Another plane turned back: "security" overreaction
 

January 12, 2005
British Flight Forced to Turn Back
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 2:16 p.m. ET

LONDON (AP) -- A British Airways flight from London to New York was forced to turn back Wednesday after U.S. authorities refused to allow one of the passengers to land, the airline said.

Flight BA175 was three hours into its journey to John F. Kennedy International Airport when it was forced to turn back to London's Heathrow Airport, where the male passenger was met by police.

``The flight returned to Heathrow after we received a request from the U.S. authorities saying that a passenger aboard the aircraft was not to be allowed to land in New York,'' an airline spokesman said. ``We stress that there was no threat to the safety of the aircraft.''

The passenger's nationality was not immediately available.

Airline officials said the rest of the passengers on the flight would leave later Wednesday evening.

Our nation's security system has collectively lost its mind.

We continue to act like a nation of idiots.

I submit this incident (along with other similar incidents) as evidence of the "hysteria" discussed in another thread (where the existence of that hysteria was strongly rejected by one or two posters).

STUPID!!! :mad:

If there was "no threat to the safety of the aircraft," then why not let the damn plane land?

If DHS reasons because of the time and manpower it would take to deport the guy, then they ought to take a look at the extra time they are wasting with the shoe carnival.

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.

How stupid can we get? Making a plane that's halfway here turn around because of a guy who's "not a threat"?

The (remaining) wheels are coming off.

US sends BA jet back to Britain

The BA jet was carrying 239 passengers when it turned back
A British Airways jumbo jet flying to New York turned back after the US objected to one of its passengers.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4169655.stm

And classic quote:

A spokeswoman from the US Transportation Security Administration said: "There was a person travelling on a French passport who was a positive match with an anti-terrorism watch list.

"Homeland security made the match by checking data transmitted after the flight departed from London."

I believe it also the responsibility of the Airline to Cross reference the No fly list before the Plane even leaves the gate… To me it seems like something BA did not follow…

The solution is to get rid of the No Fly list!!! :mad:

I think the dirty stinkin' visitors to the USA (all of 'em) ought to have to apply for permission months in advance and their applications should be processed by DMV rejects.

Only a small fraction of them should ever be approved, and they should have to fly naked with no carry-ons whatsoever. Chained to their seats. Like ConAir on steroids.

We can't be too safe. Think of the children.

Note: Very heavy use of Sarcasm Above (for the sarcasm-recognition-challenged among us).

When will our nation's hysteria stop?

When we win the war on terror? How will we know when that date happens?

Just reported on LBC 97.3:

The UK authorities questioned the passenger for two hours AND RELEASED HIM.

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.

And I am trying hard to restrain myself and hide my true feelings!

British Airways doesn't have access to the harassment lists. They have to transmit it to the US authorities who do the checking. BA followed procedure.

It was the hysterical people in the US who caused the problem.

Well I’m just stating what CNN reported, and that this person was on the No fly List, and it was up to BA to check it… However in this case they didn’t have the update list, and thus when the US authority checked the pax names this person showed up…

Not only that, the US Authority was already in process of receiving the aircraft in Bangor Main… But BA decided to turn back to Heathrow…

In a few years when they've put more and more people on these lists, I can't imagine how much of a nightmare it's going to be to travel. It's going to be impossible to get from point A to point B.

Even on FlyerTalk we've already got a good number of people on the F-U lists. All indications point to it getting worse.

Why return to Heathrow instead of at least getting to the right country? Operational/maintenance reasons, or a preference for dealing with British authorities?