Continued U.S interfering with foreign airlines

[Grandpa]

We need International Law!

We can't no more follow US Administration's Big Brothers.

If Airmarshall, fingerprints, photos, irischecks or DNA test have to be enforced, it has to be ruled by International Aviation Authorities, because nobody has any more faith in US Administration which lied to the entire world about WMD, and deals with the rest of the world as if it was half human.

We should react to American decisions as did Brazil : reciprocity!

(US imposed visa on French tourists for years...until France announced same rule was to be enforced for American tourists visiting France...so we don't need anymore visa to enjoy freedom fries in front of the most imposing migrant in the world : the crying Statue of Liberty)

[sevenforeseven]

I am not American but am British, if the Americans want us to have our fingerprints taken well thats fine, what you all must remember are the reasons why. So a lot of you think it will not stop terrorists but it sure will give the low lifes another obsticle to hurdle over.
I think that the UK should adopt a similar approach.
Good on you USA I for one, believe you are doing a good job, I certainly feel safer now than before.

[RRAAMJET]

I think Broadreach and Cools are posting with a strong hint of the realities at work here. There is no doubt in my mind that the US is struggling mightily to come to terms with the realities of terrorism at home - something many of us Euros grew up with as a fact-of-life - and are rushing headlong making many gross errors in trying to shore up totally open borders. And, as Cools correctly pointed out, many middle/upper-apparatchiks don't want to take the rap for the next inevitable incident, so are firing rather wildly - particularly when it comes to the total lack of diplomacy in dealing with (former) close allies. There seems to be the bland policy of "maybe some of the sh1t we're throwing about will stick in the right places". I'll give you an example of ludicrous dictums: I have to get FBI backround checks done for permission to go to re-current training as a foreign citizen, but meanwhile it's ok to keep driving the real 777 around NY until those checks are complete. Daft. eh? But it shows the near-panic mindset that has gripped some of those in authority. I'm afraid cool heads are not prevailing.

Unfortunately, what's totally lacking in US government circles is deep analysis of why they're in this position as regards foreign policy. I've posted before on this: there is an incredibly black-or-white view of the world in general in GOP politics (Israel good/all Arabs evil, France bad/Blair hero, etc). It's the limited outlook of a Deep-South view of Country, Church, Football, if you like. The result are these broadsides in all directions totally lacking in delicacies. FOX News would make the average foreigner cringe with it's over-simplifications of world events. It is simply not good enough to quote "...you can't reason with these people...we're under attack- you're not". Does that include former allies as well? Because that's the way it's going across to an increasingly sceptical Europe, Asia and now S. America.

While I'm not against the deterrent effect of Marshalls per se, I think the total lack of tact that is being dealt at foreign governments will haunt the US for far longer than Bin Laden and his band of jihadis. Valuable credit is being destroyed that the US could well do with in the future; Colin Powell is one politician who seems to recognise this.

It's absolutely hopeless trying to express this point of view here in the mid-west, at the power-base of Bush politics. Their world is simple in their minds - "...you're with us or against us. You either carry a gun or you're a pu$$y-a$$ liberal, etc...What's wrong with you Euros? Don't you want to defend yourself like a man?"etc.

Sorry to paint it like it is, but I think it's important for Europeans to grip the mind-set of the average Republican voter that thinks GW is right on course. It's now totally at odds with the average European voter, and discord is inevitable. Hence a lot of what you see here on these threads. Bit sad really.

[Donkey Duke]

Grandpa,

I think less visitors to France would hurt them more than it would hurt us. Look what happened after their stance on the US-IRAQ War? They lost Billions. If they want to impose hardships in retaliation for us actually trying to protect ourselves from people that want to hurt us, then fine. France will lose on this one. They need our business.

[paulo]

What some people are saying here is that it's fair game if

(a) Country B's flights to Country A, must follow 'A' rules

AND

(b) Country A flights to Country B, will also follow 'A' rules.

i.e. Country A rules apply at all times on inter-country flights.

I've got that right haven't I?

[OFBSLF]

If not all persons entering or leaving are required to participate it beats the purpose of the system.

Yes, that is a loophole. The system in place now is just a start. It makes it harder for the terrorists -- most of the people that they draw from do not have EU passports.

Is it foolproof? Of course not, but no security system is. When you leave your home, you probably lock the door with a deadbolt. Is that completely secure? Of course not. Does the fact that someone can break the window mean that you should not lock the door?

[codpiece face]

I think the problem is that the US seems to just decide that it is going to implement something, and to hell with the rest of us.

The attitude smacks of we are the superpower and it is up to us what we want to do. Now this is not america bashing i can assure you, I have not met many americans that i have not liked.

I think paranoia is reaching epidemic proportions, and after many trips to the US, for the first time I find myself contemplating not making any future trips.

If security is as good at airports now as it is supposed to be then what are the chances of getting anything on an aircraft that would enable you to do any damage anyway, and if you did your fellow passengers would just not sit back and let it happen.

The US now stands to really alienate the uk, the one country that has stood by your side in thick and thin, the airline community is truly global and one country really cant go it alone.

[AA SLF]

WRONG -- paulo

ALL Carriers INTO the USA must comply with USA regulations, including USA flag carriers. What is wrong with the USA making the rules for life HERE in the USA?

USA flag carriers must comply with USA rules at ALL times. Inter-country or not. USA carriers must also - repeat - ALSO - comply with the rules of the country the USA flag carrier is flying into. What is wrong with that?

The amount of whinging I see on this thread is near impossible to believe. Folks act like Air Marshalls are something new - NOT. Ain't been new for decades now, including on International flts.

Fingerprinting - I was fingerprinted before most of you were even a drip down your Daddy's thigh. Was rountinely fingerprinted for a new drivers license 5 yrs ago. Am fingerprinted several times per month here in my local area when I write a check at a merchant. Oh yes, they also took my picture when I got that new drivers license.

Looks like most of the "foaming-at-the-mouth" crowd firmly believe that THEIR COUNTRY should set the laws for the USA and NOT USA citizens. Very interesting concept of freedom, that is!!!!

So - "foamers-at-the-mouth" , please do set me straight on why your crowd should be the ones to set the Laws in use here in the USA and not the citizens of the USA!

Eagerly awaiting your learned responses.

ps - sure do hope I did not mis-spell too many words this time, as obviously, bad grammer completely destroys the merit of any argument I put forth - since there has been NOT ONE simgle reply directly to my logic!

Have a nice day - Y'all .........

[wrafter]

Just a small anecdotal story - but relevant, I feel.

A childhood friend of mine is getting married this September.

The wedding was set for Boston, invites were issued and some 50 individuals were flying in from various European countries.

As a result of the increased controls at US airports, he today decided to pull the wedding and relocate it to Ireland.

He felt those invited would have been put under too much stress etc, and was also afraid others, like myself, would be put off travelling in the first place due to what's taking place over there.

Now, that's a small, but significant indicator of income lost, and a change in attitudes.

[MOR]

AA SLF

ALL Carriers INTO the USA must comply with USA regulations, including USA flag carriers. What is wrong with the USA making the rules for life HERE in the USA?

Nothing. Nobody is objecting to that. What some are objecting to is that your government is attempting to enforce compliance with US regulations in other countries and in international territories, on aircraft that are themselves sovereign territory. You might be able to get away with that in Iraq, but not in Europe.

You may have been fingerprinted/photographed since you were a baby- so what? Most of the rest of the civilised world does not share the paranoia that exists in your country and hey, guess what- we have far less serious crime in our countries. Go figure.

Like almost all the Americans who respond here, you are completely unable to argue the issue on its merits. All you are capable of doing is saying "we are bigger than you, do as we say or else".

If you can't make a coherent argument, save the redneck nonsense. Most of us in Europe find it boorish and offensive.

[RRAAMJET]

AA SLF: the Europeans were coming to terms with terrorism before you were a drip down your daddy's thigh....that's the point.

Many Europeans are disgusted at the paranoid response Bin Laden is eliciting in the USA. As long as this continues, he's winning. He knew his target well: soccer-mom minivan driver and her hubby and 2.3 kids living in the safety of the US heartland - they thought. Now they're spooked sh1tless. Hence the more and more extreme responses of the security services go un-questioned and mostly un-debated behind the ra-ra of FOX News et al.

It's long been acknowledged that the best way to combat terrorism is to defeat popular support for it; in this respect the US is failing absolutely dismally.Unfortunately, many in the US are less than well-informed via the media as to Middle-East complexities, so there was very little incisive, inquiring public debate.

I'm still very grateful to the people of the US for the chance to live here, and distressed to see the train coming off the rails due to decisions harried under extreme pressure leading to diplomatic disasters that your kids and mine will have to untangle in the future.

[broadreach]

It would be helpful to this thread if some contributors realised that the US is almost as divided about this issue as about any other. It is not the "US", the Americans you know and love - or hate - that have determined you cannot congregate around the toilets; it is the present, elected, US government - or the part of it concerned with Homeland Security - who have suggested that strongly to airlines. Who've reacted quickly in what they see as their own commercial interests.

So, if you can, put aside the patriotism and the anti-yank rhetoric and try to figure out what's really happening. In the minds of those in the US government who could be as concerned about this election year as they are about real homeland security. Think about how instructions and suggestions filter down through what is essentially a new security beaurocracy and how they are implemented. Think about the impact the resulting ill-feeling has on thousands of people like Bizflier, who described so clearly why he won't be going to the US for a while at least, and the knock-on effect those persons' reactions will have on the millions of tourists, visa-waivered or not, who spend their money in the US.

This is all very likely to come back and bite the US as a country rather than as a goverment, with great venom. We're beginning to see that now and the damage being inflicted is going to take many years to heal.

Tourism and business travel is undoubtedly going to find destinations other than the US. Non-US travel agencies who depend on their local market's appetite for Orlando will, if they have their wits about them, be drumming up alternatives in Patagonia and Iceland. Conventions that would normally have been held in Miami will go to Coatzalcoalcos and Las Palmas. Which in themselves might be a very good thing.

As to the issue of Brazil retaliating by fingerprinting and mugshotting Americans, which some on here have applauded. Retaliation per se is not very productive unless you happen to be bigger than the other party. Not the case with Brazil. If there were a purpose other than simple retaliation, e.g. exchanging intelligence, one might think, well, perhaps that's good. That is definitely not the case and Brazil's economy stands to lose more from a reduction in tourism than the US does, so go figure where this all leads us.

Or, go figure who-all is leading us.

[boofhead]

FFFlyer... I must have missed something. the only thing changing is that incoming persons who are on a visa will have to have their photo taken and fingerprinted. Those records will be filed. The names and other details will be handled as they are normally, and if a watchlist is used the photos and fingerprints are not relevant. In fact unless a further set of photos and fingerprints are taken when the person leaves the country, to compare with the first lot,what use are they?

[Litebulbs]

Sorry if I am repeating, but this thread takes a lot of reading on a night shift!

Their has been countless billions spent on increasing aircraft security around the world since that day. I flew out on hols to the med last year and my travel companions had there toe nail clippers removed as we passed thru security at LGW as this posed a clear and present threat to the security of our flight!

Now, we are to allow some one to walk freely onto a flight carrying a gun?? What a blessing for any self respecting terrorist! The hard work is done for them!

I am not sure where rambo will sit on his/her flight into or out of the US, so I will go thru some senarios -

If the flying gun sits in the flightdeck, then osama and is mates cause a disturbance in the cabin, then a decision has to be made. Now if policy is to sit in the flightdeck, and let the cabin staff handle it, then fine. BUT can you be sure that this will happen. You cause enough disturbances on enough flights, then the law of averages will say that one person will leave the flight deck to intervene. Now you have a live gun entering the cabin. The marshall has the gun, but is now up against people who are prepared to die for their beliefs. Again problably the person with the gun will win, but say its the other way round. BOOM!!

If the marshal is visible in the cabin, then even easier. BOOM!!

Invisible, then cause multiple scraps around the cabin and draw the marshal out. BOOM!!

Their is no deterant in my opinion at all! If 3000 people die due to some people armed with spoons, the just imagine what could happen with a highly skilled pilot in control, with a gun held to the back of his head?!

Rethink the current American foreign policy and remove the belief that their is a cause worth dying for! The anger that you feel from this thread from people living in the west, must be and indication of how much more anger is felt by the people we now live in fear of!

[Crepello]

Hmm, we're skating on a few issues here, but back to the subject of US-VISIT:

Boofhead raised the point about I94-holders being photographed and 'printed on departure from the US, for comparison. Chatting about this at work today, we wondered if this was on the cards, as it's a big change in border policy. Can anyone enlighten?

[Ranger One]

country A, country B...

paulo, you're not making a lot of sense... all flights between country A and country B have to follow the rules in *both* countries.

The problem arises if, for example, country A has rule which, say, requires armed sky marshals, whilst country B has a rule which forbids firearms on civil aircraft under all circumstances. Clearly no flights can legally take place until some agreement is reached - someone has to compromise.

The *direction* of the flights is utterly irrelevant.

R1

[Donkey Duke]

MOR,

I didn't say "we are bigger than you....etc", I said that we have rules now that need to be enforced if your airlines want to fly into our airspace. It is as simple as that. You can do whatever you want in your country or flying to other countries, but if you want to fly into the US, then you have to follow the rules. I think it would be great if the UK made it mandatory for all airlines flying into London airspace to have 5 air marshalls who all look like Austin Powers. I would definitely try to fly on one of those flights-----It would be Groooovy baby!! Grooovy. If those were the rules to fly into London, then they would have to be followed.

[Panama Jack]

Gents,

Please remember that your cooperation is essential to comply with the US-VISIT program.

Remember to smile when they take your fingerprints, and to promptly give them the finger when they take your photo.

[Airbubba]

>>Remember to smile when they take your fingerprints, and to promptly give them the finger when they take your photo.<<

Yep, try that stunt and see what you get...

[Panama Jack]

Ooops, did I get the sequence out of order Airbubba???

My comment was intended to be very tongue in cheek.

OK children, seriously now, be nice to the nice officer and remember to say "sir."