Oh yay! Tighter airport security

[Riku3220]

(Dec. 26) -- Extra pat-downs before boarding. No getting up for the last hour of the flight. More bomb-sniffing dogs. Airports worldwide tightened security a day after a passenger tried to light some kind of explosive on a flight into Detroit.

 

The Transportation Security Administration wouldn't say exactly what it was doing differently on Saturday. It didn't need to.

 

Passengers getting off both U.S. domestic flights and those arriving from overseas reported being told that they couldn't get out of their seat for the last hour of their flight. Air Canada also said that during the last hour passengers won't be allowed access to carry-on baggage or to have any items on their laps.

 

The extra vigilance came after a man flying from Nigeria to Amsterdam to the U.S. tried to ignite a device just before the plane landed in Detroit on Friday.

 

 

 

 

"The extra measures apply worldwide on all flights to the U.S. as of now and for an indefinite period," said Judith Sluiter, spokeswoman for the Dutch National Coordinator for Counterterrorism.

 

Jennifer Allen encountered the tougher security on her way from Amsterdam to Detroit on Saturday. Her Northwest Airlines flight on Saturday was on the same route disrupted by the attempted attack a day earlier.

 

"They patted you down really well," said Allen, 41, an automotive engineer from Shelby Township, Mich. "It wasn't just a quick rub, it was a slow pat. They went through everything in your bags, went through the pockets in your pants, the pockets of your coat."

 

Other passengers said security officers went through their luggage more thoroughly. For the last hour of the flight on Saturday, they had to keep their seat belts on and couldn't use electronic devices or get up to go to the bathroom.

 

Sarabjit Dhillon, 35, of Sterling Heights, Mich., was returning from a visit to India with family. Even her three young children got a pat-down.

 

"They had to open each and every item. They didn't tell us why they were doing it, they just said the United States wanted them to do it, to check everything," she said.

 

The incident on the flight from Amsterdam is a reminder that securing U.S. airports is only part of the solution, said Elaine Dezenski, who until recently was managing director of the Global Security Initiative at Interpol and also used to work for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

 

"More and more it's not about what happens in the U.S. airports, it's what's happening outside the U.S. and how the system can or cannot be infiltrated," she said.

 

At Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, the airport police dogs, which are trained to detect explosives, were out on Saturday. Airport spokesman Perry Cooper said the extra effort was at the request of the TSA.

 

Passengers flying to the United States from London's Heathrow said they received text messages informing them the could carry only one piece of hand baggage onto the plane.

 

Italy's civil aviation authority, ENAC, said its extra measures for passengers leaving for the U.S. included increased passenger and baggage searches. It said the extra measures were requested by the TSA and will initially remain in place for 72 hours.

 

The general alert level at Schipol airport in Amsterdam was not immediately raised after the incident, and security procedures for other flights remained unchanged, Sluiter said.

 

Schiphol is one of Europe's busiest airports and tranports passengers from Africa and Asia to North America. It has been testing full body scanners for about a year that allow security staff to see the outline of a passenger and potential weapons beneath their clothes, and intend to roll out a more complete program next year, said airport spokeswoman Mirjam Snoerwang.

 

Passengers in Brussels, where the EU is based, were advised to reach the airport three hours before departure to allow time for a second security check at the boarding gate.

 

In Sweden, Denmark and Norway, airport operators said they would apply tougher security checks on flights destined for the U.S., but that they did not plan tighter security rules for other flights.

 

Officials in the Mideast and in India said they were maintaining their current procedures, which they said were already high.

 

Little was different at the airport in Lagos, Nigeria, where the man's trip originated. Soldiers impassively stared at those passing into the departure terminal Saturday. Others sat and talked among themselves, loaded rifles tossed over their shoulders.

 

Passengers moved quickly through security, waiting only for immigration officers to examine passports and visas. A battered X-ray machine quickly passed over suitcases and shoes. Federal airport authority spokesman spokesman Akin Olukunle said the airport had no bomb-sniffing dogs but were considering getting some.

http://www.sphere.com/nation/article/airlines-say-transportation-security-administration-has-new-rules-for-passengers-in-seats/19294497?icid=main|hp-desktop|dl1|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sphere.com%2Fnation%2Farticle%2Fairlines-say-transportation-security-administration-has-new-rules-for-passengers-in-seats%2F19294497

 

Personally, I think this is ridiculous. Nobody can get up or have anything out during the last hour of their flight? I'm sure every little kid who needs to use the bathroom is packing explosives in their jacket.

[jemathonical]

If it saves lives, why not? A little over the top but if that's what they have to do to ensure safety.

[Giordano]

Which is why cars, boats, and trains beat airplanes.

[i_love_burritos]

Which is why cars, boats, and trains beat airplanes.

 

 

When "they"make a model of car that can cross the South [bleep]ing Pacific Ocean, I'll buy it.

[The Dark Lord]

Damn it! Time to go to war again.

 

To Nigeria!

[____]

Evidently they need to review their current procedures rather than slap on extra [cabbage] and leave the current problems laying around for the next guy to slip through.

[ember3579]

Dark, it's quicker and simpler to stack on more random security measures than to refine the ones currently present. Nobody would be able to do that this soon after the incident, so they chose option #1. Still, I agree with you on that. We should try finding quicker and more efficient methods of hazardous material detection than what we have now. The quicker and less invasive it is (from the passenger's perspective), the happier they'll be. The more thorough and detailed it is, the safer everyone will be. Whose to say we have to sacrifice one for the other? It's just a matter of ingenuity and resources. I think that the civilized world can come up with something if they work at it.

[tripsis]

Oh goody, I'm currently on vacation in Brazil and will be coming back to the US next week :XD: This should be interesting.

[Grim_]

I'm glad. I don't want to die, and anything to make it less likely for my airplane to get blown up by an extremist whack job is fine by me.

Even cavity searches?

[Furah]

Thank god I'm never going to the US, if I was told I had to be search I'd request to be sent back to Aus without that search.

[Abc1230]

What'll happen to all of the pedophile security guards now? :(

[magekillr]

Ugh. Let's just enact Patriot Act 2 because some guy from Yemen failed to blow the plane up! Better yet, send in the troops to invade Yemen so they can't harbor terrorists!

 

This was clear cut incompetence, plain and simple. No amount of increase in regulations is going to fix that. The guy wasn't allowed to travel to Britain, his father warned the US of his extremism, he's been on the terror watch list for 2 years. Come on, guys...

 

At least it wasn't politicized like it would have been had it happened a year ago.

[Dizzle229]

Thank god I'm never going to the US, if I was told I had to be search I'd request to be sent back to Aus without that search.

 

Fine, more cheeseburger for me. Honestly, why is this such a terrible thing?

[EdgedThesis]

Why don't they use the skin-deep X-Ray scanners anymore?

[sohkmj1]

Why don't they use the skin-deep X-Ray scanners anymore?

Because touching people is more fun? :roll:

 

If a guy can bring something onto a plane to light... evidently security is not tight enough. I'd like to think it was the departing country's fault though... So it might be a little overkill.

[Nadril]

Ugh. Let's just enact Patriot Act 2 because some guy from Yemen failed to blow the plane up! Better yet, send in the troops to invade Yemen so they can't harbor terrorists!

 

This was clear cut incompetence, plain and simple. No amount of increase in regulations is going to fix that. The guy wasn't allowed to travel to Britain, his father warned the US of his extremism, he's been on the terror watch list for 2 years. Come on, guys...

 

At least it wasn't politicized like it would have been had it happened a year ago.

 

Totally agreed. These extra measures aren't going to stop accidents from happening because often times they happen because of negligence.

 

 

Fine, more cheeseburger for me. Honestly, why is this such a terrible thing?

 

Because it's just unnecessary and makes flying that much more annoying. I know that a lot of guys on TIF would bend over backwards for that feeling that they are "protected" but come on, there is a limit you know.

[tripsis]

I remember when I was going on vacation a few weeks after 9/11 and the security line was 4+ hours long and wrapped around inside of the airport and even when outside at one point D:

[Dizzle229]

 

Fine, more cheeseburger for me. Honestly, why is this such a terrible thing?

 

Because it's just unnecessary and makes flying that much more annoying. I know that a lot of guys on TIF would bend over backwards for that feeling that they are "protected" but come on, there is a limit you know.

 

Would you rather be dead, or slightly annoyed? Sue it's annoying, and eventually there will probably be a more efficient alternative, but until then this is nothing more than an inconvenience.

[Nadril]

 

Fine, more cheeseburger for me. Honestly, why is this such a terrible thing?

 

Because it's just unnecessary and makes flying that much more annoying. I know that a lot of guys on TIF would bend over backwards for that feeling that they are "protected" but come on, there is a limit you know.

 

Would you rather be dead, or slightly annoyed? Sue it's annoying, and eventually there will probably be a more efficient alternative, but until then this is nothing more than an inconvenience.

 

These extra measures aren't going to safe my life. It's statistically improbable that they will.

 

Really nothing is more annoying then thinking that anything in the name of security is fine. Yes, we do need security in the Airports. Yes, it would be good after this incident to have airports review their security standards and try and improve. However it is not ok to add on more rules that are going to do nothing in the way of stopping the real criminals.The one hour limit rule, for example. Sure this will stop an average joe from listening to his iPod or playing his DS but is someone who has somehow managed to sneak a bomb onto an airplane really going to listen to it? This rule means nothing because if someone is going to take out a dangerous device they are going to do it despite the rules.

 

 

Extra patting down just simply isn't necessary either. You already take off your shoes, everything out of your pockets and step through a metal detector (and some airports will now have you go through an x-ray type of machine now). There really isn't any reason for anything beyond these measures.

 

At any rate though this "Would you rather be dead" argument needs to stop. Stop pretending like these extra changes are actually going to save your life, ok?

[Kaphias]

Almost happened again today by the looks of things...

[michel555555]

This is why i refuse to travel to the united states until someone who is actually sane starts running security.

 

A better topic would have been if this actually was a terrorist attack.

 

The official story is that this guy, a wealthy son of a banker, with good grades in university, sewed a packed of 80 grams of PETN into his underwear to blow up a plane with.... Several major flaws in this story. First off the guy has a promising future and unless his father cuts him off would have been wealthy as well. I don't know about you but i would rather live to be rich.

 

second 80 grams of PETN won't do much damage. not only that but the airport this guy came from uses a full body scanner i can't remember what its called but its the one that caused alot of controversy when it first came out because it can essentially create a nude picture of you. so the operator should have been able to see what looked like a packet of drugs stiched to his underwear. to add to that all bomb dogs and chemical scanners check for PETN so there is no way that he should have been able to get it onto a plane in the first place.

 

Thirdly the guy supposedly got onto a plane without a passport... ya i don't think i need to explain that flaw to anyone.

 

And lastly http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2009/12/northwest_flight_253_passenger.html there is no mention of the object that this passenger pulled off him in the official report. and since this hands and legs were burned and not blown off its seams to me more like a battery of a cell phone or pda over heated and caught fire rather then a bomb going off.

 

there are several other links i'll dig up and post later when i get the time.

[Giordano]

This is why i refuse to travel to the united states until someone who is actually sane starts running security.

This is why you should ride on boats. Safer, more reasonable, and you get to act like a pirate! Arrr...

 

On-topic: this guy was on the Terrorist watch list and he still made it in? Am I getting this correctly?

[michel555555]

This is why i refuse to travel to the united states until someone who is actually sane starts running security.

This is why you should ride on boats. Safer, more reasonable, and you get to act like a pirate! Arrr...

 

On-topic: this guy was on the Terrorist watch list and he still made it in? Am I getting this correctly?

 

not sure several articles i've read say he was on the list but others say that the CIA knew he had ties to terrorism for almost 2 years but he was never put on the list. still to early to actually get any reliable iinfo.

[Giordano]

See? They want to touch us some more but won't let the guys on the list get on. They could be mal-accused sure, but the 99% of passengers are mal-accused too.

[magekillr]

Looks like I wasn't that far off. Good ol' Joe Lieberman can't find any money for health care, but he can send freedom bombs over to Yemen to start another war:

 

"Somebody in our government said to me in Sana'a, the capital of Yemen, Iraq was yesterday's war. Afghanistan is today's war. If we don't act preemptively, Yemen will be tomorrow's war," Lieberman said, during an appearance on "Fox News Sunday". "That's the danger we face."

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/27/lieberman-the-united-stat_n_404241.html

 

And like Nadril said, enough of the false dichotomies between "you can either be safe, or you can die." We knew this guy was a danger with what we have in place right now. It was incompetence that allowed for him to get by. Upping security doesn't fix idiots who are asleep at the wheel.