standing still, people with suitcases walking in the tunnel desperate to catch their flight.

All of this for a symbolic security check during the peak of the season that has nothing to do with security and has made Schiphol not an inch more secure.

They have even found the time to fine passengers walking along the freeway �110.-- for endangering traffic! Goes to show where their priorities lie.

Since this whole circus started, the entire haul comprises of a single handgun found in the glove compartment of a car in the departures drop-off zone. The driver must have been a certified moron.

Johan

I'm sure, as so many on this board, you are an expert in the matter and you have some data to back up your statement?

Annoying yes, but ever heard of implementing visible security measures to discourage things from happening...

The problem for them will be deciding when to stop the measures. My hunch is that that will not happen any time soon, if ever.

Yes it's annoying and is cause for some hassle, but in the end is it not better being safe then sorry. After Brussels everybody asked why was there no extra security. Now Schiphol has extra security and because they cannot find 'anything of great risk' people start complaining about it.

I would think the extra security scares of some people. Although it doesn't necessarily give me a more safe feeling. My thoughts after a weekend in Paris with police/army and machine guns seen on the street every 5 minutes at least.

This morning they were blocking the main entrance from the A4 just before it splits to Arrivals/Departures/Long term parking.

Now of course if you come from south and see the traffic jam to schiphol you just take the exit immediately before it ("Long term/Cargo") where there is no security...

An insoluble problem. Not only is there the question of how far out you move the security perimiter and for how long the authorities can remain on high alert, but there is also the small matter of displacement.

The number of potential targets is endless, increase security at one and the others become all the more attractive. Trains, buses, concert halls, ferries, subways, you name it. The latter must be especially vulnerable and appealing to terrorists, given that narrow tunnels greatly enhance the blast effect of an explosion.

One could go on and on, there is no way that even a fraction of targets could be given anywhere near adequate protection. That puts the authorities in a bind, perhaps inducing them to resort to very visible measures that have very little impact.

Johan

No traffic jams or queues at lunchtime today. The main checkpoint between the A4 freeway and Departures was unmanned and deserted. They must have been hungry.One hopes that all miscreants bent on wreaking havoc at Schiphol were on a lunchbreak too.

Departures a complete zoo, by the way. The line for Schengen security stretched all the way to the KL check-in zone in Terminal 2.

Johan

Visible security measures? Schiphol has 4 access roads to enter the arrivals/departures. This security check covers only two of them. If you approach the main terminal building through one of the other two roads, there is not a single check, not even a police officer.

So please tell me, what is the purpose of this security check? Should I be an expect on this matter?

Imagine an airport security check with four lines. Two of them have TSA officers and a mandatory full body scan. While in the other two lanes there is no TSA officer nor a body scanner, you just walk through.

Would that discourage you from doing bad things?

Again, this has nothing to do with security.

The Volkskrant has landed itself in some trouble; the driver photographed on the front cover on Tuesday is requesting that they publish a front-page apology on Friday or face action regarding invasion of privacy, reputational damage, etc

It also appears that the army is now on patrol there.

While I can't say I understand the workings of a mind that seriously contemplates carrying out a terrorist attack, they always seem to only strike soft targets; they take the easy options.

An international airport with heavily armed military police and soldiers just metres away does not strike me as being a soft target. It means that whatever plan is being contemplated is going to be brought to a swift conclusion - where all the recent attacks show instead a preference for striking locations or targets where they can take their time in maximising the impact of their actions.

Call it theatre if you want - but I regard Schiphol is now a far less attractive target than before these controls were introduced.

Exactly, and that is most likely the main reason this is done. Or my cynical mind might think that KMAR want's more funding and people :-).

But since I don't have any of the relevant facts it's all useless speculation. And it's not that having a buffer zone outside the terminals has never been done.

It's an interesting discussion if a photographer is framing because he/she has recorded what actually happened or should have waited until some blond Caucasian girl was stopped :-).

Indeed...but there surely was a photograph that could have been used that did not allow any of the subjects to be so easily and obviously identified. The Marechaussee and soldier are, for example, not identifiable. Particularly given the subject-matter, it seems at the very least to have been an oversight on their part not to seek the consent of those photographed before using the photograph in such a public (and to some, provocative) way.

Why be PC when we all know that this picture very actually represents what is happening.... two adult bearded men.... The picture only shows the reality, discussion about it are something different. Everyone can draw their own conclusions, I prefer to do that myself without any censorship in the facts that I'm presented.

And when it's a news picture you don't need consent of those displayed.