See, you're using logic, and that's how you're getting in trouble here. The DHS plainly stated he WAS NOT A THREAT, which really isn't important. The important thing is that his name matched someone else's ON THE LIST -- that's why he couldn't be allowed near DC or New York. Now, if he was a threat but not on the list, they would have let the flight continue.

The United States of paranoiAmerica, featuring President George W. Orwell. May God continue to bless Our Beloved Leader.

Oops. My mistake. Logic. Stupid me, using my brain. I'll try to not let it happen again.

Not to worry. I'm sure in the future if you make the same mistake you can just 'voluntarily' attend a re-education camp.

I wonder how long it will be when one of us, who crticize the TSA regularly, will be added to the list after getting into FT's database? I can see it now - "rp, this is the TSA. Your posters are creating a security threat by discussing how we use and abuse the flying public. Do it now and don't tell anybody or you'll be next." It wouldn't surprise me.

Do you think FT should be hosted in Cuba, land of the free?

No, but I do feel that a number of Omni posters would find their political views more at home there.

Do you think the situation would have played out the same if the person in question was an American?

Our right to privacy and our right to the pusuit of happiness is quickly going away.

I have NO DOUBT that the goons at the DHS/TSA monitor this web site and the people who use it.

A civilian friend who works closely with certain goverment agencies told me that your name came be put on the list for all sorts of reasons, ie. - web site activity, questionable banking activity, "suspicious" credit card activity, unusual travel destinations, political activity, a flag by a customs offical or undeclared material found by customs, appearence (arab american / indian american). If a goverment agency decides to put you or your name on the no fly list, it is only that agency that can give the TSA permission to remove it. So, if you go through the TSA/DHS procedure to get yourself off of the list and everything checks out O.K., the agency in question can still refuse to remove you. You will NEVER find out which agency has put you on the list and why


SO UNAMERICAN

The "list" should be eliminated.

Did you somehow happen to miss the part where it said BA decided to turn Back to LHR�.

Did you somehow happen to miss the part where it said DHS wanted them to divert to Bangor, Maine, for an indefinite delay, where DHS would hold BA's airplane hostage with no estimated time for release?

Plus you have the tail winds in your favour once the aircraft turns around for the trip back to LHR. I suspect it probably wasn't very far out -- likely somewhere south of Iceland.

With an unpredictable amount of time in Bangor, it's also possible a crew could go illegal. Probably some other factors too - would BA be fined by the US Govt if this 'no fly list passenger' landed on US soil?

Regardless, it sounds like BA made a good move in returning to LHR. They could better look after their passenger at LHR opposed to Bangor, Maine, for an "unpredictable" amount of time.

I travel between the US & UK frequently and I have faith in the British Authorities. If this person was really wanted, the British authorities would of kept him -- or despite being released, they could be keeping a close eye on this individual.

Last but not least, why has the DHS been forcing aircraft down at the first point of US soil instead of letting them continue to their destination? These diversions are costly and unnecessary - unless someone is truly a danger. So far I haven't seen any. However, it seems Bangor, Maine, has been quite popular lately for some European flights. A Delta Air Lines flight to Atlanta from South/Latin America (not sure of origin) was put down at the Key West Naval Air station recently as well.

I'm sorry, but I don't buy the "Cat Stevens" was a threat to the NE corridor line of B.S. Ironically "Cat Stevens" was deported from IAD and flew over the NE corridor on his way back to the UK. Apparently this BA pax wasn't a threat either, per the British Authorities -- so why land at Bangor? What's wrong with handling it at JFK?

At the rate we're going, perhaps the DHS should build a special international terminal at Bangor to handle these flights, allow all of the other pax to de-plane and be processed, and the various airlines could install a "shared" club/lounge for use each time there is a "diversion"?

Most importantly, how many miles did these BA pax get for their London Heathrow to London Heathrow service, with continuing service to NY JFK?

SDF_Traveler