Continued U.S interfering with foreign airlines
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: US
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ever since 11/9/2001 (or 9/11 as the Americans insist on calling it) the Bush administration has made all the wrong decisions.
or 9/11 as the Americans insist on calling it
I hate to say it, but the fact that some of those domestic issues are still issues illustrates how America lags behind many other western nations, where most of those controversies were resolved a long time ago.
Edited to remove reference to a stupid remark made by someone else which is just one of the reasons this thread and PPRuNe in general has to be moderated. Too many people either making ill-informed and ignorant statements which bear no real relationship to the topic under discussion.
Last edited by Danny; 10th Jan 2004 at 08:40.
Paxing All Over The World
As I have said many times before - the next major attack will not use aircraft. That would be the case without us making a single change in procedures, following 9/11.
We had, of course, to make the changes that we have done, but we are now wasting everyone's time.
We had, of course, to make the changes that we have done, but we are now wasting everyone's time.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So no congregating at the toilets.
Maybe the sky marshal should marshal the bogs. A bit like the traffic queue. Better still get him to wipe the arses.
A **** idea, needs a **** response.
Maybe the sky marshal should marshal the bogs. A bit like the traffic queue. Better still get him to wipe the arses.
A **** idea, needs a **** response.
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Suffolk UK
Posts: 4,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most of this argument is going round in circles, and won't be resoved here what ever anyone says!
However, I've just returned from my second visit to the States since New Year and I'm shocked at the paranoid rhetoric that is now taking hold of the news TV stations over there. Fox even has a permanent banner on the screen shouting TERROR ALERT -HIGH.
I think the US needs to just calm down a little, step back and take a long hard look at what's going on. Striking fear into the hearts of the population at every opportunity will do nothing to halt terrorism, and everything to screw up the freedoms that you hold dear.
However, I've just returned from my second visit to the States since New Year and I'm shocked at the paranoid rhetoric that is now taking hold of the news TV stations over there. Fox even has a permanent banner on the screen shouting TERROR ALERT -HIGH.
I think the US needs to just calm down a little, step back and take a long hard look at what's going on. Striking fear into the hearts of the population at every opportunity will do nothing to halt terrorism, and everything to screw up the freedoms that you hold dear.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wino
I take your point about company rules and all I can say is I doubt it. If you ignore the firearms side of it, it would mean that say NATS could decide to employ someone off the street as an ATCO, or that company rules could decide to ignore the need to have a validation for an aircraft type. They can't do those, so they can't ignore rules on firearms.
The UK Goverment could however change the law, very easily, as indeed they will have to in order to allow non Police officers to carry any form of offensive weapon or firearm. This is something they will have to do as it seems that they are going to use a private security firm not Police officers. I find that much more worrying!
I take your point about company rules and all I can say is I doubt it. If you ignore the firearms side of it, it would mean that say NATS could decide to employ someone off the street as an ATCO, or that company rules could decide to ignore the need to have a validation for an aircraft type. They can't do those, so they can't ignore rules on firearms.
The UK Goverment could however change the law, very easily, as indeed they will have to in order to allow non Police officers to carry any form of offensive weapon or firearm. This is something they will have to do as it seems that they are going to use a private security firm not Police officers. I find that much more worrying!
Trash du Blanc
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Scroggs - the terror alert had been raised to Orange (high) before Christmas. It was lowered back to Yellow (medium) tonight, with the proviso that certion industries (read airlines) will remain at a higher vigilance. It is still a newsworthy item to be at Orange - it has happened only 5 times in 3 years.
By the way, I must say that I have always admired the pithy, witty, concise arguments exhibited on PPrune. That is, until I read this thread. Not our finest hour.
By the way, I must say that I have always admired the pithy, witty, concise arguments exhibited on PPrune. That is, until I read this thread. Not our finest hour.
As for the prohibition of any groups around the lavs, how is this being enforced, or is there any reasonable way to apply it? At first glance at our recent FIFs, it does look like an overreaction on the part of the bureaucrats, especially for people in other countries, but then I remember which country was attacked by Al Qaida on 9/11.
Is this meant to be a permanent regulation?
Is this meant to be a permanent regulation?
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Feltham, UK
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my time at the airport, I probably went through security at least 10 times a day for over 8 years. I know some security is frustrating and pointless, yet it was there for my security. Had they implemented some measure that I thought was as much a danger as the threat it was designed to negate, then I would use my freedom of speech (paid for in blood) to voice my opinion and put forth a logical argument against it. Having the argument "like it or lump it you ungrateful git, we own your freedom" shoved through my screen everyday by folks who expect us to change our laws to suit your whims, is the reason I won't entertain the idea of going back to the states.
I have every respect for any countries effort to protect themselves, especially when there is a real risk of a repeat of 911. Ask me to help, and I will do what I can. But when you presume to dictate to me and my government on the back of people who died fighting against the idea of being dictated to, you will never have my support or respect.
I made a post some days ago where I stated that we, as the western society, can only effectively fight terrorism and thereby protect our FREEDOM, by cooperation and mutual support. Just think about how to generate that support for our cause rather than alienate everyone with your attitude. There is a higher goal here than just you getting your way.
I have every respect for any countries effort to protect themselves, especially when there is a real risk of a repeat of 911. Ask me to help, and I will do what I can. But when you presume to dictate to me and my government on the back of people who died fighting against the idea of being dictated to, you will never have my support or respect.
I made a post some days ago where I stated that we, as the western society, can only effectively fight terrorism and thereby protect our FREEDOM, by cooperation and mutual support. Just think about how to generate that support for our cause rather than alienate everyone with your attitude. There is a higher goal here than just you getting your way.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: ASIA
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Impressive
Tony,
That is one of the most articulate, sensitive and logical posts I have ever seen on this website. You make your point very well and I think you may have missed your vocation. Run for Office. You will get my vote.
That is one of the most articulate, sensitive and logical posts I have ever seen on this website. You make your point very well and I think you may have missed your vocation. Run for Office. You will get my vote.
aka Capt PPRuNe
Join Date: May 1995
Location: UK
Posts: 4,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Next person to mention "the war" (WWII) gets banned. I don't need this kind of petty, infantile argument in this thread. All it leads to is gung ho'ism uf the most peurile kind. Getting fed up of having to edit posts because of it. 
Same applies to those posters who have a habit of making two separate statements in their posts, one related to the thread and the other, so loosely related but a diversion into areas that are just an invite to a flame war. Your efforts will be in vain because the post will be edited.
Grow up!
Same applies to those posters who have a habit of making two separate statements in their posts, one related to the thread and the other, so loosely related but a diversion into areas that are just an invite to a flame war. Your efforts will be in vain because the post will be edited.
Grow up!
Union Goon
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 1,097
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BJCC.
But on the other hand, if the CAA wanted to grant an exemption to one or two airlines without cluttering up the ANO, how would you go about it?
Can you imagine how the ANO would look if they didn't have that power? Every rule would be followed with the post script "Except for Airlines A and B"... I reaize there aren't that many airlines in the UK and few of them have special needs, but over the course of 50 years or so the ANO would become a right mess...
A law can be quite valid and still need an exception...
Cheers
Wino
But on the other hand, if the CAA wanted to grant an exemption to one or two airlines without cluttering up the ANO, how would you go about it?
Can you imagine how the ANO would look if they didn't have that power? Every rule would be followed with the post script "Except for Airlines A and B"... I reaize there aren't that many airlines in the UK and few of them have special needs, but over the course of 50 years or so the ANO would become a right mess...
A law can be quite valid and still need an exception...
Cheers
Wino
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OFBSLF
very nice summary!
BTW: Has anybody experienced inbound screening by the TSA (that means stripsearch after landing, when leaving the airport)
Our crews (European carrier) have.
But: America has great self-healing powers, so I am still very optimistic that things will change for the better.
very nice summary!
BTW: Has anybody experienced inbound screening by the TSA (that means stripsearch after landing, when leaving the airport)
Our crews (European carrier) have.
But: America has great self-healing powers, so I am still very optimistic that things will change for the better.
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wino,
That's exactly how it is done.
At our ATC facility we hold various letters of exemption for various operators. Mostly these are for exemptions from the speed restriction legislation but also for other parts of the ANO such as low flying. The letters have a specific life (one year validity usually) and also detail the conditions which the operator must comply with. Presumably the operator gets a copy as well in case they need to quote it at any 'jobsworths'
There is no reason why the CAA, with Government approval, couldn't do the same for the firearms portions. Perhaps they do already.
That's exactly how it is done.
At our ATC facility we hold various letters of exemption for various operators. Mostly these are for exemptions from the speed restriction legislation but also for other parts of the ANO such as low flying. The letters have a specific life (one year validity usually) and also detail the conditions which the operator must comply with. Presumably the operator gets a copy as well in case they need to quote it at any 'jobsworths'
There is no reason why the CAA, with Government approval, couldn't do the same for the firearms portions. Perhaps they do already.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: London
Posts: 708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tony you have hit the crux of it.
The sad thing is that this alienation of allied countries comes just after an apparent positive change in foreign policy strategy by the Bush administration - moving to dialogue with potential adversaries rather than confrontation.
So is the left hand talking to the right?
Interestingly Mara Rudman (ex advisor to the president on security policy) was on the BBC the other day saying that the new aviation measures (being controversial) were probably the result of rules being made by security people in isolation, who will always take the heaviest methods they can find. Whereas if politicians had been consulted they would have been toned down.
Which goes against what many people here believe - idiot politicians doing the meddling. Maybe it's not. Maybe it's the security bodies who are out of control - after all, international relations isn't their agenda, they are simply too far down the foodchain to be the thought leaders on that strategy.
Mara Rudman Bio
The sad thing is that this alienation of allied countries comes just after an apparent positive change in foreign policy strategy by the Bush administration - moving to dialogue with potential adversaries rather than confrontation.
So is the left hand talking to the right?
Interestingly Mara Rudman (ex advisor to the president on security policy) was on the BBC the other day saying that the new aviation measures (being controversial) were probably the result of rules being made by security people in isolation, who will always take the heaviest methods they can find. Whereas if politicians had been consulted they would have been toned down.
Which goes against what many people here believe - idiot politicians doing the meddling. Maybe it's not. Maybe it's the security bodies who are out of control - after all, international relations isn't their agenda, they are simply too far down the foodchain to be the thought leaders on that strategy.
Mara Rudman Bio
Last edited by paulo; 10th Jan 2004 at 23:07.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: France
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hit Paulo!
The inference of your post looks like saying power is drifting in USA from elected bodies to hidden bureaucrats, on the pretext of fight against terrorism.
So the colateral victim of 9/11 could be Democracy in USA?
So the colateral victim of 9/11 could be Democracy in USA?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wino
I don't see how it can with regard to firearms. The ANO clearly says you can't do it. End of story. Its still legislation and an offence to contrevene it at present.
Yes the regulation can be changed and thats what it would take to make carring a loaded firearm or any other weapon on an aircraft legal.
Of course this is ignoring the Avaiation Security Act which makes carring any weapon of offence with lawful excuse an offence on an airport or in an aircraft.
If UK Sky Marshalls are to be private security Guards then the law would have to be changed to allow them to carry firearms, tazzers or anything else they are planning on carrying.
I don't see how it can with regard to firearms. The ANO clearly says you can't do it. End of story. Its still legislation and an offence to contrevene it at present.
Yes the regulation can be changed and thats what it would take to make carring a loaded firearm or any other weapon on an aircraft legal.
Of course this is ignoring the Avaiation Security Act which makes carring any weapon of offence with lawful excuse an offence on an airport or in an aircraft.
If UK Sky Marshalls are to be private security Guards then the law would have to be changed to allow them to carry firearms, tazzers or anything else they are planning on carrying.
Luckily I edited my previous post before the Chief Pilot found it-just before it was sent to the thread! It referred to a previous time (i.e. dealing with ops from East Anglia etc) when many lives were sacrificed for a common cause, but it might have been misinterpreted. 
The legal position regarding certain individuals, who in the course of their professional duties may have carried a loaded firearm with them in the cabin of a British registered aircraft, has been discussed at some length.
I intend no disrespect when I say that some comments made on this point appear to have come from those whose knowledge of UK law on this topic may perhaps be less than current or complete.
Staying up-to-date with the law is what lawyers do, and that is why HMG, Met Police, BA, BAA, and CAA consult a battery of them - to ensure they stay the right side of the current law. If anyone thinks a blind eye was being turned to UK law by these bodies, then that was never my experience.
It would be folly to go into details, but on those occasions in which I have been involved, the legal position was sound, and the individuals concerned highly trained and very impressive.
With the changes that it appears the future will bring, I hope that my last point will continue to hold true!
Regards
Bellerophon
I intend no disrespect when I say that some comments made on this point appear to have come from those whose knowledge of UK law on this topic may perhaps be less than current or complete.
Staying up-to-date with the law is what lawyers do, and that is why HMG, Met Police, BA, BAA, and CAA consult a battery of them - to ensure they stay the right side of the current law. If anyone thinks a blind eye was being turned to UK law by these bodies, then that was never my experience.
It would be folly to go into details, but on those occasions in which I have been involved, the legal position was sound, and the individuals concerned highly trained and very impressive.
With the changes that it appears the future will bring, I hope that my last point will continue to hold true!
Regards
Bellerophon