Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Mystery Flight: KLM 685's Return To AMS On Apr. 8  
User currently offlineLonghaulheavy From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 402 posts, RR: 2
Posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4658 times:

This article seems to clarify a little bit about what actually happened on April 8th with the KLM flight's turnaround.

By the time the Boeing 747 had finished its three-hour crossing of the Atlantic, Homeland Security screeners were on high alert. The names of two Saudi passengers aboard the KLM flight had begun producing "hits" on the screening center's lists of 70,000 suspect foreigners.

The two Saudis, the database reported, were brothers and pilots who had attended the same Arizona flight school as 9/11 hijacker Hani Hanjour.


http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7529185/site/newsweek/

3 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTripple7 From Netherlands, joined Aug 1999, 539 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 4556 times:

Have a look at the following topic for an extensive and sometimes out of control discussion about this incident:
http://www.airliners.net/discussions...eneral_aviation/read.main/2046127/

Interesting news story you add to it  Smile If the content is true. I have my doubts on it. In my opinion, the article makes too many asumptions to be credible.

When I read the Newsweek article I do not get really convinced of the safety meassures taken by the US. It states that the 2 Saudi's are "bad guys" and have Al Queda links. Why were they not arrested in the Netherlands? The US could simply have asked Dutch authorities to do so. The only thing they had to do is make clear to the Dutch justice that these 2 Saudi brothers are members of a terrorist organization and come up with proof of that. That would have allowed the Dutch to arrest them. In Holland it is not allowed to arrest people when you have no evidence against these persons. Dutch authorities did not have those and thus had to release the two persons. BTW the above is a hypothetical case and assuming it were "terrorists".

It still have doubts about how this incident has been handled. In the end the two persons have NOT been arrested and are free to go. This incident has been handled in a strange way. Maybe this incident is a good lesson for those parties involved that is not possible to win the war on terror by acting individually, but rather through cooperation and sharing information.


User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13078 posts, RR: 12
Reply 2, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4456 times:

Perhaps there was a 'similar name' situation, that is, these people had the same names as or the bogus names of those on the watch list. That could explain why they were not arrested at AMS, as maybe they were able to confirm futher info that they were not the people whom were wanted on the list.
It is well established that many of those involved in 9/11 used alais names and got counterfit identity documents to get USA state driver licenses. Potential terrorists, criminals and despirate people have also used counterfit passports and stolen idenities to get false passports and visas to enter the country and later get drivers licenses. It is possible that the names on the list reflect alais names rather that the real names of wanted terror suspects. This has been and continues to be problem with such lists and not just to Islamic based terrorists, but European, ex-Soviet states/Russia and Asian non-Islamic terrorists.


User currently offlineClrd4t8koff From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 225 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4397 times:

What i'm curious about is what does the pilot tell the passengers as to why they are being denied entry into US airspace. I doubt they say "Well, because we have 2 potential terrorists onboard, we have to turn back." Does anyone have any info on that?

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
QF B744 Forced To Return To AKL On LAX Flight posted Wed Nov 16 2005 08:40:44 by 777ER
KLM 1069 Returns To AMS Due To Icing Prob posted Thu Nov 16 2006 23:08:27 by Cardiffairtaxi
KLM 744 Wants To Sunbathe On Maho Beach posted Wed Jul 19 2006 13:28:03 by Darrenthe747
Flight 93 Re-Creation To Air On 9/11 posted Mon Jul 18 2005 21:40:12 by Vanguard737
Air Universal B747-200 To AMS On 15th Oct. posted Fri Oct 15 2004 03:43:49 by PIA747
KLM From JFK To AMS Puts Down In Manchester posted Mon Sep 20 2004 16:57:22 by Greg
What Is Flight Time From ALT To LAX On Their 67-4? posted Thu Mar 22 2001 01:15:24 by AirTangora
FOD Is To Blame On Onur's AMS Flight posted Thu May 19 2005 15:55:35 by Bahadir
KLM 747-400 To Be Used On AMS-PBM posted Fri Mar 21 2003 17:39:16 by Anair80
UA Flight #946 IAD-AMS On Friday 10/6. posted Thu Oct 5 2006 07:05:14 by USAF757300
KLM F70 Returning To AMS posted Thu Apr 8 2010 12:26:32 by noelg
Will CO Return To Athens On 2010 posted Tue Sep 8 2009 07:57:17 by Olympic720B
Maersk Crew Return To USA On Chartered A319CJ posted Thu Apr 16 2009 00:52:53 by SFOFlyer
KLM The Return Of AMS-PTY Non-Stop? posted Thu Aug 9 2007 03:57:06 by Tomascubero
Why Did KL 871 Return To AMS After Take Off? posted Wed Apr 4 2007 09:11:22 by Deaphen
KLM 1069 Returns To AMS Due To Icing Prob posted Thu Nov 16 2006 23:08:27 by Cardiffairtaxi
KLM 744 Wants To Sunbathe On Maho Beach posted Wed Jul 19 2006 13:28:03 by Darrenthe747
Flight 93 Re-Creation To Air On 9/11 posted Mon Jul 18 2005 21:40:12 by Vanguard737