Test run for terrorism?
Aug 30, 2010 | 8:01 pm
#17
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: YOW
Programs: Aero-something
Posts: 125
Wow, what a weird story all around. The one thing that sticks out for me is how his bags made it from Chicago to DC when he changed his intinerary to Chicago to Amsterdam.
Isn't rule 1 of airline safety that if the pax doesn't go, the bags don't go?
What the hell happened?
Isn't rule 1 of airline safety that if the pax doesn't go, the bags don't go?
What the hell happened?
Aug 30, 2010 | 8:04 pm
#18
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: MSP
Programs: Fallen Plats, ex-WN CP, DYKWIW; still PAL Premier Elite & Hilton Diamond
Posts: 25,429
Positive bag matching is not required on domestic flights. Also, an airline can choose to separate your bag from you, i.e. put it on a different plane; you cannot choose to separate yourself from your bag.
Aug 30, 2010 | 8:04 pm
#19
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, Rapids Reward
Posts: 40,088
No, does not follow the specific rules at airports. I believing TSO will eventually fired from the jobs or disciplinary actions. TSA wasn't aware of suspicious bags inside the CTX machines. I believe there is no evidence to being founds. It wasn't responsible for searching the bags inside the x-ray machines. It was supposed to being caught them and does not have any find those passengers who were left from BHM-IAD-AMS. I believe the flight is delayed due to mechanical problems. When the bags is reroutes another airports instead of going to IAD. I wasn't assuming what happened of terrorized organizations.
Aug 30, 2010 | 8:11 pm
#20
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 8,957
Help me out here. I can understand "testing the system" with "mock" bombs in carry-on luggage, but how does one do it in checked luggage? If the TSA plays it correctly, they would never let the passenger know whether the checked luggage triggered a further examination. As such, what would the passenger gain by testing a "mock" bomb in checked luggage?
Aug 30, 2010 | 8:40 pm
#21
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Various CRCs
Programs: Red Sox Nation
Posts: 288
Apologies if I used the wrong word. Would you be happier if I said "detained"?
Per Wikipedia:
The TSA could have (and probably should have) notified the authorities to detain the passenger with fake bombs in their bag until they could investigate further.
In the end, they were arrested. That is a fact. My point wasn't whether they should/should not have been arrested. I just want to know why they were arrested only after they were allowed to fly?
What did the authorities in Amsterdam know that the TSA didn't already know before they departed? That's what I'm curious about.
Per Wikipedia:
Police may briefly detain a person if they have reasonable suspicion that the person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity.
In the end, they were arrested. That is a fact. My point wasn't whether they should/should not have been arrested. I just want to know why they were arrested only after they were allowed to fly?
What did the authorities in Amsterdam know that the TSA didn't already know before they departed? That's what I'm curious about.
Last edited by amlothi; Aug 30, 2010 at 8:50 pm
Aug 30, 2010 | 8:49 pm
#22
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Programs: AA Gold, Marriott Plat
Posts: 456
It has nothing to do with how much money they were carrying. That is just another piece of information that, when taken together with the other evidence, looks suspicious. They weren't arrested because of the money itself.
Bulky clothing???? Yeah, he was given a pat down, and let through security because the suspicious items were in the checked luggage.....
To all of the above...and I mean this in the nicest way possible... Do you even read the news before you comment on it???
This is a big big reason why we can't get anywhere with the security debate. There are too many idiots spouting irrelevant and unrelated nonsense and all that does is muddy the water.
link
The actions of the TSA certainly deserve to be questioned here, unless there is more information out there that I didn't see. However, when we ask the questions, let's try to ask relevant ones....ok?
Bulky clothing???? Yeah, he was given a pat down, and let through security because the suspicious items were in the checked luggage.....
To all of the above...and I mean this in the nicest way possible... Do you even read the news before you comment on it???
This is a big big reason why we can't get anywhere with the security debate. There are too many idiots spouting irrelevant and unrelated nonsense and all that does is muddy the water.
link
- The part that I bolded is what concerns me first. If this is true, and the TSA in fact did find the devices, why were they allowed to continue on from Chicago to Dulles, and then taken off the plane in DC?
- If the article is correct and the TSA determined the devices were not dangerous, wouldn't you think they might say "Hey, this looks suspicious though. Maybe we should arrest them before they leave the US?" Evidently, that thought never occurred to them?
The actions of the TSA certainly deserve to be questioned here, unless there is more information out there that I didn't see. However, when we ask the questions, let's try to ask relevant ones....ok?
- "empty shampoo bottle with watches attached"
- "empty bottle of a stomach medicine with mobile phones attached"
- "$7,000 cash"
- "One is on a flight that continues to Dubai and Yemen"
- "Ahmed Mohamed Nasser al-Soofi"
- "Hezem al-Murisi"
- "knives and box cutters"
These two knuckleheads could have labeled their luggage "Test run for future terrorist attack" and TSA would still have let them go! This should have been stopped in Birmingham. Once again, another failure of the system.
I can see Janet on the news tonight stating, "The system worked as designed." Just as she said after the attempted Christmas Day bombing in Detroit. Oh wait, it is Mr. Pistole. Let's see what he says. ;-)
Last edited by essxjay; Aug 31, 2010 at 5:10 am Reason: quote removal
Aug 30, 2010 | 8:54 pm
#23
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 58,133
No idea at the moment.
Aug 30, 2010 | 8:58 pm
#25
Join Date: May 2010
Location: FLL - Nice and Warm
Programs: TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 1,025
Another Miss of the Big One
Palm Beach airport concourse briefly evacuated
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38925437/ns/travel-news/
They're getting jumpy today.
Do you think it's a ploy to justify the nude-o-scopes and the grope fest?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38925437/ns/travel-news/
They're getting jumpy today.
Do you think it's a ploy to justify the nude-o-scopes and the grope fest?
Aug 30, 2010 | 8:59 pm
#26
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northeast Kansas | Colorado Native
Programs: Amex Gold/Plat, UA *G, Hyatt Globalist, IHG Plat Marriott LT Gold, NEXUS, TSA Disparager Unobtanium
Posts: 22,650
Aug 30, 2010 | 9:01 pm
#27
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 58,133
Palm Beach airport concourse briefly evacuated
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38925437/ns/travel-news/
They're getting jumpy today.
Do you think it's a ploy to justify the nude-o-scopes and the grope fest?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38925437/ns/travel-news/
They're getting jumpy today.
Do you think it's a ploy to justify the nude-o-scopes and the grope fest?
Aug 30, 2010 | 9:22 pm
#28
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: MSP
Programs: Fallen Plats, ex-WN CP, DYKWIW; still PAL Premier Elite & Hilton Diamond
Posts: 25,429
Help me out here. I can understand "testing the system" with "mock" bombs in carry-on luggage, but how does one do it in checked luggage? If the TSA plays it correctly, they would never let the passenger know whether the checked luggage triggered a further examination. As such, what would the passenger gain by testing a "mock" bomb in checked luggage?
1. Could they get the fake bombs through luggage inspection
2. Could the fake bombs end up on a different airplane than the suspects
Aug 30, 2010 | 9:38 pm
#29
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Salish Sea
Programs: DL,AC,HH,PC
Posts: 8,972
In the end, they were arrested. That is a fact. My point wasn't whether they should/should not have been arrested. I just want to know why they were arrested only after they were allowed to fly?
What did the authorities in Amsterdam know that the TSA didn't already know before they departed? That's what I'm curious about.
What did the authorities in Amsterdam know that the TSA didn't already know before they departed? That's what I'm curious about.
Normally I pooh-pooh all these dry run and probe scare stories, since they all turn out to be false. But there are enough strange aspects of this one that I am reserving judgement pending more information (which we may or may not get). If he did indeed check in for the DXB flight and then switched to AMS, that alone is a red flag and probably what tipped the scales to arrest them.
OTOH they could simply be a pair of dumb***es, or it's a completely garbled account of what actually happened.
We'll see. I hope
Aug 30, 2010 | 9:48 pm
#30
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: USA
Programs: UA/CO(1K-PLT), AA(PLT), QR, EK, Marriott(PLT), Hilton(DMND)
Posts: 9,538
Alright, I didn't see the part where it said he attempted to board with "large knives and a box cutter". I recant my earlier pronouncement - maybe there is a chance that he is a ......... after all.
What puzzles me is the claim that the TSA found a boxcutter and several large knives in his carry on at Birmingham. Anyone can probably explain away a single errant box cutter in their backpack, but I'm thinking this gentleman would have had to have provided the TSA with a bloody good explanation for having several "large knives" in his bag; so good in fact that they let him board the flight from Birmingham to ORD. Or perhaps the TSO's were more concerned with the size of the Pepto-Bismol bottle?
What puzzles me is the claim that the TSA found a boxcutter and several large knives in his carry on at Birmingham. Anyone can probably explain away a single errant box cutter in their backpack, but I'm thinking this gentleman would have had to have provided the TSA with a bloody good explanation for having several "large knives" in his bag; so good in fact that they let him board the flight from Birmingham to ORD. Or perhaps the TSO's were more concerned with the size of the Pepto-Bismol bottle?