There has been a spate of airliners being turned back when approaching the US, or escorted by fighter jets over the last week or so. One reference is this article in CNN.
The question: is there really something going on that justifies these actions, or is it an over-reaction (or something else) on the part of the U.S. government?
Mods, I was on the fence about this being Great Debates or In My Humble Opinion. If it swings toward opinion, please move it to a more appropriate place. Thank you.
over reaction. Sheesh, man, it was proven on the fourth flight on 9/11 that taking over an airplane can’t really be done if everyone on the flight knows they will die if they don’t fight. airport security is a joke and we all know it.
I think one of the supposed concerns behind the current actions is that members of the flight crew might be parties to the act. Along the lines of the (Egyptian?) pilot who flew his plane into the Atlantic (sorry I forget the flight number.) So passengers taking over the flight would not be an issue.
I certainly hope our government would not be so corrupt as to make up such stories for political gain. It presents the unfortunate situation, however, where successful interdiction, or even the credibility of underlying threats, may well be unproveable. If nothing happens, that can be presented as justification for such efforts to continue.
Aren’t the cockpits supposed to be veritable vaults now? How can a plane be commandeered if hijackers can’t get into the cockpit?
This is rich:
What’s the difference between “matched” and “appeared to match”? They’re not quite sure whether or not the names match?
I think the TSA (or Homeland Über Sekurity) is just trying to stay visible by pretending that it’s doing something. “Look how effective we are, we’ve cancelled three flights last month!”
I think it’s a classic over-reaction by a bureaucracy that is afraid of being caught being too careless.
The CIA or somebody probably intercepted a couple of emails with vague, but reasonably believable information.For example, that unknown FBI analyst who, a year before the Sept 11 attacks, collected info about suspicious activity at flight schools. So somebody had to decide–either ignore the information and hope for the best, or take concrete action. They took action, but now it turns out to have been a bad decision, based on info that was too vague . (one of the suspicious names on the Air France passenger list turns out to be a 9 year old boy)
Now, just a few hours ago, i see that a British Airways flight from London to NY was also cancelled for “Security reasons”
After a few more cries of wolf, the people who make decisions will probably decide to lighten up a bit, and demand more specific information before taking any actions, because of public outcry at the inconvenience. Then there will be another successful hijacking, or other terror attack, and the public outcry will be exactly the opposite.
I wouldn’t want to be the senior decision makers–they are damned if they do, and damned if they dont.
What I dont understand at all is why they publicly announce that the flight cancellation was for security reasons. Why not just say that there was a mechanical problem? It has the same effect, but keeps the public calm.
Well supposing you have a list of 5 know or suspected terrorists. Suppose that the passenger manefest has 5 names that are the same as or very close to the names of those terrorists. Suppose that the guys are Arab (not a stretch) and there are 3 different ways to transcribe a certain name from Arabic in Latin letters.
Gee, that was hard to imagine.:rolleyes:
We have no idea the extent of the intelligence info that prompted the authorities to ground the flghts. Absolutely no idea.
It’s easy to be a critic, sitting home typing on your computer. I have a great deal of respect for the folks spending endless sleepless nights trying to make sure the airlines are safe. I wouldn’t want their job, especially when they have thankless people like this spewing nonsense and inuendo into the public sphere.
Yeah, lying is always agood way to inspire confidence. :rolleyes: Just see how well it worked for communist governments.
Once the lie gets out, and it will because there’s no way to keep a lid on things like this, the entire world will distrust the US government even more than they do, the conspiracy nuts will go even more nuts and the population at large will become ten times more anxious not knowing who to trust.
Lies, like counterfeit money, get their validity from support from the truth and the good currency respectively. Once you have too many lies or too much counterfeit money the good cannot sustain the bad as they are undistinguishable and all suspect. All trust is lost. Money and truth are based on trust. A person who is a known liar will not be trusted. If you want to be trusted you can only tell very few lies, long and far between and make sure you will not be found out. Once you are caught in more than a couple of lies you are no longer trustworthy. The one thing which got several recent and current American presidents in trouble was lying. People do not like to be lied to (except maybe women when they ask if they look fat).
The FAA has jurisdiction only over US aircraft - we can write all the regs we want, and force our carriers to comply, but the FAA has no authority over hardware owned by people and companies in other countries. You can’t assume foreign carriers will have fortress flight decks.
Also - if some terrorists went through flight school, others could, too. I think one fear is that there may be “sleeper agents” employed (unknowing) by foreign carriers. These folks would be real pilots, working as pilots, and probably well behaved until told to execute a terrorist act. Since they are already in the cockpit they need only disable anyone else in that very small room. If the cockpit in question is one of those “veritable vaults” there would be no chance for the passengers, or any police that may be aboard, to stop the Bad Guy.
It’s certainly possible…
If you’re in Chicago, Illinois and looking for a man named “John Smith” how do you know which of the many, many “John Smiths” listed in the phone book is the correct “John Smith”?
Add to that the problems in transcribing between languages and alphabets, and aliases…
This site reports airline pilots from the Caribbean country of Trinidad and Tobago, flying for BWIA, were detained by the FBI last week after their names reportedly appeared on a TSA “no-fly” list. Even after being cleared, they had to wait until their names were removed from The List before being allowed to go home. Well, that’s a bit more intense than simply cancelling a flight or interrogating passengers.
This BBC article reports that it was the British government that cancelled flight BA223 from London to Dulles.
I am curious about how this is playing in the media outside the US (that’s a hint to non-US Dopers)
BA cancelled the flight on advice from the Government after warnings from the US, is what I’m hearing on the radio.
Warnings of a name appearing on the manifest, no more than that; why not just detain that person and search their luggage, is the question not yet answered.
Curiously, no US airlines have been affected. Almost makes you think all airlines are equally at risk, rather than primarily US airlines. Or is that what we’re supposed to be now thinking, consciously or sub-consciously . . .
As with everything coming out of this administration, assume total bullshit unless contrary evidence is forthcoming, imho.
The most amusing is that most of the “suspicious” names on Air France flights - which caused if I recall well 6 flights to be cancelled - were in fact travelling diplomats.
The CIA/FBI can’t even keep record of the personnel of the diplomatic posts of the “so extremely dangerous and suspicious Arab nations”.
How could they ever keep record of “names of possible terrorists”.
Yes, and it surely would have been a joke if the UA and AA flights had been cancelled on 9/11. Sheeesh. How could anyone expect a group of Arab men to hijack a plane with box cutters? Clearly ridiculous.
What was announced as the “leader of a Tunesian based terror group” was in reality a child.
Other names on that very accurate FBI list were those of an assuranceman of Wales, an old chinese ladywhich ever had a restaurant in Paris and 3 French citizens who had never ever any connection toe potential terrorists.
Wonderful " accurate information" they have there. If I was US’er, I would be very afraid with such lunatics holding the strings of “security”.
I feel so sad that they never put me among of their “accurate information”.
I follow the French reports on this.
Pardon me, but they contradict those of the clumsy FBI and CIA.
Those planes were grounded for no reason, 2000 passengers stranded for no reason, because of the clumsyness of your preferred “official judgements”.
Permit me to smile.
Yes, that IS a very good question. Why not detain/remove the passenger under suspicion (which is what is done on US domestic flights)
Supposedly the US government has performed a check on all 700,000+ licensed pilots holding US issued certificates. About a half dozen of that number lost their privileges. Seems to me like the DHS is assuming that “background check” was thorough enough that the US doesn’t have to worry about our own pilots.
Even though I hold a US pilot license I can’t say whether this check was actually done or not - certainly, I was never contacted. Then again, in most respects I’m a very boring and unthreatening person.
Still, I can’t figure out how much the US is strong-arming other governments on this issue. Certainly, on a certain level, we have a right to deny access to our airspace (as does every other sovereign country) but I can’t help but think this is being done is a very rude manner.
Sure, they’re vaults when the door is closed. On long flights, the door might be opened a dozen times, to give food/drinks to the flight crew, for the flight crew to go to the bathroom, etc. When you look at the whole situation, the “vault” doors appear to be useless.