FlyerTalk Forums - Another plane turned back: "security" overreaction

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)

- Practical Travel Safety and Security Issues (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-security-issues-686/)

- - Another plane turned back: "security" overreaction (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-security-issues/388965-another-plane-turned-back-security-overreaction.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wally Bird

I doubt it and I bl**dy well hope they didn't ask.
When did the DOHs get sovereignty over the mid-Atlantic (or maybe Canada or wherever the flight was @ 3-hours from LHR) ? :mad:

The pilot had to ask Heathrow about that, you don't just make an unplanned landing without giving a warning...

And it's possible that going back to Heathrow, unloading the unwanted pax, and taking off again was considered shorter than flying to Bangor, wait an unpredictable amount of time, then take off to NY.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richelieu

And it's possible that going back to Heathrow, unloading the unwanted pax, and taking off again was considered shorter than flying to Bangor, wait an unpredictable amount of time, then take off to NY.

the key being unpredictable amount of time at Bangor

Quote:

Originally Posted by OrlandoFlyer

STUPID. I would love to see a US, DL, AA, UA or CO flight to Europe be turned back for this reason. It will never happen because the Europeans are not that stupid. Leave to the US to lead the stupid ratings.

Not that stupid? These are the people who took the shoe bomber off our plane one day and put him on the next!

Oh God, not the Richard Reid card again.

Is there any ink left on that thing?

It's amazing how one blundering idiot could spawn so many more blundering idiots...

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrakant

my friends two year old daughter was on NO FLY list. It took 6 months and political push right up to Atty. Gen to take the girl off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peetah

Senator Ted Kennedy was on that list. He has lots to say about Shrub. ...I'm willing to bet you Kerry and Edwards will end up on that list sometime soon... for running against Shrub.

Peetah has a point here. First a two-year-old, then Kennedy, and then Kerry and Edwards. It seems like they are going after everyone who shares the same political opinions.

You know, I really don't see why people are all upset about these no-fly 'clacklists'. All you have to do to get off is go down to congress, admit that you were a member of a terrorist cell and now renounce your membership. After that, name the names of fellow terrorists and after 3-5 years in prison you'll be allowed to re enter both society and airplanes. Several terrorist organizations you may have been a part of are:

Al Qaeda
Al Jazeera
Hamas
ACLU
NAACP
BBC
Black Tuesday
ADL
PLO
College Democrats

After naming names you can join pro-american groups like:

TSA
KKK
NRA
Prayer Chanell
Fox News
GOP

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psychocadet

What an outrage! being a member of a communist party doesn't allow you this fasttrack procedure to be removed??? I thought it was the point of asking the question...

Quote:

Originally Posted by travelinmanS

How long before lots of people are on these lists just because the US gov't doesn't "like" them? How long before US citizens are on the list because they disagree with the administration? Its a slippery slope.

It's already happened, though the guv-mint won't admit that.

http://www.aclu.org/news/NewsPrint.cfm?ID=16240&c=206

Quote:

* Rebecca Gordon and Jan Adams learned they were on a “No-Fly” list from the San Francisco International Airport ticket counter. The ticket agent "came back and said ‘you turned up on the FBI no-fly list. We have called the San Francisco police.’ We were shocked, really shocked,” recalled Adams. Gordon and Adams may have been targeted for their work on War Times, a free bilingual newspaper that has been critical of the war and the Bush administration's policies on terrorism. -- CBS, February 5, 2004

* John Dear, a 43-year-old Jesuit priest, member of the Catholic peace group Pax Christi and a former executive director of the Fellowship of Reconciliation, an interfaith global peace organization has also been targeted. “I fly just about every week,” Dear says. “Since 9/11, I’ve been taken aside at the boarding gate every single time and searched and questioned.” -- In These Times, Dave Lindorff, November 22, 2002

* Virgine Lawinger, a 74-year-old nun and a member of Peace Action, was stopped at the Milwaukee airport along with some 20 other members of the group on their way to Washington to lobby the Wisconsin congressional delegation against military aid to Colombia. She says they were told at the time by local sheriff’s deputies and Midwest Express ticketing personnel that one or several of them were “on a list,” and that the TSA had instructed airport security to keep the group off the plane. -- In These Times, Dave Lindorff, November 22, 2002

An article on this is here: http://www.inthesetimes.com/issue/27/02/feature3.shtml

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wally Bird

I doubt it and I bl**dy well hope they didn't ask.
When did the DOHs get sovereignty over the mid-Atlantic (or maybe Canada or wherever the flight was @ 3-hours from LHR) ? :mad:

My initial thoughts exactly. But upon reflection, I'm now thinking they probably asked for permission from ATC for wanting to do a 180, and from UK authorities, who were no doubt alerted...

Quote:

Now I'm not saying the US authorities are necessarily wrong and the UK authotities are necessarily right, but this whole stinking matter shows there is something seriously wrong with liaison between people who should know better.

... must be the language barrier... :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by chtiet

My initial thoughts exactly. But upon reflection, I'm now thinking they probably asked for permission from ATC for wanting to do a 180, and from UK authorities, who were no doubt alerted...

I was in no doubt that the Captain and BA ops were the ones who decided to go back to LHR. And yes, ATC would have been informed.

My wrath was aimed at the unnamed "Official" quoted by Reuters who obviously believed US permission was required.
And anyone else who cannot see the arrogance of such a belief.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wally Bird

I'm not sure we can glean these details from our news media, since nearly every story words it differently. From today's Washington Post:

Quote:

British Airways was given the option of diverting the flight to Bangor, Maine, the landing spot for most inbound transatlantic flights with such problems. Instead, it chose to return the plane to London, according to Yolanda Clark, a spokeswoman for the Transportation Security Administration.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Jan12.html

I seriously doubt that BA has to ask permission to return to the UK.

The sadest part of this entire incident is that the average American will be so happy that we have been SAVED again from the terrorists.

So sad.

From the Daily Telegraph:

Quote:

Scotland Yard officers interviewed the passenger but released him without charge. A police source said: "You can call this due care on the part of the Americans or you can call it paranoia. It is up to you."

If this person was such a "threat" to American security, why didn't DOHS apprehend him/her once he landed here in the US? That way, he/she would no longer be free to "terrorize" the rest of the world.

Was this person THAT dangerous that they didn't want to risk it? :rolleyes: