American Airport Security A Laughing Stock!

[gyrohead]

:( This really takes the biscuit!
................

Airport dash Briton thrown into cell as FBI terror suspect
By Nick Britten
(Filed: 13/04/2002)


A BRITISH hairdresser is facing jail in America after being taken off an aircraft and accused by the FBI of being a terrorist.

Sarah Johnson was rushed through check-in by ground staff when she arrived late for a flight at Philadelphia airport. But as the plane was about to take off three guards came on board and accused her of avoiding airport security.


Sarah Johnson: she was put in a tiny cell 'like an animal in a cage'
The airport was closed for 12 hours as Sarah was taken away in handcuffs, strip-searched and questioned. She was then put in a detention centre cell with heroin addicts and suicidal prisoners before being charged with defiant trespassing and released on bail.

Now she must return to America to face court proceedings that she said are "a complete sham". Her "living nightmare" began after she was late arriving at Philadelphia from Britain en route to Puerto Rico, where she was to work on a cruise ship.

As she ran through the airport to pick up her connecting flight, ground staff allowed her through without passing through the metal detector, although they twice checked her passport and boarding card.

She was taken to a local police station where the FBI became involved. "They would not accept I had been told to go through by security staff and were convinced I was some sort of terrorist."

Sarah, from Wednesbury, West Midlands, was transferred to a detention centre in downtown Philadelphia. "I was thrown in a tiny cell with a bench round it and a blocked toilet in the corner. The cell stank and there were two other people in it.

"Then a third came along and was cuffed to the cell door because she was suicidal. It was like an animal cage, worse than a zoo. There was blood on the floor and I had nowhere to sit. I was vomiting with fear." Eventually Sarah was released on bail, without any of her possessions, at 3.30am.

She now has a pre-trial hearing next week and then must fly out for the trial. Her legal costs are likely to run into tens of thousands of pounds. She said: "I don't have any trust in the justice system there but my lawyer is certain I'll be found not guilty."

Tom Watson, MP for West Bromwich East, said he had written to Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, to demand an investigation. "This is the most outrageous case I have ever had to deal with," he said.


The newly-tightened security of Britain's budget airlines claimed fresh victims yesterday when a family party of 10 were barred from boarding a domestic flight because they did not have their passports or other approved photo-identification.
The group, booked to fly from Stansted to Glasgow Prestwick for a double birthday celebration, were turned away by Ryanair under rules also introduced by Easyjet and Go.

:confused:

[Hand Solo]

Hmmmm you don't like the Americans do you Adam? Have you ever been to the USA?

[Apollo 1]

I find this very difficult to believe. This story seems a little far fetched to say the least. Who's Nick Britten? What paper is he with? The National Enquirer? Or some other Garbage Tabloid paper?

Sad that this forum is being used for this kinda garb.

And NO, I'm not a Yank!:mad:

[Airbubba]

Look for the usual "How can I get a green card?" thread next...

[Roadtrip]

Security personnel waived her through, huh. Sure they did. Let's see the videotape.

[gyrohead]

Sorry I really should have pasted the source of the above story. It is

The Telegraph Online (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;$sessionid$GSDIKIYAACNSFQFIQMFCFFWAVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2002/04/13/wfbi13.xml&sSheet=/news/2002/04/13/ixworld.html&secureRefresh=true&_requestid=124051)


From the Saturday Telegraph 13 Apr 2002.
:eek:

[BOEINGBOY1]

perish the thought that a security agent made an error of judgment - cos that never ever happens does it - especialy in the usa !!!

[Suggs]

Last month I went from Las Vegas to LAX, my bags went American I went South West. The joys of staff travel.
Will they ever learn.

[Check 6]

To AdamUK: Stupid bloodey Limey, so typical!

Cheers,

[I. M. Esperto]

"There is no security on this earth, there is only opportunity."
- General Douglas MacArthur

This whole thing is an out of control mess.

See the threads about arming Pilots.

The Law is a ass!
http://www.shazbot.com/lawass/

[Bigears]

CHECK 6 - Nice reply!
Best laugh all day.....:D

[newswatcher]

I believe this incident actually occurred in February. Funny how it is only just being reported now. Whilst DT says airport closed for 12 hours, another source says 1.5 hours.

[Check 6]

Thank you Bigears.

Cheers, :) :) :)

[llamas]

Hmmm. CNN reported this a little differently.

http://www.cnn.com/2002/TRAVEL/NEWS/02/23/philly.airport.security/?related

Shock, horror, law enforcement officers do not take the assertions of suspects at face value! In other news, water is wet and the sky is blue!

The headline suggests that US airport security is "a laughing stock". I suggest that incidents like this show that it is far from a laughing stock, but is taken very seriously indeed.

I just got back from a multi-leg trip across the US and back. I found airport security to be rigorous, but courteous and with what seemed like reasonable accomodations for the security and privacy concerns of passengers. The staff are obviously much better trained and coordinated in their work than they were immediately post-911. And even at prime time in a major airport, it took only about 15 minutes, including a hand-search of carry-ons. Plus - the exclusion of non-passengers from the departure areas has made them much more tolerable. Not quite BOAC First Class, you understand, but I was actually able to get some work done while waiting.

llater,

llamas

[Covenant]

Strangely enough, the very next week, Thursday 28th February, I was flying out of PHL from terminal A, and there was another security alert involving a passenger breaching security. Once again, terminals B & C were shut down for about an hour.

Now, I'm definitely in favour of being safe rather than sorry, but PHL seems to be getting more than it's fair share of security cock-ups - which this undoubtedly was because what happened really wasn't this woman's fault.

Instead of the knee-jerk response of closing ranks around your airline/airport colleagues against the media, maybe a more open and intellient discussion about what can be done to improve security, while not making life hell for passengers, would be in order. After all, if passengers start deciding that air travel is just too dangerous, tedious or stressful, it's your jobs that will be cut.

I don't think that US security is a laughing stock. I do think that, certianly at PHL, it is not being accomplished in a very efficient or thorough way. The infrastructure at most US airports is simply not designed to cope with the level of security that is now being required of them. However, in the full knowledge of this, seven months later, still there is precious little being done about it.

I also think that the US authorities should maybe swallow their pride a little and go ask the European airports, who have had to deal with the terrorist threat for a lot longer, how they might improve matters.

Most American travellers I have spoken to who have been through London airports have expressed surprise at the security measures they encountered there. On being pressed further, though, they commented that it made them feel more secure. They also comment that the whole security business was at the same time quicker and less of a nuisance.

Maybe PHL could think about installing more than 1 (or if lucky, at peak times 2) x-ray machines per terminal. That would be a good start. Maybe also would doing something more reliable than posting a bored airport security worker on a stool to guard a vast 20'x8' gap which is used for passengers exiting the terminal and which completely bypasses the security checks.

I live in hope.

[Covenant]

On a related issue, I have noticed that some airlines (BA is one) appear to have come to some deal with PHL authorities to fast track their business passengers through the inevitably enormous queues for the security check.

Now, while I applaud their enterprise (and how typically American to find a profitable angle to everything), I can't help feeling vaguely disturbed, and this may just be my British prejudices, that security is becoming a two-tier operation.

[Hand Solo]

A fast track system has been in place at LHR and LGW for some years now. Its still the same security check but you have to have a first or business class boarding card to use that channel, hence the queue is much shorter. It may be that a system like this is in place at PHL. BA would not knowingly allow passengers to bypass security checks and certainly wouldn't make it a company policy to facilitate such.

[llamas]

Funilly enough, two legs of my trip last week were into and out of PHL. The return leg was at 6.00 pm on Friday evening, prime-time. Obviously, these were domestic flights and the security may be different for international. I went through security in less than 15 minutes, and that included a very complete handsearch of carryons and reference to a supervisor for a questioned item. I thought the staff were well-trained, courteous and very thorough, and they obviously had their SOP's well in place.

If I have a gripe about security, it is that it can be confusing to the harried pax where to go and when to go there. When many checkpoints are available and only some are working, there should be better measures to show pax which are open and which are not. [charitable mode] This may be how some of these breaches occurred[end charitable mode]. Some of the security staff might work harder on communicating clearly and precisely what they want from pax who need to do more than just pick their bags off the belt. But overall, I thought it was working very well, much better than in the days right after 9-11.

The woman whose problem started this thread obviously made some error of judgement - what, she thought that just because she was in a hurry, that she wasn't going to be checked? Pax have a responsibility to take security seriously also. Once she became a issue, it took some time for her to un-become one. Where did she expect she would be held - the airport Marriott? "Like an animal in a cage"? Dam' straight!

llater,

llamas

[Tin Kicker]

Congratulations to one or two of you for bringing up the subject of juvenile prejudice without a hint of irony at your own prejudice against the reporter. Did you assume that the writer of the article is a liar either way? I'd be prepared to wager that the writer (who, stone me, might actually have researched the article) is more aware of the facts than most of the readers whose sum total of knowledge about the incident has come straight from his work (and even then only after it's been pinched and pasted here). Sounds like vested interests all round. :rolleyes:

[Covenant]

Hand Solo

I never meant to imply that BA were bypassing security procedures, simply that there is security fast tracking going on at PHL.

Maybe I'm just bitter about twice waiting in a 2 hour queue for security check and watching fat cats breeze through in their sweaty pinstripes! :)

[llamas]

Nobody's calling nobody a liar, any way up.

But the story, as reported at the head of this thread, and re-reported in The Grauniad today, is told from one side only - that of the aggrieved passenger and her US lawyer. Bear in mind that US lawyers are not ethically bound to stick to the truth. There is only the briefest response from US law enforcement (in The Grainuad) concerning a possibly-different state of affairs than what the suspect described. In other words, this stream of outrage at the awful violations visited upon an innocent passenger is based solely on what she says happened to her.

Apparently, there is surveillance video of the security breach which sparked the incident. Let's wait and see what that shows, shall we? She claims that she was "waved through" security checks by security personnel, something I have an awfully hard time believing. But the tape will tell the tale.

The strength and vehemence of her protestations about her treatment after her arrest leads me to have suspicions. There seems to be an awful lot of concentration on the alleged indignities of her incarceration (welcome to jail, folks, you're not in Kansas anymore) and a tendency to gloss over exactly what happened that caused it.

If it is found (as I suspect) that she slipped through a security checkpoint because she was in a hurry, I wonder how big and bold that will play in the newspapers?

llater,

llamas

[PaperTiger]

But the tape will tell the tale.

Maybe, maybe not. Depends on the field of view, some cover the whole area while others are 'zoomed' in on just the archway. Also I doubt there is any audio, which might confirm or refute her claims. If the waved through bit is true, finding the person(s) who did so should be easy enough.

[Covenant]

llamas

If it is found, as I suspect, that she was the victim of an inefficient and confusing security system, or simply made an honest mistake, will you eat your words publicly on this forum?

I don't know if you've ever spent time in jail for a crime you did not commit. I haven't, thank God, but if I had, I think I would be pretty pissed of at the system that managed to get me there.

If you can, just put yourself in her situation. If, perish the thought, you one day find yourself in an unfamiliar environment, on your way to a dream job, runing late, worried about making your connection and generally flustered, as air travel quite often makes people. Isn't it just possible that she may have quite understandably misread or misunderstood a security officer's instruction? Even if we assume that the security officers were not to blame, isn't it just possible that she made the kind of mistake that any of us could have made?

Did she really deserve to be thrown in jail? We know, in retrospect that she wasn't a terrorist. Isn't that something that could have been cleared up a bit sooner so she could be sent on her way?

I don't think for a moment that she deliberately circumvented the airport security. In my experience, it's usually the highly travelled business passengers who feel they virtually own the system and are too busy to be bothered with these boring repetitive security procedures.

I'm sorry if it looks like I'm being parochial in this thread. I'm not, I really like America and the Americans; I do live here after all! I just can't help thinking, though, that this wouldn't have happened in the UK. American law enforcement does tend to be a little heavy-handed, to say the least! :)

[steamchicken]

And for those Americans ranting on here; you'd be better off catching a terrorist before telling us how hard y'are - hell, flame me, I don't care!

[llamas]

Words can be slightly indigestible, but if it turns out that she only did as she was directed I'll have no problem saying that my suspicions were unfounded.

As it happens, I have been a deputy sheriff and I've seen plenty of the inside of a US jail - not, fortunately enough, on a non-voluntary basis. The proportion of people who claim that they are there without cause, and who complain mightily about the quality of the accommodations and the character of the company, would stagger you, I assure you.

Jail is not a pretty place. However, her complaints about the quality of the accommodations and the character of the company have no bearing - I say again - no bearing on whether or not she was there for cause. I dare say that the conditions for detainees and those on remand in Wandsworth or Strangeways leave a lot to be desired also. They are an unfortunate byproduct of the process of law enforcement.

I'm afraid I have to say that this comment

"Did she really deserve to be thrown in jail? We know, in retrospect that she wasn't a terrorist. "

is less-than-sanguine. Hindsight does not equal foresight.

Likewise, the fact that it now appears that she is likely not a terrorist has no bearing on whether or not she breached security measures.

You may very well be right, and she may well be the victim of the errors of others, or of her own, understandable mistake. However, I did note earlier that pax have some degree of responsibility for security also - she must be awfully naive if she felt that she could board and airplane without any security check whatever.

As to whether this would have happened in the UK - well, what would you say about the case of a US resident stopped for speeding on the M1 who spent four hours in the cells in Milton Keynes Central while the boys in blue figured out what to do with him? I've heard plenty of "could never happen HERE!" thinking in my life, and I assure you that it could, and does.

llater,

llamas

[OnFinal]

As a diabetic on an insulin pump, I can say I was treated better in the UK than in the US as far as airport security goes. When I passed through security at Glasgow, I was nicely asked what the device was on my belt. I informed them that it was an insulin pump (No I don't carry a note from a Doctor, security gates don't pay attention to them, and for good reason) They had me show them that it was indeed a pump, and had me change the menu and then sent me on my way. In ATL, I literally had the pump "ripped" from my stomach! I notified them that I was a diabetic on a pump that is attached to my abdomen with a tube, she then proceeded to yank it off my belt and rip the tubing from my abdomen. Of course I grabbed her arm to get it back which got me detained in the backroom and treated like a criminal until the supervisor finally cleared me. No apology was given. :mad:

[steamchicken]

Probably because we have had terrorists for thirty years - by the way, I'm sorry for the unnecessarily provocative post!

[crab]

Further to steamchicken`s comments,let us not forget that a large proportion of the terrorism in the UK was funded by collections in the US.I hope the contributors have now lost their appetite having witnessed the devastating effects of terrorism closer to home on Sept.11th.

[Leviathan]

"I just can't help thinking, though, that this wouldn't have happened in the UK"


Er, yeah thank God it only happens in the U.S, talk about self righteous indignation.

[llamas]

OnFinal -

well. what can one say about your experience? Obviously, it was seriously substandard, and I for one am very sorry that it happened to you.

But what it demonstrates is a concentration on security that borders on the zealous - which kind of gives the lie to the claims of "a laughing stock". There will always be instances of thoughtless excess like what you describe, but the issue there has to be training and experience on the part of the people doing the work. It must be a thankless task, and perhaps it contains more than its share of "jobsworth" personalities.

I got the impression, in my last travels, that the level of courtesy and consideration for pax had improved enormously since the days immediately after 9-11. I flew domestic about 2 weeks after 9-11 and they obviously had a long way to go in those areas. Your experience shows that there is still work to be done. As others have suggested, two or three decades of experience with these issues in Europe and the Middle East is bound to have improved the process still further.

Have a good day.

llater,

llamas

[Celtic Emerald]

The yanks always go overboard about everything IMHO. Before Sep 11 they went overboard regarding lack of security, ever since there going overboard about security.

It's the innocent pax who are paying the price for all this paranoia because of the actions of a few. If they had had the proper security procedures in place in the first place it might never had to come to this. They've turned airtravel from what was once a fun experience into a paranoid nightmare for many people by their own stupid ineptness. :mad:

Emerald

[PaperTiger]

It is a popular misconception, perpetuated by repetition, that Sept. 11 was a direct result of the failure of airport security.
Unless there is something we have not been told, none of the weapons used were prohibited items either by US or European standards. (They are now). It is just that the terrorists chose to make the US their target. Most were living or had lived for considerable periods in Hamburg. Had they decided instead to pick a German, UK or any other airline (LY excepted) and targets in Europe, can anyone state categorically that the outcome would not have been the same ?

In fact, the US had the mechanisms to be more secure than Europe - the CAPPS and the FBI watch list. That these apparently failed miserably is an indictment of the overall intelligence system not airport security. Which makes the current concentration on this particular aspect all the more questionable. IMO of course.

[Ignition Override]

Late this afternoon at Detroit Int'l Airport, our agent told us that a Toronto-bound passenger was found at the gate with an old-fashioned razor blade, scissors and some rope in his bag. He explained what these objects were for (nothing unusual) and was next seen on the ramp in handcuffs.

Behind us earlier while inbound to Detroit, a B-757 had declared an emergency for some unrelated problem.

[GeofJ]

Lets see - American airport security not a laughingstock - you cant be serious. The new and improved, more highly trained, diligent etc. security personnel cannot find a knife or other blade 60% to 70% of the time and miss guns 30% of the time and you do not call that a laughingstock? I travel frequently in the US on business and I can say from experience that if they spent more time looking for weapons and less time searching 90 year old wheel chair bound women and 4-7 year old children maybe they would be more successful. I have been subjected to repeated additional security screenings which I can only guess are a result of the nature of my travels, last minute arrangements, sometimes on one-way tickets - I tend to be singled out 90% of the time I fly including connecting flights. Is this effective security - searching me and my belongings after I have already spent an hour or more on a commercial airliner? Much of what they do is pure and simple window dressing for the benefit of the uninformed and the politicians who can point to "enhanced security" and prooudly claim that they are doing something to protect Americans. Scrounging around through pax luggage for tweezers and cuticle scissors is not going to stop terrorists when people can walk or run through a security checkpoint unopposed get out of sight and then require a terminal evacuation! We are paying the security types to do something, the least they can do is stop unauthorized intrusions into the secure areas.

[llamas]

Well, the recent FAA reports about the numbers of weapons &c still making it past security post-9-11 are troubling, no two ways about it. Perhaps someone in the know can post data regarding the situation in other nations, so that a truer comparison can be made.

More troubling to me, perhaps, is the issue of the physical security of airports outside the terminals. When I park in the cheap seats at DTW, for example, there's nothing between me and the ramps that a decent pair of wire-cutters wouldn't solve. There are areas of the over-underpasses to the new midfield terminal where a determined scrambler wouldn't even need the wirecutters. And vast tracts of fence, especially to the West, where one could work at getting onto the runways and taxiways completely unobserved. One hopes that surveillance and electronic security measures are in place, but how to know?

At Oakland-Pontiac, the airport perimeter includes significant areas of industrial parks - for want of a better term. Mostly aviation-related, to be sure, but anyone can pretty much drive in and out of the airport at any time. At which point, the entire ramp area is open to anyone who wants to go there. And 737's and such fly in and out of there.

A razor blade, scissors and a rope? Where has this guy been living for the last eight months? Oh, in Canada, maybe? Well, that explains it.

llater,

llamas

[Roadtrip]

Well, if the UK and France would keep their passport carrying terrorists at home, the problem in the US would ease a bit.

[Flame]

I am just back from a trip to the US, flew into LAX and onto LAS with AA, interestingly.....at the boarding gate at LAX, some passengers were subjected to a full detailed examination, including wanding, check of shoes, hand search of carry-on baggage, and a very thorough hands on body search.

Full marks to the security people for their attention, but they lost all my confidence when it was quite clear that the only passengers being subjected to this attention, where all non US nationals. I counted 21 people in the line behind me, and watched as all where checked, all carrried European passports.

Discrimination or what, or maybe there are no security threats from people carrying US passports:confused:

[West Coast]

I find myself shaking my head at the Yank bashing. I am an airline pilot in the U.S. I guarantee I go through more security checks than the lot of you combined. I find them to be responsible and reasonable in scope. The only relief offered is front of the line privledges. I go through the same inspection you do, even in uniform, and If I can do it without complaining you should also. Then again you limeys love to complain about anything and everything.

[tractorking]

At least in America, if proven not guilty, she will probably
get her money back and then some. But you wont see
that in the papers.

[Conan The Barber]

If proven not guilty...?

I think that line says it all.
It used to be that you had to be proven guilty, now it is the other way around.

[Send Clowns]

Whichever versions true (and I suspect, as usual, it is somewhere between the two) then the security and the authorities are in the wrong.

It should not have been easy to go through a closed lane, whether delibrately, accidentally or directed by security personnel. Now the most this woman should get is a slap on the wrist for dodging securiy, if it can be shown that she intentionally did so. Seeing people here say how confusing security can be at this airport, I can't see how they can even make that stick. she should certainly not be treated as a criminal, now she is shown not to be a terrorist.

On Final - no chance of suing them, is there?

[Send Clowns]

Yeah but RoadTrip, the US is still inviting British terrorists on money-raising trips, and even giving them official duties in parades.

[Larry in TN]

Geofj,

If you think it's so easy, try this two-minute demo/test where you are presented with actual Xray images and have to find the threats in real time. Your performance is graded at the end.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/729756.asp?cp1=1

The link takes you to a story, just click the "Interative Can you spot the threats?" link in the right column.

A couple of things you should know about the test results that you quoted.

1. The tests were conducted by people who are completely familair with the procedures in use and the limitations of the equipment so they are able to conceal the test devices so as to minimize the chance of detection. The testers also know all of the profiling criteria so are able to avoid the extra checks. (About half of the 9/11 hijackers were flagged by the profiling in use at the time for additional scrutiny. They didn't have any prohibited items in their checked bags so those extra checks didn't find anything. Today being flagged would trigger the hand search of the luggage which would have found most of the missed items in the test.)

2. The tests were conducted prior to the TSA taking over airport security. Those results will be used as a baseline from which improvement can be measured.

Last I heard, the TSA had hired close to 1000 supervisors who were in the process of being trained. Those supervisors will go out and hire, train, and supervise nearly 30,000 new screeners later this year.

[NX211]

Well Now -
Cease Fire folks !!
To All Colonials - The big fight with The Red Coats ended about 230 years ago. That is if you don't count the confrontation where the boys from the British Isles burned Washington pretty good.
But - since then things seemed to have been considerably more amiable. True - we came really close to making German the official language here in the USA - Now think how that might have changed the history books !! But that's another subject.
Point is - we should not be at each others throats on the things I've seen in here. We all know that what we have right now is " The Greatest Security Show On Earth " - It has many holes - It is infuriating - It is amatuerish - We all hope to God that it will improve dramatically before it's too late. As regards the funding of terrorists - We all have problems in this area. Collectively we have all been remiss as regards these types of people. Perhaps this will change. We have all had a hand in creating most of the monsters turned lose in the world - the reasons are too many to list. I think it is now safe to say that we can no longer allow ourselves the luxury of this form of neglect. It has now gone way too far. Yes - we as Americans have been shocked by what happened - Our neglect/disregard/arrogance to a certain degree backed up on us in one big swoop. We now have to face the facts as they are in todays world - and we must deal with them - now.
We have called on our freinds - Yes Colonials that includes England - to join with us to go fight this fight.
Our countries are now the best freinds each other has in this world.
We have been there for them on a number of notable occassions - ie WWI, WWII, Falklands. They have returned our help in kind - and will continue to do so. Who else can you say that of?
We are in this together - to the end.

We shall stand or fall together.

United We Stand.

Best Regards To All
NX211

[Ignition Override]

NX 211: That was a good attempt at mediation/arbitration.

The FAA and/or Congress seems concerned that the people who seem to superficially fit the 'profile' would run to the media and yell "rascism" if the FAA applied security based on its information.

On the other hand: 1) the Oklahoma City terrorist, the late Timothy McVeigh, was a Caucasian Desert Storm veteran from upstate New York. 2) El Al, the Israeli Airline, found many years ago during the long check-in 'interview' that a British or Irish lady was trying to carry a package onboard for a boyfriend of Middle Eastern origin (with the PFLP or PLO?), who had hidden a bomb inside without her knowledge. I don't know what the perfect solution is, but the present system is quite frustrating. Beginning about two weeks ago, voluntarily putting my uniform shoes (which contain metal) in the plastic container every time, means that I get the wand treatment rarely, which saves time and embarassment-it is a relief.

As far as North America goes, personally I have always preferred the style of security personnel at Canadian airports (YEG,YYC,YWG,YYC,YUL...). They have always appeared and behaved in a much more professional manner than most US airport personnel.

[Iron City]

Believe with the advent of TSA the FAA is mostly out of the "retail" passenger security business. And a good job too.

Now if everybody would also understand that the FAA has nothing directly to do with the commercial aspects of airline operations (frequent flyer programs, fares, schedules, permission to operate from Armpit to Lower Slobovia, cabotage (whatever that is), fifth freedom (and freedom's 1 through 4 too), the coffee too hot/too cold, pax seats too close together, etc would be a lot easier.

All concerned should understand that even when FAA had security responsibility it was limited by the Congress and the "input" of stakeholders in industry and other places in what it was allowed to do. And if it made things too tight, or even talked about it, rightous indignation, rockets (metaphorical) and direction followed from higher level management. Where were they 9/11?

Because FAA "didn't do it's job" (never mind wasn't allowed to) TSA will now take over and everything will be grand. Direction from upper level management since 9/11 on absolute enforcement of the letter of the regulations (b*&^%&* common sense) came from law enforcement and national security by edict. Now you have a TSA staffed by very few people who know the pointy end from the blunt end of an airplane or how aviation runs, so good luck. It will cost the earth for, I think, a modest increase in security and keep the "me too" and not so tightly wrapped terrorists (the majority) at bay, but the real sophisticated operators are already on to different ways of getting into the airport or airplane or to other means of producing terror anyway.

[holden]

There´s another topic at the moment about pilots being paid too much.Having read most of the hogwash on this topic,I am inclined to agree with it.The inanity of some would be funny if it werent so sad.This isnt jetblast after all.The postings of West Coast and NX211 do restore some sanity and maturity.Well said.
The treatment of this woman was unfortunate but understandable.With so much at stake,nothing can be taken for granted.Next time she´ll get there on time.

Just a word to some person calling himself AdamUK..crawl back in the hole from whence you came.Bet its an orange hole too.

[OnFinal]

Send Clowns,

The thought to pursue any legal action due to the insulin pump incident never crossed my mind. I was infuriated to say the least; However, I was reluctant to let my name be strewn across the media and end up being on some "Internet Airport Security Post" ;) that would obviously bring much unwanted attention.

As far as this whole "Security" discussion is converned, we are only as secure as we perceive to be. Security is nothing but a feeling and an illusion.

Look at the Presedential Secret Service, you know ALL possibilities of an attempt at assanation are examined and scrutinized to no end. But occasionally some "mentally- deranged" will find a way.

My point is you can not implement laws/policies to prevent these "mentally-deranged" individuals/groups from carrying-out haneous acts and not expect the innocent to pay the price.

[HiSpeedTape]

Hmmm... Here's my recent experience.
LHR-LAX-AKL (Air NZ)
At LHR full screening of hand baggage. Removal of shoes for screening, metal detector and wand and body search. At LAX, after an overnight stop and re check-in, only hand luggage through X-Ray.

AKL-LAX-LHR
At AKL, even more stringent checks including through the metal detector and HB X-Ray twice and Shoes off for screening. Identity coroboration twice (thrice if you count at check-in). At LAX after another overnight stop, same thing - only hand baggage through the X-Ray.

Obviously secuity is so good in the states that there is no need to do anymore than x-ray hand baggage!

[flyblue]

Check6, that says it all about our guy

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=50728

[Covenant]

NX211
Good post; I fully agree with you. However, if we are to address the problems in any area of our lives, we cannot do it by ignoring the deficiencies. There are deficiencies in the security system at PHL that I recognise and feel I should point out on this forum.

There are also problems with what I see as a general tendency at the moment at US borders to be over-zealous with security and to treat all passengers as little more than criminals. This may appear to some as a distasteful but necessary part of increased security, but I beg to differ.

I don't think I'm being self-righteous. There are many things that are wrong with Britain. The NHS is an obvious one that comes to mind, and if this were a forum about health issues, I would be spending my time criticising the health shambles in the UK. However, this is a forum about air travel, and this thread concerns air security, which is an area where I believe the USA could learn from the UK and other nations.

One of the privileges of having lived for a significant time on both sides of he Atlantic is that I feel somewhat qualified to look at both American and British society with a degree of objectivity - or at least with some knowledge of both. I certainly don't intend to demean Americans or the USA in general. We should all be big enough to take criticism without feeling threatened by it.

I stand by my assertion. I find it unlikely that the woman at the centre of this controversy would have been treated in the same way had the episode occurred in a British airport. There is no implied criticism of Americans in general here, nor is there a suggesiton that we British are any better than you. It is simply a statement that I think few people would disagree with: that American security officials tend to go about their job with a little more force and a little less courtesy than do their British counterparts.

I don't think either way leads to more effective security either (in any case, that is a separate issue), but I do think that the British way is less likely to put an innocent traveller through law-enforcement hell, as this woman claims she was.

[Covenant]

Having read my previous post, I feel I should add a follow-up regarding a big difference between British and US culture which could account for the disparity of opinion on this subject.

I have noticed that in the USA it is an unremarkable occurrence, that barely merits page four local news, for a teenager to be shot and killed by police because his car was mistaken for one used as a getaway car by armed bank robbers. However, this is something that we Brits would find deeply shocking and would lead to front page national headlines for days with numerous inquests, investigations and documentaries.

It should therefore maybe not come as a suprise that most Americans do not bat an eyelid when reading of this woman's story, whereas the Brits feel righteously indignant. We can't change the way we were brought up, but there is bound to be a clash of cultures in cases such as this.

[llamas]

This may seem like a contentious response, but it is not.

Regarding this:

" . . . . a teenager to be shot and killed by police because his car was mistaken for one used as a getaway car by armed bank robbers."

would you please provide more than one recent example, to support your assertion that such a case would be viewed -anywhere in the US - as "unremarkable"?

As to this - "law-enforcement hell" - it is a fine example of exactly what I mean. What "hell" was that? The whole basis of this statement appears to be that she spent some time behind bars and jail is not a very nice place to be. The description of "law-enforcement hell" is entirely predicated on a premise that she did nothing wrong and that everything that happened to her was completely unjustified. See what I mean?

Earlier in this thread, I mentioned the case of a non-resident arrested for speeding on the M1 who was banged up in Milton Keynes Central for four hours while the boys in blue figured out what to do with him. True case, for I was that unfortunate. Was it a nice place to be? No, it bloody well wasn't! Was the company what I would have liked it to be? No, it bloody well wasn't! Was it "law enforcement hell"? Not hardly.

Regarding different cultural responses to the incident which started this whole thread, I think you are right about the differences but not about the reasons. The tone of the UK press coverage and the response of her MP was completely uncritical. Her assertions were taken at face value, and one may see the immediate response generated among some UK participants, along the lines of "well, of course, those bloody Yanks, no manners at all, they always go over the top . . . " and so on and so forth.

You may note that US participants are generally more cautious - some might say cynical - about taking her assertions at face value. There's two sides to every story. There certainly isn't enough known yet to make the sorts of broad and sweeping generalization which is the title of this thread.

llater,

llamas

[Covenant]

llamas

From the specificity of my example, you correctly deduce that I was referring to a particular case.

The incident I referred to happened maybe a month or two ago and was reported in the local Wilmington News Journal in about three or four column inches in the middle pages. I think the actual incident happened in Washington, or maybe Baltimore, and the FBI were the ones responsible for the shooting. I'm afraid I don't have a copy of the newspaper to hand, as I don't keep them.

There are exceptions that prove the rule (your case of the speeding American banged up in MK is one), but given time, I could probably lay my hands on hundreds of similar incidents depicting what Brits would consider a very heavy-handed approach to law-enforcement in the USA.

Your assertion that Americans are more cynical to the claims of the victims of police zealotry only goes to prove my point, and exactly demostrates the different cultural approaches to law-enforcement that I was trying to illustrate.

In Britain, we would tend to give the benefit of the doubt to the civilian, and expect the police to give good reason as to why a citizen was shot or beaten or imprisoned. We apply the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" outside the courtroom as well as inside so that instead of a "shoot first, ask questions later" policy, we expect the police to use minimum force and minimum restraint at all times - and there is hell to pay if they don't.

That's just the way it is, and I have seen numerous occasions of it personally and by report. If I was to be asked for one piece of advice to give a potential immigrant to the USA from Britain (slightly tongue in cheek but with a very serious undertone), it would be that you remember that in America it is you who refer to the police as "sir" and not vice versa.

I do however agree with you that the title of this thread does not in any way describe the problems raised by this incident. There are still security issue at US airports that I think could be improved upon, but this incident is not an issue of the efficacy of the security, but rather the consequences of its implementation.

[newswatcher]

From Ananova:

"A British hairdresser whose sprint to catch a flight caused the shutdown of Philadelphia International Airport has been convicted of a misdemeanour trespass charge.

Sarah Johnson plans to appeal against her conviction by a municipal court judge who suspended a possible one-year prison sentence but fined her £325 plus court costs.

The security breach and resulting 90-minute shutdown in February cost the airport an estimated £500,000, her lawyer John Elbert said.

"This is why the whole prosecution came about," Mr Elbert said in court. He plans to appeal against the conviction before Johnson flies home on Sunday.

Johnson, who had flown from Gatwick airport on February 22, was running late after clearing customs and immigration for a connecting US Airways flight to Puerto Rico, where she planned to work on a cruise ship.

Johnson, who said she did no wrong, told the court that several officials along the way to the gate gave her directions. At one point she said she encountered a ticket agent who allowed her to go around the metal detector.

The ticket agent later testified that she did not say Johnson could go around the metal detector and said she tried to call her back.

During the shutdown, passengers were taken off planes and sent through security a second time; search dogs were sent aboard planes to sniff for explosives; 1,800 to 2,000 passengers were evacuated and flights in and out of the airport were halted.

Johnson said she hoped her faith in the American justice system would be restored.

"I've not much faith in it so far but I hope that will change when I file my appeal," she said."

[rotated]

Dear Captains, et.al.

I may not be in the air as much as you, and the view is much worse where I usually have to sit. However, just 38,000 more frequent flyer miles and a major American carrier is awarding me my own 747-400, so I speak with the benefit of some experience.

I guarantee you that the rank and file of Economy class passengers who travel through American airports do not share some of your relatively fond memories of the trip through security. For you who arrive at the field with flight bag in hand the security checkpoint is but one minor deviation on an otherwise unobscured course to the relative comfort and serenity of the cockpit. I arrive only after organizing my family, gear, and home for a trip lasting perhaps 3 weeks. After waiting in line up to 2 hours to get a boarding pass, toting aforementioned gear through a maze of rope barriers, corraling my 5 year old son any number of times; in short, a family on vacation.

I'm not complaining about any of that, it comes with the territory. But I hope you can see that you and I might be in a different state of mind when we hit the checkpoint.

What's on your mind, then? No doubt the flight, of course, the wind and the machine and who you'll be flying with, any of a million things. Maybe you're thinking of the port you're headed to, that great hotel and night spot, just a taxi ride away. You're flying the thing of course, and if push comes to shove you KNOW that in the end you will be above suspicion and on your way shortly.

My own course at arrival is slightly more complicated, not to mention the ammenities enroute. And I have no Company prepared defense with with to erase all doubt or predetermination on my way to the assigned seat.

I've seen you breeze by on the inside lane many a time, while I and my brood stand guilty until proven innocent, trying desperately to enjoy our holiday while at the same time feeling violated, not by the security check itself but by the unspoken threat that seems to hang in the air..."one false move buddy, and you're not flying anywhere"...never have I been made to feel so small and so despised. Less than "just another number" my status is reduced because I, who love the air as much as you, have chosen to travel through it.

I understand the need for increased security and am more than willing to have any and all items, including my person, thoroughly searched in the interest of safer air travel. I am NOT willing to be treated as some sort of inferior class citizen because I fly. "Don't be so cooperative," said the guard, pretty clearly an off-duty cop, for whom I had raised my arms, he having made it apparent that he was going to pat me down, "we'll think you're trying to hide something." This, along with his demeanor and entire posture said to me quite clearly "I'll bust you if I want to and ask questions later.". Or perhaps he was just trying to offer some friendly advice.

I might add that I am a caucasian American, clean cut, 36; my wife is a beautiful, petite 40 kgs. My son could charm the world. We have been through several non-American airports this year, some with quite a bit more security than found Stateside, and were never apparently viewed as a security threat or singled out for special attention. We were certainly never offered snide remarks.

To wrap it up, it is this type of heavy handedness and lack of taste, more than the threat of any terrorist attack, that has caused us to take only one trip to the States this year, when we usually go every other month or so. And I'll bet dollars to doghnuts that's why a good deal of the passengers who haven't done much flying to the USA this year stayed away. The skies are still friendly, but getting there is not. Consistent courteous and professional treatment at the security checkpoint would go a long way to making the entire experience of flying pleasant again, and probably a h@ll of a lot safer. With more passengers to enjoy it all, on top.

IMHO

[Notso Fantastic]

I do believe in the interests of international relations, AdamUK should have his typing fingers guillotined forthwith. Quelle plonker!

[stargazer02]

I agree that US airport security is a joke....for years the yanks never thought that a threat would come from within the domestic US and then came Tim McVeigh......
Now they have gone totally overboard and over reacting at the small things.......they can't seem to see the woods from the trees.
Yes is it still worring that items are getting through the screening but i still insist that you have to go back to the people who are screening...in KATL it is generally people who are not the best at communicating...hence if you query something you are immediately thought to be a terrorist (being foreign) and have a nice chat with a LEO or an armed guard with no brain who shouts "keeping moving mister" at you.
Now if they US DOT invested some money in finding genuine nice people who take their jobs seriously but can still be humane then i think that passing through the security systems would be alot easier and pleasant....
YES i agree that it is every passanger's responsibiity to get to the airport on time and to have all the necessary barred items placed in the check luggage.....

But i am finding more and more that this country is not now the land of the free....and nowyou are guilty till proven innoccent in a court of law.....

Soon it will be the animals running the farm.....4 legs good 2 legs bad......oooooh sorry some of them already ARE!!!!!!!

[PaperTiger]

http://icbirmingham.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0100localnews/page.cfm?objectid=12101399&method=full

Seems the video tape of the Sarah Johnson PHL incident was 'no longer available' at her trial.
Hmmm. Wonder if Rose Mary Woods* works at PHL now ?


* See Watergate for our younger readers

[Ace Rimmer]

Now just hang on a minute, with the exception of a few mollifying remarks much of this thread has degenerated into a "were better than you" type bashing. I’ve travelled in and out of the US a number of times in the last year and my experience has been mixed. Yes, the provision for security srceening and indeed some of those doing the screening has been woefully inadequate. But that is not necessarily a fair or accurate picture.

Let’s examine the realities… take the facilities…US airports have been designed with the idea that all comers may enter the airside, pax and weepers and greeters. The concept of the pax only airside has only come to the fore in the last 11 months. As a result the layout of terminals works against an efficient processing of passengers…major re-design is needed.
Of course these changes in infrastructure will take a long time to implement and in the meantime we will have to deal with what they’ve got. Sure add more x-ray machines but that won’t solve the problem improve it but solve it sadly not.

The people problem is another thing all together:
For example the case of the US Marine explaining (with difficulty) to the JFK security worker (who appears to have only a rudimentary grasp of poor English) that the cap badge on his dress hat (in his carry on baggage) would be unlikely to present a security threat (bear in mind that the photo ID he was using was none other than his military ID card) While the weekend warrior on guard at the security checkpoint gave him his ‘baddest stare’.

Or the ‘new man dad’ pax at the security checkpoint that refused to take his sleeping toddler out of its pushchair so it can be run through the X-ray machine while the MIA security bod (with incredible patience and humour – I’d have been rude) explained for the umpteenth time that the stroller had to go through the machine and there was no way he was gonna put it through with the sprog still in it. While the now stalled queue behind ‘new man dad’ stretched back into the distance.

Then there was the case of ATL which had queues for security stretching out of the terminal. Lines controlled by a big hardass looking policeman who marshalled literally hundreds perhaps even a thousand people with efficiency and good humour which improved the experience of all those travelling.
Swings and roundabouts you see – there will always be an element who think that a uniform buys them the right to be rude to all and sundry – and it’s not limited to the US.

I have to say that every enounter I had with cops in the States (OK I haven’t been arrested for anything either – but including being stopped for speeding and a doing a U-turn) The cop in question has always been courteous and professional – (but maybe I’ve just been lucky).

Yes there are elements of the US security system that need work but it is starting from a relatively low datum point and it appears to be improving rapidly.
Yep some of the people working at security checkpoints would find a job at McDonalds a mental stretch but some elements of the great travelling public equally do their best to bollox things up too.
Yep, there will be from time to time over-reactions by pax and or security types but it’s important to remember that the real picture may not be as it is reported – just what fits the whatever angle the journo writing the story decided to put on it.

[ronnie123]

I just went thru LAX with out a scan, in todays day and age.
I had minimum wage airport staff yeling at me "COME ON THRU"
READ THAT IN AN AMERICAN ACCSENT, you'll get the pic.:D