Argentinean foreign minister Mr. Rafael Bielsa (currently head of the UN security Council) was detained for over one hour arriving in MIA after complaining to a Flight attendant that the departure from JFK was Severely delayed.. The FA called in the airport security saying his pax was disrupting the flight.. And upon arrival.. He was stopped.. Argentina's ambassador had to intervene..

Shameful... Talk about a POLICE STATE... Detaining the Head of the UN security Council for "Security" reasons??

Nobody is above the law. It's shameful that he couldn't act like a person of authority and behave himself on an airplane. Security did their job.

the flight was 6 hours late.. he told the FA While on ground in JFK if he could leave the aircraft since he had to go to haiti for some important meeting.. the FA said she couldnt let him get of the plane.. so he asked to speak with the captain.. he did speak with the captain.. and everything was fine.. apparently the FA didnt like that he went above her.. and called in security upon Arrival

He is not above the law.. but he is an important person.. and he cannot be held hostage of an airline...


For spanish speakers.. here is the link

http://www.lanacion.com.ar/politica/nota.asp?nota_id=671485&origen=ranking

BTW.. i think there is going to be an opening for a FA position in JFK...

>Nobody is above the law.<

And nobody is above the Captain on an airplane

>It's shameful that he couldn't act like a person of authority and behave himself on an airplane.<

He did. The FA is the one who did not behave correctly

>Security did their job.<

No, they did not

First off I was responding to what you originally wrote you did not included that he spoke with the captain and had approval from him that changes things obviously. After reading more of the story the FA is at fault but security was just doing it's job. They were probably told by the FA that she was having a problem on board with a passenger and needed help.

Argentinean foreign minister Mr. Rafael Bielsa (currently head of the UN security Council) was detained for over one hour arriving in MIA after complaining to a Flight attendant that the departure from JFK was Severely delayed..

Aww 60 whole minutes  

Christ I spent more time in gridlock this week alone than that... sounds like someone thinks highly of himself...  


[Edited 2005-01-16 03:22:47]

Well, *if* he was such a security risk, why did the plane take off in the first place, as the incident took place ON THE GROUND before takeoff.

The plane was delayed 6 hours.. plus upon arrival he was detained for yet another hour..

United Nations = Worthless group.

Bunch of corrupt crooks are there.

Look at the oil for food program!

Perhaps if the gentleman cannot bear a delay while he is traveling, he should consider a private jet.

>Security did their job.<

No, they did not

Yes, they did. They have an obligation to investigate a complaint, regardless of its supposed validity.

I wonder if this UN chap has ever been on a flight out of LHR/ORD during rush hour time when it can take a plane 30-60 minutes to be in waiting line on the runway for take off !!!

Nevertheless I think the airhostess over reacted but also the pax as 1 hour isnt a big deal !!!

Yes, they did. They have an obligation to investigate a complaint, regardless of its supposed validity.

Thank you theiler for understanding what I was saying.

United Nations = Worthless group. Bunch of corrupt crooks are there.

If the U.S. would provide political support rather than just financial support... they wouldn't be such a waste...

Look at the oil for food program!

Look at UNHCR

Detaining the Head of the UN security Council for "Security" reasons??

It's post 9.11... when you choose to fly commercially, you are consenting to any number of time counsuming hold-ups. Don't like it? Charter a jet... or bite your lip and act like the rest of us mortals.

United Nations = Worthless group. Bunch of corrupt crooks are there.
2 words for you... no sorry.. 1 word...

halliburton

I wonder if Mr. Powell would have accepted to endure the same courtesy at EZE. Somehow, I think he wouldn't.  

[Edited 2005-01-16 08:33:53]

He wouldn't because he doesn't travel by commercial aircraft.

I'm assuming he was on AA JFK-MIA?

Talk about a POLICE STATE

Uh huh.

There are some inconsistencies in the story. Or lack of communication. Why didn't the captain intervene when they passenger was being hauled off by security? Why did the F/A try to go above the captain? Why did this airline keep them on the plane if they were sitting on the ground for an extended amount of time? If it was because they weren't at the gate then how exactly does the F/A contact security without going through the captain?

Just another reason to avoid flying through the US or even visiting there. If you complain about anything, you are considered to have an "attitude" and get carted off. I can do without being held hostage to the whim of every Tom, Dick and Harry.....

Snoopy give me a break and grow up please. I don't recall anybody saying anything bad about Japan.

Rjpieces-you and everybody else on a.net know that I'm not very happy with American at the present time, but I'm at least objective enough to know that you just walked into a "tread at your own risk" zone. Sorry, but that comment was uncalled for.

So the Argentinian guy thinks he's a hot shot and he's got the right to be pissed off about the delay? I don't give a fnck if it was him or the Queen of England, rules are rules and you gotta abide by them. Serves him right...

SNB

What I cannot understand is how a current foreign minister of respected country can be treated like this. He was certainly traveling on a Diplomatic passport, which grants him diplomatic immunity, something the US must recognize (of course, based on reciprocity)

Diplomatic Immunity means that a person may not be detained or arrested or subjected to a body search, and may not be prosecuted or required to serve as a witness unless his/her government has waived that person's diplomatic immunity.

So for example as an extreme case, a country like France cannot put Bush or Blair on trial for human rights violations as much as Chirac would love to. This is simply NOT POSSIBLE. This is why countries give their officials diplomatic immunity.

I remember a case in Ottawa where a Russian embassy employee who was driving under the influence killed two people. The police could not get him to take a breath test nor could they detain him, since he waived his diplomatic passport at them. Russia recalled him and tried him in Moscow where he is now serving time.

My feeling, this is a naive FA who over reacted and didn't know who she was dealing with. Security personnel too may not knew what they were doing.

For the record, this foreign minister was visiting Argentinean troops in Haiti, probably fighting side by side with the US Marines who are still there, which makes this even more ironic.

BTW.. i think there is going to be an opening for a FA position in JFK...

rightly so, you can't hold president bush on a plane against his will, same goes for the flipping UN Secretary General.

Why was he on a commercial flight to begin with? Hello security issue?!?!

I hope that people on here are not trying to say that the US doesn't recognize or respect diplomats because that is not true at all. Matter of fact we provide security for most of them if they want it or not they get it. In fact most of the time the only security detail they get is from the DSS. Men and women have given their lives for diplomats from all over the world so take that in mind.

I don't recall anybody saying anything bad about Japan.
Why bring Japan in here.
BTW Japan is a great place.

I guess after 9/11,US is just too worried,thats whats causing the problem,however I dont blame them for being worried.

Unless we know the truth its difficult to comment on it.
regds
MEL

I didn't say Japan wasn't a great place and I plan to visit one day but we don't have to go down to a childish level and say my country rules and yours sucks.

I didn't say that at all Hawk44. But let's face it, you don't read about flights to other countries being turned back because of a name on a list and you don't read half as much about TSA-style excesses elsewhere.

To each his own....I'm not saying you have to stop. I'm saying I don't like it and I don't have to visit you if I don't want to. That's fairly straightfoward, no?

This is true but as someone said we have all the reason in the world to be a little over anxious. I also would say don't let airport security deter you from visting a great country.

Hawk44

[...] same goes for the flipping UN Secretary General.
Why was he on a commercial flight to begin with? Hello security issue?!?!

First of all, it wasn't the Secretary General, it was the Chief of the UN Security Council.

And I'd venture the guess that he was on a commercial flight because he did not consider this flight, or his trip, as being a security issue... although I wouldn't be surprised if he were not to repeat that again...

A lot of politicians travel by normal commercial flights - and why shouldn't they? Not every politician is automatically the target of terrorists!

And as for the ridiculously stupid comments about the UN being a bunch of crooks... grow up!

Regards,
Frank

I can do without being held hostage to the whim of every Tom, Dick and Harry.....
Tom Ridge, Dick Chaney, and Harry...uh...there's gotta be a Harry in the White House...! When they're gone, this riduculasness (yes, I know I killed the spelling on that!) will be gone!

And to why he traveled commercially...until now, I wouldn't have seen him on the street and said: Hey, I know you, you're the Chief of the UN Security Council! He'll probably think twice now, though.

I love the good old US of A,but Snoopy has a point and after my last visit in december,it is becoming more like a police state. I can say that with honesty as i've visited/traveled there at least once every year since 1992.

For the first time i can ever recall,there are adverts on TV here to entice visitors to the USA,just shows how much the current regulations and paranoia are deterring visitors.

I'm posting the following message on behalf of an Argentine friend of mine

---------------------------------------------------------


What I heard about this issue is quite different to what some of you have been saying (or interpreting, on the few facts you actually know). Mr. Bielsa was on the flight as Chief of the UN Security Council, although he also is Argentina's Minister of Foreign Affairs. As the former, he was on his way from New York to Port au Prince, to meet the haitian Prime Minister.

It seems there was no direct flight from NYC to PAP, and he had to connect at MIA. When the AA-flight to MIA was still standing at JFK, with a delay of four hours plus, Mr. Bielsa and his people realized that they would loose their connection at MIA, beeing forced to spent a night at MIA. They prefered to stay at NYC and try again the following day, just because they had made no arrangements for MIA. Rather than "complaining" about the delay, they informed the crew of the flight of their "problem and preference", which had nothing to do with their comfort but with their time and work. Mr Bielsa isn't that arrogant, and actually he and the rest of the government have since tried to minimize this issue. Anyhow, I think it wasn't just in his personal interest to stay at New York or arrive at PAP on he same day.


[Edited 2005-01-16 20:50:23]

you think this is ridiculous, how about TSA body searching the Taiwanese First Lady (who is wheelchair bound so she couldn't just go through the metal detectors ) who was about to board a Taiwan govt chartered flight filled only with her entourage and security detail! Like maybe they were worried she would hijack it and fly it into the Chinese embassy in Washington or something I guess!

The good side of all this was that it prompted a telephone exchange to the Taiwan president by the "highest level US govt official" since US switched diplomatic recognition to China from Taiwan in 1979. Gee, wonder who made that call?

slightly OT but in a similar vein to excesses by US Homeland Security, the new head of the Taipei Economic Cultural Office in Washington, Taiwans de facto embassy as the US does not recognize their existence as a "nation" , was fingerprinted at Dulles as he does not have a diplomatic passport per se, though the US Congress has multitudes of laws directing the US govt to recognize such Taiwanese officials as "diplomats". But since Taiwan wasn't on this particular Customs Border Control guys list he insisted the only way to come in the US was to be fingerprinted and photod like any other foreign plebe. Fortunately the new "ambassador" was an easy going guy, who was also in a hurry and agreed to these formalities. Though the incident prompted a grovel and much kowtowing no doubt on the phone by Colin Powell to the Taiwanese president.

[Edited 2005-01-16 21:04:31]

I seem to remember stories of ambassadors smuggling drugs and classified information...Not worth a search I guess..

9844, and your point is?

One (or more) Ambassador(s) breaking the law means all of them break laws? Is that what you're trying to tell us?

if they are bringing in drugs and arms in their official diplomatic bag, thats their damn business, if they get on the street thats the host nations business but what they do with it in their embassy is no one else's business because its legally on their territory.if they are taking it in on personal luggage thats more a grey zone
if the CIA didn't have access to US diplomatic bags, they would be hurting bad in their operations!

It should be noted that foreign diplomats to the UN mission have historically tended to be more abusive of the laws of the US than diplomats to their US embassies. I'm not saying that has anything to do with the current case.

As for this notion that the US is a police state, give it up. US airports are certainly more secure, but that really is the only place where you see any beefed up security. The UK is far more of a police state with those security cameras you have all over.

As for the notion that these "problems" will disappear when the current administration leaves, I hope not. Otherwise we will return to the good old days when people like Tom Daschle's wife can lobby for the purchase of defective screening equipment and Clinton-Gore can be receive campaign donations from airlines in return for not boosting airline security requirements.

Ah, I know those prissy Latin flight attendants. I was almost arrest in Caracas because an Aeropostal agent who thought she was better than me said I was an attempt upon security because I was taking pictures inside the airport.

Sometimes people think they are more than they are. Someone needs to put that woman back in her place.

TSA did what they had to do, and the customer also did what he had to do he complained, the employee was an idiot and reported him for nothing.

Clearly no passenger has the right to be abusive, however any customer is entitled to complain. Does anyone know what actually happened.

Most of you may not be concerned about tourism, but frankly stories of passengers being treated like criminals will result in less tourists.

If the U.S. would provide political support rather than just financial support... they wouldn't be such a waste...

The UN is called the United Nations for a reason. Just because one country doesn't politically support it doesn't mean it becomes a waste. Horrible argument.

The bottom line is the guy should have just flown privately, and not complained on a commercial flight.

It is really amazing to see how people can justify this incident by saying that Bielsa is a regular passenger, etc. First of all, regardless of the UN, he has DIPLOMATIC passport so that's enough, you can't touch the guy, period. And I'm not defending him cause he's from Argentina (frankly, I would arrest 99% of our politicians). If a similar incident would happen with, say a US ambassador,. how would you react? Would you bomb the country? Oh, and by the way, according to some sources the questioning went on for hours, and the delegation had to spend the night at MIA, only to get more crap on the next day at MIA before leaving towards PAP.

do you guys realize this is not a regular Passenger? This is the HEAD OF THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL.. PLUS he is carring 2 diplomatic passports...

Mia, How do you know if the Flight Attendant was Latin? What does that have to do with the story? Sounds pretty racist to me.

ARGinMIA, There is always two sides and sometimes 4 sides to every story. And the Captain might have been the main player in this event. The Flight Attendant can't just do all that work by herself, the Captain had to join in and agree, and call outside sources to get someone removed off the flight. I am not saying that the Flight Attendant is right here, but in past posts you have been a tad anti-Flight Attendant.

And the whole opening at JFK, not happening unless they were a MIA crew. Which much of the crews that do that run are MIA based , and not JFK.

Everyone keeps bandying about diplomatic immunity as if it was an automatic get-out-of-jail-free card or something, that automatically makes the individual carrying a diplomatic passport untouchable. Incorrect.

In most cases, and as a general rule, depending upon your status within the government or international organization you represent, you may not be arrested or detained, but there's a footnote to this you may view at the U.S. State Dept's website on Diplomatic Immunity:

"Reasonable constraints, however, may be applied in emergency circumstances involving self-defense, public safety, or the prevention of serious criminal acts."

Legal Aspects of Diplomatic Immunity and Privileges

I'm not saying that any or all of the parties acted inappropriately, only that there is no basis to say that the Foreign Minister couldn't be detained under any circumstances. Mr. Bielsa, the former Attorney General of Argentina, was fully aware of the laws and courtesies granted under diplomatic immunity, I'm sure.

Cheers.

Typical government thuggishness.

The UN is not a useless organization and if the US didn't step over that organization's authority on international issues time and time again then I'm sure it would be seen in a much better light.

This situation is completely repugnant. How could our country treat a high level UN official like that? Certainly there would be cries of horror if the US president and his entourage was given this same discourtesy .i.e. kept on ground hold until it was convenient for air traffic control to deal with Air Force One's high demand security procedures.

There are two sides to every coin... As Americans we must treat others the way we would like to be treated. Certainly we have the power to turn any country we desire friend or foe to dust and none can stop us, however the exercise of restraint in lieu of overwhelming power is the greater measure of a nation. All this situation shows is that we could trounce over the heads of any government we like and because our nation is "All Powerful" the foreign community would have to bend over and take our flagrant insults.

"Reasonable constraints, however, may be applied in emergency circumstances involving self-defense, public safety, or the prevention of serious criminal acts."

Yeah, asking the F/A or the pilot or whoever why the hell their flight is 6 hours delayed, now that is a terrible serious crime! he should be executed on the spot for asking (let's not forget the only reason he askes was to try and change his own work agenda by catching another flight -- criminal!!!!). Some of the people here are pathetic by trying to excuse such behaviour. I'd love to see bush or rumsfeld being questioned. They would probably then find weapons of mass destruction!