The AP is reporting that a security breach at terminal B forced a partial evacuation this morning. Terminal B services American Airlines, US Airways, and American West. Yet another security blunder from our local airport.
I don’t know if other Bay Staters felt like me after 9/11 but I was horrified that our airport basically enabled the attack thanks to lousy security procedures. If Logan messes up on such a tragic and grand scale again, I don’t know what could be a possible solution. How many procedures need to be revamped, how much money will it cost, who would be accountable and where would the money come from?
As a fellow Bay Stater, I felt exactly like you on 9/11. The fact that they got 2 flights out of Logan scared the crap out of me. I don’t feel much better about Logan yet either - I fly out of Providence or Manchester whenever possible.
I travel quite a bit for work, and have seen my fair share of airports and gone through more security than most of the population, and in my somewhat professional-amateur opinion…
They’re all the same. Boston, Chicago, DC, Dallas, FT Wayne, Indianapolis, Montrose, Denver, LAX, etc.
I’m from MA as well, and fly out of logan about 60-70% of the time that I travel, and it kinda bugs me that there were two flights out of there on 9/11, but if you think about it - it was purely coincidence. There was nothing in security practices that woul dhave kept them from getting on places in NYC or Miami or DC or any other east coast plane. The target was NYC - they came through Canada to Portland, drove 2 hours to Boston. Total coincidence.
And do you know what? they can spend all the money they want on re-training, improved equipment, tighter security and its not going to make a difference at ALL because 99% of the security you find in airports is yourself. All this federal ‘improve security’ is a feel good measure, nothing more.
I’ll be damned if any of us see another hijacking like what we saw on 9/11. Simply put, any plane full of passengers is NOT going to be convinced to go to the back of the plane and huddle in fear while someone else takes control of the cockpit/flightdeck/whatever-they-want-to-call-it. Not any more.
It worked the first time because the passengers were hoping that the plane would just land somewhere, some sort of demand would be paid, and everyone let go.
In fact, I feel a lot safer about boarding a plane now then I did pre-9/11 - just because of that fact. The only thing that concerns me even remotely is a SAM. And guess what - that has nothing to do with the metal detector you walk through in the terminal.
I agree that security is mostly for show. Other than the Deliverancesque “you just take them there shoes off right now” from the security guard they haven’t really done much. Now their big deal is cigarette lighters. I just flew back to Boston from Detroit and they had a TSA official with a bucket for people to drop off those dangerous items into. I wonder what the next prohibited item will be: first nail files, then lighters, I guess belts are next. You could strangle someone you know.
A few weeks ago I flew to Louisville from Providence and I saw the lighter signs. Among other random things, there is a lighter in the bottom of the pocket of my luggage, and I considered digging around for it to throw it out, but I never did.
It went through the screeners and no one said a thing.
More proof (to me) that going the extra hour to Manchester or Providence isn’t worth it from a security point of view
I’m afraid that you’re repeating an urban legend that has been thoroughly debunked since 9/11 - none of the terrorists on that day came to the US via Canada. They arrived directly and legally in the US from flights from overseas.
See this letter from Canada’s ambassador, written to Newt Gingrinch who had repeated that claim on a t.v. broadcast recently. Ambassador McKenna pointed out to Mr. Gingrinch that both the U.S. 9/11 Commission and Attorney General Ashcroft had concluded that none of the terrorists entered the U.S. from Canada. See also this article, indicating that Mr. Gingrinch has apologised for perpertuating an urban legend.
The breach in security at Logan yesterday was due to someone entering the restricted area via an exit area, once they caught it on camera, they evacuated the affected area, and rescreened everyone prior to being let back in.
A beating is due to the person that “had to get in” and went around the security procedures…
I was going based on the news reports from back then, and a photo that apparently showed the suspects in the Portland airport.
It’s too bad that the debunking of the urban legend hasn’t gotten near as much publicity as the original urban legend itself
So did they ever leave Logan airport prior to boarding their flights that morning? Or did they fly in that morning on a red-eye flight, and therefore not have to go through screening once they arrived? The only reason I ask is to determine whether they went through screening (aside from customs) at Logan or not.
Not a biggie, silk1976 - as I said, it’s an urban legend that’s been out there since 9/11. You’d think Snopes would have addressed it by now.
As to your question - my recollection is that at least some of the hijackers flew to Logan from other, smaller, airports - which leads some to infer that they thought those smaller airports might have laxer security. For example, a couple of them flew from Portland, Maine (commented on tangentially in this CNN article), which may have contributed to the idea that they’d snuck across the border into Maine.
