Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Should Middle East Carriers Be Scrutinized?  
User currently offlineContinentalEWR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3762 posts, RR: 13
Posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1243 times:

What do you all think? Should flights from Middle East nations arriving into the US (and departing the US) be subject to tighter immigration scrutiny and security checks against the backdrop of September 11th? Should the FBI, CIA, and other law enforcement bodies pay closer attention to who actually emplanes and deplanes flights operated by Saudi Arabian Airlines, EgyptAir, Pakistan International, Royal Jordanian, etc..?

Should background checks on these carriers be carried out more?

What about US airlines that fly to the Middle East? Now, no US carrier flies to an Arab nation (but Delta does fly to Cairo and Dubai and plans to resume these flights in the Spring) and what about TWA's now dropped flights to Cairo and Saudi Arabia? Where these flights chosen by terrorists and their cells?

I am not suggesting anything. Just asking for opinions and please, let's keep this intelligent.

ContinentalEWR

21 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineIronminds From Australia, joined Apr 2001, 556 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1186 times:

Right now airlines are supposed to provide INS with a pax list of incoming international pax, on a voluntary basis. The only nations that don't are some of those with serious terrorist links, i.e. Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Of course these flights and these pax require more scrutiny -- in fact, our borders in general need tightening and greater security. It's a joke right now for everyone, yet you can't suggest doing anything without being called racist or anti-immigrant.

User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16228 posts, RR: 57
Reply 2, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 1170 times:

Yes, there should definitely be tougher scrutiny of all Middle East pax and airlines.

Indeed, I think all national airlines of states that sponsor terrorism should be banned from Western skies. This would include MEA, Syrian, Libyan, Iran Air.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 19
Reply 3, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 1162 times:

IMO Europe should put in place far tougher scrutiny of US carriers. They have a proven tracktrecord for allowing persons on board with items that are banned according to our regulations.


I wish I were flying
User currently offlineAmerican_4275 From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 1076 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1148 times:

Yy717,
Iran Air HAS been banned from the United States for many years now. I don't know about the other airlines. Seems like you have the mindset that middle eastern people deserve to have a difficult time at getting into the U.S. or maybe you just don't like them (btw, i'm not trying to attack you). In any case, you gave no clear reasoning and please enlighten me if i'm way off on my assumptions.

Additionally, would this mean flights connecting from the middle east to the United States via Europe (i.e. Iran-Switzerland-Boston) would also go under strict security procedures? Even if the carrier flying into Boston is, for example, Swiss Air? If not, this theory is basically screwed because referring back to my example above, a flight operated by Swissair can be FULL of Arab or Iranian passengers.

I suppose, for now, it's fair of the U.S. to be cautious - I just hope it doesn't go overboard.

American_4275


User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16228 posts, RR: 57
Reply 5, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1143 times:

National airlines of countries that support terrorism should be banned from Western airspace. Middle eastern or not.




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1144 times:

What about western countries that support terrorism, Yyz717?

User currently offlineIronminds From Australia, joined Apr 2001, 556 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1144 times:

American_4275:

The big difference, I think, with the Swissair flight and, say, an EgyptAir flight is that Swissair voluntarily gives pax lists to the INS before the flight even takes off, giving more time for scrutiny and cross-checking, whereas EgyptAir and other Middle Eastern carriers refuse to participate. And pax who are from -- either by birth, residency, or passport -- countries that sponsor or export terrorism against the U.S. certainly deserve more scrutiny. And everyone who comes into the country should be kept better track of, no matter where they are from or where they are going, so we know if they even left or if they signed up at the school they were allegedly studying at, etc.


User currently offlineAviatsiya From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1140 times:

Indeed, I think all national airlines of states that sponsor terrorism should be banned from Western skies. This would include MEA, Syrian, Libyan, Iran Air.

That would probably ban American airlines from the skies of the world. Except America doesn't support terrorists. They support "freedom fighters".

Don't forget Aer Lingus. They would be banned also. You know that group called the IRA? They have a terrorist arm which has it's base in Ireland. Except they aren't called a terrorist faction, they are a "para-military" faction.

It is a very fine line which needs to distinguished. A terrorist is against your interests. A freedom fighter is for your interests. Basic (not 100% accurate) description, so I am sure you get the point.

No amount of checking is going to stop people getting into a country if they wanted to. I could enter any country in the world tomorrow under the name "Joe Bloggs", and all I need is some documentation which I can buy on the street for a few hundred dollars.


User currently offlineDCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4466 posts, RR: 34
Reply 9, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1125 times:

After the FBI set up the Computer Assisted Passenger Pre-Screening (CAPPS) database in 1996, all US airlines voluntarily plugged their reservations systems into it, as did all European and most, maybe all, Asian carriers for their flights to the USA. CAPPS keeps FBI data on suspected terrorists--people for whom they already have evidence of possible links to terrorist groups.

If someone on the list makes a reservation, they are flagged and can't make a reservation without scrutiny. I'm not sure if they're prevented from flying altogether.

The Middle Eastern airlines that serve the US all balked and refused to have their US flight reservations scrutinized by CAPPS. Their landing rights in the US should all be immediately revoked until they agree to be plugged into CAPPS. All other airlines are scrutinized; there's no reason they deserve an exception.

Jim


User currently offlineAmerican_4275 From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 1076 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1112 times:

Ironminds and DCA-ROCguy,
Thank you for answering/clearing up some of my questions and concerns.

Aviatsiya,
I like the point you raise in your post!

Yy127,
You still didn't expand.

Mish1234,
You need to stop watching so much TV and get to know some decent Arabs (NOT HARD TO FIND!)


User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5225 posts, RR: 25
Reply 11, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1110 times:

Please don't forget that many of these terrorists are not entering the US directly from the middle east. Many of these terrorists resided in Europe prior to coming to the US. That means that many, if not most, arrived on BA, LH, SR, IB, AF, etc. not on MS, RG, RJ, PK, etc.


Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16228 posts, RR: 57
Reply 12, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1110 times:

All air ties with states sponsoring terrorism should be banned.




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1109 times:

Ok, no more US planes in European airspace then, seen as though they sponsered/are sponsering the IRA, The Northern Alliance etc etc, not to mention supplying weapons to countless organisations.

User currently offlineAirmale From Botswana, joined Sep 2004, 375 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1110 times:

Yyz717 is quite obviously racist, hes the type who must be burning inside seeing the immigrants in his beloved Canada not to mention wanting to get rid of them at first instance, as for the poor native Canadians(eskimos) they dont exist for him, hes more concerned about the democratic values of other countries rather than his own, the question for him is more likely "Should racism be expressed openly?" im sure he'd take the lead in showing his hate for anyone not white, he hasnt missed a single opportumity to express his dislike for the non-whites even contributing to threads realted to their airlines, with stupid comments that need not have been posted there , basically meant to be thinly disguised insults and rebuke, I think he should be banned from this forum, to think all this hate at his age, even the teenage lot here is better than him Angry


.....up there with the best!
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16228 posts, RR: 57
Reply 15, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1108 times:

The American govt does not support the IRA, although much of their funding has come from individual Americans. I guess it all depends on your definition of terrorism. I don't fault anyone else for their definition....no need to throw insults at me for mine.

As for Airmale, throwing the 'racism' label is a cheap shot. I could say the same back with all your anti-Western nonsense.

By the way, "eskimo" is considered a derogatory term...Canada's northern native people are called "inuit".



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1106 times:

So the IRA aren't (wern't) terrorists according to your definition then? What's the difference in killing thousands with 4 planes and killing thousands with bombs? And, during the clinton administration, the IRA did get quite a lot of support from the US government.

User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16228 posts, RR: 57
Reply 17, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1103 times:

There's no difference. Incidently, what kind of support did the IRA get from Clinton? If you're talking 'engagement'.....well, SF is part of the picture. Like it or not.




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineLeftseat86 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1103 times:

No.

User currently offlineIronminds From Australia, joined Apr 2001, 556 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1087 times:

To get back to the topic at hand, anyone have any idea why Middle Eastern carriers refuse to participate in CAPPS? I would think we ought to make participation mandatory. I know for a fact that the only airlines that refuse are from that region.

User currently offlineCedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 7925 posts, RR: 54
Reply 20, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1068 times:

The US Gov't, bless em, are the world's number one sponsor of terrorism. Central America, Middle East, Europe, all over. You're talking about billions in arms, training, uniforms for militias, wages etc. One obvious example of a terrorist organisation founded and paid for and trained by the US is of course the Taliban. I'm sure these actions were done with US interests in mind but if the US is so anti terrorism they should stop funding it.

And if I was a middle east terrorist heading for the US I'd at least fly with a decent airline, so I'd turn up at JFK on Swissair, BA or Lufthansa, all of whom serve Tehran, Beirut, Cairo, Jeddah, Islamabad et al. At least get there on time, decent food, new plane and a leather seat. I hardly think someone's choice of air carrier tells the INS anything about their intentions once they get out of the airport.



fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlineMEA From Australia, joined Jan 2001, 631 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1063 times:

I totally disagree with banning ME carriers from flying to the US. This whole situation is becoming quite ridiculous & I can only blame the US Government.

What type of organisation/s (FBI & CIA) let terrorists roam their country? What type of government sponsors these terrorists, wasn't it the US governement who sponsored Bin Laden?

How come I have yet to see any records stating that the terrorists or terrorists only fly on ME carriers?

BTW - all my comments above are related to the incident of 11 September, obviously on which your thread is based.


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...
Middle East Carriers In A Alliance? posted Tue Mar 16 2004 08:56:54 by QIguy24
Alliance In Middle East, Will El Al Be Included? posted Sun Jan 30 2005 01:02:57 by Juventus
Should Bankrupt Carriers Be Allowed To Operate? posted Sat Jan 10 2004 20:22:25 by Matt D
No American Carriers Direct To The Middle East? posted Mon Nov 10 2003 04:08:05 by ConcordeLoss
Japanese Carriers To The Middle East posted Wed Jan 3 2001 14:45:13 by Airmale
More Middle East Orders Brewing posted Wed Dec 6 2006 14:41:52 by Flying-Tiger
Middle East Aviation posted Mon Oct 16 2006 08:10:58 by AirLittoral
Analysts Warn Middle East Will Face Overcapacity posted Thu Sep 14 2006 06:04:30 by Tangowhisky
Etihad A380 In Middle East (pics) posted Tue Aug 22 2006 05:10:37 by 808TWA
Low Concept Airlines In The Middle East & N. Afric posted Fri Jul 28 2006 02:05:40 by Detroiter