Arrow
Topic Author
Posts: 2325
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2002 7:44 am

AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 12:43 am

Here's some serious fallout from the KLM overfly issue of a few days ago. Homeland Security wants "no-fly" list honored by Air Canada domestic flights that use US airspace.

Since 90% of AC's east-west transcon traffic uses US airspace (great circle distances) for part of the route (Toronto dips far south of the 49th parallel), it will be a logistical nightmare for them. Someone could be hauled off a Toronto-Vancouver flight because his/her name is on a US no fly list, for who knows what reason. Only alternative will be to fly 100% through Canadian airspace, adding sigfnificant time, and increasing fuel costs -- not a happy option with oil at $50/bbl.

Read all about it:

http://www.canada.com/national/natio...0e3cdf-8c7a-4f85-8393-cd2b0efab722
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 12:53 am

I know that this is an unpopular move, but to a degree it makes sense. If a terrorist wants to get in the United States and were really motivated, they could board a YVR-YYZ flight and while it is in US airspace cause something to happen that will force the flight to divert to the nearest suitable airport which could be in the US like MSP or worse an airport without adequate immigration facilities. It is a move to keep people out of the United States and restrict possible sources for entry. The whole KLM incident didn't surprise me either, because unless foreign carriers will jeopardize safety by treating the US as an empty space of land with no alternate airports, then there is a security risk albeit a rather small one.

Do I completely agree with this? Not really. There are a lot of other things this country should do to increase safety. All anyone has to do is get a boat and drive it across the border and then the are on the Oregon or Washington coast since it is not well guarded at all. But it is a force that we have to live with, and unfortunately our neighbors to the north will have to understand the security procedures necessary. The last thing we need is a Canada vs. United States cold war since 90% of Canadian exports go to the US, and the US exports large amounts to Canada as well.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
ahlfors
Posts: 1281
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2000 1:44 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 12:58 am

So what's next? An overfly visa?
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:05 am

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 1):
I know that this is an unpopular move, but to a degree it makes sense. If a terrorist wants to get in the United States and were really motivated, they could board a YVR-YYZ flight and while it is in US airspace cause something to happen that will force the flight to divert to the nearest suitable airport which could be in the US like MSP or worse an airport without adequate immigration facilities.

I agree. Even as a Canadian, I support this US move. The US has the right to know who is flying over US territory.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
ahlfors
Posts: 1281
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2000 1:44 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:06 am

There are a lot of international flights going to/from US that have to pass through Canadian airspace, so in retaliation Canada should set up a similar list, if only to make create bureaucratic hassles for US airlines flying over Canada.

On another note, to make travel seamless on domestic Canadian flights, Canadian carriers should simply fly fully in Canadian airspace only in those circumstances when a passenger is flagged on the US no-fly list. If no passenger is flagged on the no-fly list, which would be most cases, they continue to fly over the US.
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:09 am

The issue is not in the actual offloading of passengers (I assure you that AC or WS would prefer not to transport anybody on the US no-fly list anyway), but rather in the setting up systems to cross-reference every passenger on a domestic flight.
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
TWA902fly
Posts: 2869
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 1999 5:47 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:14 am

I don't get why it is flights that are over US airspace... say someone is flying YYC-YEG, well a terrorist could hijack the aircraft and fly it to canada anyways, or say YXY-YVR, they could hijack it and fly it to Seattle if necessary, for that logic why not every Canadian flight? most cities in Canada are close to the border anyways so technically most flights could end up in the USA within half an hour.. think about it... Vancouver, Calgary, Regina, Winnipeg, Toronto, Montreal... all just a bit north of the US/Canda border, so any flight going to/from there could somehow end up in the USA

TWA902
life wasn't worth the balance, or the crumpled paper it was written on
 
Lemurs
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 5:13 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:15 am

Quoting Ahlfors (Reply 4):
There are a lot of international flights going to/from US that have to pass through Canadian airspace, so in retaliation Canada should set up a similar list, if only to make create bureaucratic hassles for US airlines flying over Canada.

To what purpose though, other than spite? If Canada has a credible reason to believe they are threatened by people overflying their territory due to the different criteria of the US screening versus their own, they'd have every right to implement a similar policy.

However, we both know that's not the case. Canada is in a much safer position from general attack than the US (at least, everyone hopes so. I bet the Spaniards assumed they were safe a couple of years ago as well, except for the Basque question), so the concerns are not the same. Spite doesn't win anyone, anything.
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:19 am

TWA902fly, I don't think that is necessarily the point. If someone is going to hijack a plane, then Canada is responsible for not having that happen anyway. However it is a lot easier to cause a plane to divert then to hijack it. It is also probably that a person could do it in a way that they could not get caught easily, like use something that could fill the lav with smoke or what not. Doing that would at least get you on the ground in the US with the possibility of no one knowing that you are on the no fly list, or are not permitted in the US at all. It could be a way to sneak in. Call it crazy, but there is some logic to this requirement, however I do feel sorry for Canadian carriers since they will have to cross reference all passenger names to check to see if they are on the US no fly list. I don't know if they do that anyway now or not.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
Lemurs
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 5:13 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:20 am

Quoting TWA902fly (Reply 6):
they could hijack it and fly it to Seattle if necessary, for that logic why not every Canadian flight? most cities in Canada are close to the border anyways so technically most flights could end up in the USA within half an hour

You're right of course, but the issue there is that the U.S. won't presume to tell Canadians what to do in their own airspace. You control what is under your purview.

You can safely assume that the Dept of Homeland Security is discussing exactly those matters with their counterparts in Canada. They've been working very closely since 9/11 to ensure that there is as much safety as possible that at the same time does not violate the rights of Canadians. At the end of the day though, it's Canada's job to monitor their airspace, and the U.S.'s job to monitor it's airspace.
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:35 am

Quoting B747-437B (Reply 5):
The issue is not in the actual offloading of passengers (I assure you that AC or WS would prefer not to transport anybody on the US no-fly list anyway), but rather in the setting up systems to cross-reference every passenger on a domestic flight.

Obviously, since the occasional diversion of an Cdn domestic flight to a US airport is so extremely rare. Perhaps a partial or full harmonization of Canada's immigration/refugee policy with the US would satisfy the US that any Cdn domestic flight is as safe as a US domestic flight, although I don't see this happening just to prevent this US overflight issue.

Ultimately, if AC finds the costs of setting up a system to cross-reference passengers too expensive, they can choose a more circuitous route over Cdn territory from YYZ to YVR.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
Danny
Posts: 3714
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 3:44 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:39 am

The problem is not the list but how bad and inaccurate the list is. We all remember when Cat Stevens was deported as a threat to US security, The whole world laughed at that.

Now these two guys on KLM flight. If they were terrorists why not land the plane in US, arrest them and let the rest of the passengers continue?
 
Arrow
Topic Author
Posts: 2325
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2002 7:44 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:39 am

"The issue is not in the actual offloading of passengers (I assure you that AC or WS would prefer not to transport anybody on the US no-fly list anyway), but rather in the setting up systems to cross-reference every passenger on a domestic flight."

I agree that's the major issue for the airline. But what do you think would happen politically if Maher Arar were denied boarding on an AC (or WS) flight from Toronto to Vancouver? My guess is he would be, and I bet he wouldn't suffer in silence.

The issue is having a foreign nation vet your passengers lists for domestic flights because they overfly US territory. Canadian officials have no say in the make-up of that list -- they can suggest additions, but I bet they can't suggest deletions. And I don't buy the argument that a Toronto-Vancouver flight at 40,000 feet over Minnesota is a greater risk to the US than the same flight at 40,000 feet over Winnipeg. I bet an all-Canadian route, if AC was forced to fly it, would scoot along about 30 miles north of the border.

If I had any trust in U.S. Homeland Security to do it's job professionally and without prejudice, I'd give them the benefit of the doubt. But under the U.S. Patriot Act, they are totally unaccountable to anyone -- not even in the U.S., let alone outside. Too many innocent people get hassled beyond belief when trying to cross borders because of that. Canadian security officials may be just as myopic, but at least we can get at them.

This is a freedom of the seas issue. History buffs might remember that the US went to war with Great Britain in 1812 over it.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:41 am

Quoting Ahlfors (Reply 4):
There are a lot of international flights going to/from US that have to pass through Canadian airspace, so in retaliation Canada should set up a similar list, if only to make create bureaucratic hassles for US airlines flying over Canada.

No. Canada should not retaliate in like fashion. Canada has much looser immigration/refugee policies than the US hence the US has a right to be concerned about who is flying domestically within Canada over US territory.

Quoting Ahlfors (Reply 4):
On another note, to make travel seamless on domestic Canadian flights, Canadian carriers should simply fly fully in Canadian airspace only in those circumstances when a passenger is flagged on the US no-fly list. If no passenger is flagged on the no-fly list, which would be most cases, they continue to fly over the US.

You're kidding right? The additional cost of rerouting a flight from YYZ to YVR or YHZ north of the US to stay in Cdn airspace would be significant. Who is going to pay for that?
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
Lemurs
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 5:13 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:43 am

Quoting Arrow (Reply 12):
This is a freedom of the seas issue. History buffs might remember that the US went to war with Great Britain in 1812 over it.

Except that it was generally agreed that freedom of the seas existed, and the disagreements tended to be about how far from land it really started. It's generally NOT agreed upon that freedom of the skies exists, so that metaphor is just wrong.

The skies over national airspace are more strictly controlled than the roadways they fly over. Don't get too ridiculous here.
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
 
Yu138086
Posts: 163
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 12:09 pm

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:52 am

Remove the border! Become one country! Problem solved  Smile
Too many similarities between the two countries anyways which makes a compelling case for territorial integration. As for Quebec... not an issue since it would be too costly for them to seperate.

Cheers.
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:53 am

Quoting Arrow (Reply 12):
But what do you think would happen politically if Maher Arar were denied boarding on an AC (or WS) flight from Toronto to Vancouver? My guess is he would be, and I bet he wouldn't suffer in silence.

If the overfly rule was in place, Maher Arar would know this ahead of flying YYZ-YVR, and he should avoid this route nonstop. So there should be no political issue. Anyway, most Cdns are getting fed up with this dude, and many of us think he was/is involved with terrorist organizations. I'm not sure he should be allowed to walk free in Canada until his murky past has been fully investigated. This is off-topic though.

Quoting Arrow (Reply 12):
Too many innocent people get hassled beyond belief when trying to cross borders because of that.

Anything that prevents another 9-11 is ok with me. Anyone unduly hassled crossing into the US is free to choose not to visit the US. It's that simple.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
trvyyz
Posts: 1331
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 9:19 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:55 am

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 13):
Canada has much looser immigration/refugee policies than the US hence the US has a right to be concerned about who is flying domestically within Canada over US territory

Are you talking about the 51st state of US of A?  biggrin 

I don't see anything wrong in using such a list, it only makes air travel more safe.
 
ahlfors
Posts: 1281
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2000 1:44 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:58 am

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 13):

You're kidding right? The additional cost of rerouting a flight from YYZ to YVR or YHZ north of the US to stay in Cdn airspace would be significant. Who is going to pay for that?

There is one significant unanswered question here: does Air Canada (or any other Canadian airline) have the legal authority to deny boarding on a domestic flight based on the no-fly list of a foreign country.

I know the US has the right to deny the overflight, but does that mean that domestic flight would simply be legally obligated to stay in Canadian airspace if the US denies overflight?
 
ahlfors
Posts: 1281
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2000 1:44 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:02 am

Quoting Yu138086 (Reply 15):
Remove the border! Become one country! Problem solved  
Too many similarities between the two countries anyways which makes a compelling case for territorial integration. As for Quebec... not an issue since it would be too costly for them to seperate.

Considering that Canada is considered much less of a terrorist target than the US, the US should just merge into Canada and suddenly all the security issues would become so much smaller  Smile

For a safer future, join Canada!
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:03 am

Quoting Ahlfors (Reply 18):
I know the US has the right to deny the overflight, but does that mean that domestic flight would simply be legally obligated to stay in Canadian airspace if the US denies overflight?

It's a moot point, since re-routing to avoid US airspace would be prohibitively expensive. The 5-hour YYZ-YVR flight spends most of its time over US airspace, as do flights from YYZ to the Maritimes. Re-routing to stay in Cdn airspace is not an operational option.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:05 am

Quoting Ahlfors (Reply 18):
does Air Canada (or any other Canadian airline) have the legal authority to deny boarding on a domestic flight based on the no-fly list of a foreign country

Air Canada has the right to deny boarding on any grounds they choose within the scope of the Contract of Carriage.

Security risk is one such risk, and the existence of the passenger's name on a no-fly list maintained by any country is sufficient grounds to constitute a security risk.
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
ahlfors
Posts: 1281
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2000 1:44 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:07 am

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 20):
It's a moot point, since re-routing to avoid US airspace would be prohibitively expensive. The 5-hour YYZ-YVR flight spends most of its time over US airspace, as do flights from YYZ to the Maritimes. Re-routing to stay in Cdn airspace is not an operational option.

I'm not talking about commercial considerations here. Does a Canadian airline have the legal right to deny boarding on a domestic flight on the basis of a foreign no-fly list. If not, they will be on the receiving end of quite a few lawsuits when they start to deny boarding to people travelling domestically and are on the US no-fly list.
 
ahlfors
Posts: 1281
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2000 1:44 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:09 am

Quoting B747-437B (Reply 21):
Security risk is one such risk, and the existence of the passenger's name on a no-fly list maintained by any country is sufficient grounds to constitute a security risk.

So if the sovereign state of Nauru puts me on a no-fly list, that gives every airline in the world the right to deny me boarding?
 
Lemurs
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 5:13 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:13 am

Quoting Ahlfors (Reply 23):
So if the sovereign state of Nauru puts me on a no-fly list, that gives every airline in the world the right to deny me boarding?

For domestic flights, it would depend on the local laws dictating travel contracts. In Canada and the US, yes. In Nigeria or India, who knows? There's no such thing as a globally common set of rights. (The world would be a better place if there was, but there you go.)
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:25 am

Quoting Ahlfors (Reply 23):
if the sovereign state of Nauru puts me on a no-fly list, that gives every airline in the world the right to deny me boarding

It would give them the right to consider you a security risk.

Whether they then decide to act upon that is a matter for their internal policy and for subjective managerial level judgement.
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
milan320
Posts: 818
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 2:25 pm

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:44 am

Quoting TWA902fly (Reply 6):
I don't get why it is flights that are over US airspace... say someone is flying YYC-YEG, well a terrorist could hijack the aircraft and fly it to canada anyways,

Huh??????  confused 
YYC and YEG are in Canada, 300km or so apart. No over-flying US airspace at all in this case - just a straight line (or almost) North from YYC to YEG.
/Milan320
I accept bribes ... :-)
 
L410Turbolet
Posts: 5438
Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 9:12 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:49 am

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 16):
Anyone unduly hassled crossing into the US is free to choose not to visit the US. It's that simple.

The legal problem for the airlines is that even someone NOT wishing to visit the US - traveling domestic route within soveriegn country of Canada - is still hassled by the US unaccountable authorities just because he/she ends up on some ridiculous list put together god knows how.
It's that simple, genius.
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:57 am

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 27):
Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 16):
Anyone unduly hassled crossing into the US is free to choose not to visit the US. It's that simple.

The legal problem for the airlines is that even someone NOT wishing to visit the US - traveling domestic route within soveriegn country of Canada - is still hassled by the US unaccountable authorities just because he/she ends up on some ridiculous list put together god knows how.
It's that simple, genius.

You are quoting me out of context (yet again). My comment was in response to an actual crossing-the-border issue. Not the ovey-fly issue of this thread.

Be careful what you quote, genius.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
Lemurs
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 5:13 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 3:05 am

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 27):
The legal problem for the airlines is that even someone NOT wishing to visit the US - traveling domestic route within soveriegn country of Canada - is still hassled by the US unaccountable authorities just because he/she ends up on some ridiculous list put together god knows how.
It's that simple, genius.

You either didn't read the context of his statement, or you don't get the scope of this regulation at all. Origin and Destination don't matter. If you're flying in US airspace, you're subject to the laws of that country.
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
 
sebring
Posts: 1321
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 12:08 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 3:09 am

A number of related but different points:

-Some Canadian domestic flights have air marshalls. Canada could guarantee to put an air marshall on all large jet flights. (Pardon me if I don't think that a Dash 8 is much of a threat to cause mayhem).

-This will also affect all Canadian carriers serving other points in the Americas, although I would guess it already does.

-I'm am getting sick and tired of American politicians lecturing Canada about its border securities policies when undocumented aliens and terrorists can walk across the Mexico-US border like they are taking a Sunday stroll. No terrorist has been documented as having entered the US on a Canadian aircraft and no terrorist incident has been conducted using a Canadian aircraft. American security practices are a sieve, and measures like this one are merely PR to deflect the attention of US voters from the bumbling incompetence and outright defiance of the US administration to what is happening on its southern border. The Chamber of Commerce loves illegal aliens. WalMart loves illegal aliens. Therefore US border security shall allow for illegal aliens to enter the country by the hundreds of thousands. Don't lecture us about holes in our safety net when you Americans allow abuse on a mind-boggling scale of your own borders.
 
ACDC8
Posts: 7205
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 6:56 pm

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 3:55 am

I think it is past time that there be an international standard for a "no-fly"list and not one where a single sole Government has a say in controlling the worlds airline regulations.

I can understand if the US wants to "defend" their airspace, but they also have to realize that the airline industry is played on a global scale and their rules can have implications on other airlines, governments and even come into contradiction with laws in foreign countries.

Think of how many thousands of a/c fly over countless nations everyday, now imagine if they all had their own "no-fly" list and every airline had to follow the countries guidelines, it would be a financial disaster for the airlines and a slap in the face for the flying public.

In regards to the KLM incident, I don't think that the flight could have landed in the US to let the "suspects" off and into US custody because there could be serious repercussions against the airline and Dutch government for acting as a delivery agency. It may also go against Dutch laws.

As I stated earlier, I feel that this is something that needs to be internationally organized by IATA or ICAO or the UN or in those lines, but not by a single Government.

cheers,
Patrick

[Edited 2005-04-14 21:35:39]
A Grumpy German Is A Sauerkraut
 
Planesmart
Posts: 1769
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:18 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 4:29 am

It's the USA's call, but where do you draw the line?

All flights overflying any country must have passenger details pre-advised? And then while overflying, could the country demand the plane land so they can remove passenger/s for questioning? Or refuse entry to their airspace for the particular flight?

Could individual States insist on pre-advice of passengers too?

These powers if not applied consistently, could be used to benefit / hinder competitors.
 
Olympus69
Posts: 1571
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 11:21 pm

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 4:35 am

Quoting Ahlfors (Reply 22):
they will be on the receiving end of quite a few lawsuits when they start to deny boarding to people travelling domestically and are on the US no-fly list.

Does anybody know how many people are on the US 'no-fly' list? However many there are I can't imagine that people on the list wanting to travel on Canadian domestic flights is going to be an every day occurrence.
 
Lemurs
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 5:13 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 4:44 am

Quoting PlaneSmart (Reply 32):
Could individual States insist on pre-advice of passengers too?

No actually. There is a clause in the U.S. Constitution that very explicity states that the regulation of interstate commerce is the sole right of the Federal government, so the states cannot interfere.

As for some of the others with the same sour grapes as before: This isn't your airspace, therefore you don't get to decide the rules just because it's good for "Global Commerce". No one is telling you what to do in your airspace because we respect your sovereignty. Try doing the same here.
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
 
yhz78
Posts: 140
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 9:26 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 4:55 am

Quoting Yu138086 (Reply 15):
Remove the border! Become one country! Problem solved
Too many similarities between the two countries anyways which makes a compelling case for territorial integration. As for Quebec... not an issue since it would be too costly for them to seperate.

Yeah, no problem at all except for the 20 or so million Canadians who want no part of it. We are a very proud country with a strong culture and heritage and I hate how everyone automatically assumes we want to be just like America. There is a reason why Americans are going to websites to get Canadian flags for their backpacks whenever they travel abroad. We may not be a political or military superpower but we have the respect of a large part of the world and that is something no Canadian should ever sacrifice just to be a part of the U.S.
Canada Rocks! From the west coast to the best coast!
 
ahlfors
Posts: 1281
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2000 1:44 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 4:56 am

This also sets a dangerous precedent. Soon you'll have all the Muslim countries antagonistic to Israel vetting the passenger lists of all flights overflying them for Israeli nationals.
Maybe Iran and Saudi Arabia will declare that any flights in their airspace are to have passengers follow strict Islamic dress and to be alcohol free. Given the impossibility of overflying Iraq, that would mean big detours for any airline trying to fly Europe-Asia.
Cuba will stick all of its dissidents in the US on a no-fly list, which would create difficulties for flights from Miami-South America, many of which fly over the island.

There is a very good reason the inside of an airplane is considered the sovereign territory of the home country.
 
Lemurs
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 5:13 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 4:59 am

Quoting Ahlfors (Reply 36):
There is a very good reason the inside of an airplane is considered the sovereign territory of the home country.

Where did you get this exactly? I'd love to see someone try to claim asylum by climbing onboard an airplane that's still inside the country they are wanted in. Actually, I'd love to see the reaction of the flight crew. I bet some would lose buttons laughing so hard.
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
 
MD11Engineer
Posts: 13916
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:25 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:02 am

BTW, the terrorists who crashed the planes into the WTC and Pentagon in 2001 didn´t have any criminal record, were acting completely innoccent in their college in Germany. They were typical sleepers who don´t attract attention until they strike. The same happened with the bombing in Madrid. I doubt that terrorists need to enter the US illegaly, in many cases they are probably already there, even American born citizens from Christian families. This whole hype about border security and aviation security is mostly done to appease the great unwashed public.

Jan
Je Suis Charlie et je suis Ahmet aussi
 
Lemurs
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 5:13 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:11 am

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 38):
This whole hype about border security and aviation security is mostly done to appease the great unwashed public.

That's a bit of an oversimplification. There was plenty of evidence that some of them weren't exactly people they would willing let into the country. The enforcement just wasn't there.

The larger fact of the matter here is that it's not a useful argument to say that the fact that you can't be 100% effective means that you shouldn't try and be 90% effective. You can't live forever, so you might as well kill yourself. Slipery slope.
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
 
Arrow
Topic Author
Posts: 2325
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2002 7:44 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:12 am

Quoting ACDC8 (Reply 31):
As I stated earlier, I feel that this is something that needs to be internationally organized by IATA or ICAO or the UN or in those lines, but not by a single Government.


This is right on the money. Given the global nature of airline traffic, you can't have any one country making unilateral decisions that affect some, or all the other players.

Consider this: the public rationale for Homeland Security's "no fly" list is to prevent possible terrorist acts by denying air passage to those the agency believes have links to terrorist groups. Sounds reasonable, right? But there have already been examples of people ending up on the "no fly" list for a whole range reasons that have nothing to do with terrorism. Sometimes it's just mistaken identity.

But what if it isn't mistaken identity? For example, what if Homeland Security has on its no-fly list the names of Canadian businessmen who have commercial dealings with Castro's Cuba? Perfectly legal in Canada, illegal in the U.S. Ever heard of the Helms-Burton law?

Unless there's been a change that I'm unaware of, a handful of executives working for Sherritt Gordon International -- which has commercial interests in Cuba -- can't travel to, or through, the U.S. because they'll be arrested if they step on U.S. soil. Suppose one of those folks suddenly finds himself unable to board a Toronto to Vancouver flight because he's on a US no fly list?

If you don't think Homeland Security -- which is completely unaccountable -- would do something like this you are naive in the extreme. The U.S. has already prosecuted one unfortunate Canadian under the trading with the enemy act. His mistake was accepting a transfer from the Toronto office to a U.S. office for a new job. He won't make that mistake again.

I don't doubt for one minute that if Canada accedes to Homeland Securities' requirements, there will suddenly be examples of folks denied boarding who have nothing remotely to do with terrorism -- but may they've done something else a US government agency doesn't like.

History has shown over and over again that agencies or institutions with absolute unfettered power abuse it with impugnity. It staggers me that Americans, of all the world's people, can tolerate this. Canada may have to go along with this because to do otherwise would create economic chaos; but I hope Ottawa has the b**lls to insist on having its own up-to-date copy of that no-fly list -- just in case there's a name or two there that has more to do with Cuba than terrorism.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
 
robsawatsky
Posts: 477
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 7:07 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:17 am

Yes, the US has the right to decide who enters their airspace. Whether the use of that authority with the "No Fly List" accomplishes any real security purpose is a whole 'nother question. I personally doubt it accomplishes anything more than window dressing, which is enough to satisfy the paranoid and political opportunists making hay since 9/11.

The current "No Fly List" is bound to collapse on itself since it provides names only and its content is determined by a mechanism apparently unknown and unappealable. As the list grows it is inevitable that the hassle to people sharing common names with those on the list will increase exponentially. And I do suspect that barring passengers from a domestic Canadian flight because their name appears on a foreign no fly list will keep the lawyers entertained for ages. It appears that the US is retreating into its pre-WWII isolationism, with a strange unilateral foreign-relations twist, that coupled with many of its own citizens "if you don't like our rules, go away" attitude, will result in serious harm to its own economy. And knowing that economics and internal security are highly linked, will only create more problems not fewer.
 
Lemurs
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 5:13 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:21 am

Quoting Arrow (Reply 40):
History has shown over and over again that agencies or institutions with absolute unfettered power abuse it with impugnity. It staggers me that Americans, of all the world's people, can tolerate this.

You know, I'm about as bleeding heart liberal as you can get with most things, but one thing I cannot stomach is the general hypocracy that gets tossed around on issues like this. I don't claim to like many if not most of the foreign policy decisions made by our president, but that has nothing to do with this issue.

This is a domestic concern. It has to do with overfly rights of U.S. territory, by unknown people who may or may not have untowards intentions to people who live here. It's our government's job to protect us from this, while still protecting our civil rights. This in no way impinges on anyone's rights. All it does is make flights a little longer, or requests Canada do some screening.

Someone mentioned the conflict in the middle east as one of the "out of control" scenarios that could arise from a policy like this. I know they meant a passenger on a forign airline, but acknowledge that this ALREADY goes on in the entire region when it comes to flag carriers. El Al has to go through all kinds of loops because of airspace restrictions, and yet not many people here bat an eye.

Man, I started off trying to be as reasonable as possible here, but everyone seems to think they know what's best for America and Americans. You should all come here and join the Republican party, you'd fit right in!  Smile
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
 
TWA902fly
Posts: 2869
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 1999 5:47 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:28 am

Quoting Milan320 (Reply 26):
Huh??????
YYC and YEG are in Canada, 300km or so apart. No over-flying US airspace at all in this case - just a straight line (or almost) North from YYC to YEG.
/Milan320

i belive you misunderstood me, i was saying that considering YYC is about 30-40 minutes away (flying) from the US border, technically any flight in Canada can be hijacked into the United states, although this conversation has proved my theory wrong, that diversions would be the main goal. Sorry for the misunderstanding

TWA902
life wasn't worth the balance, or the crumpled paper it was written on
 
Lemurs
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 5:13 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:31 am

Quoting Robsawatsky (Reply 41):
The current "No Fly List" is bound to collapse on itself since it provides names only and its content is determined by a mechanism apparently unknown and unappealable

You're right about this and the fact that it's overly-aggressive. It's already bordering on the comical at how inefficient the current screening and appeal process is. That doesn't mean it's not the right idea though. There are changes in the works to make this a far more useful system, which should be the goal. You have to start a filtering process based on the costs of a mistake.

I'll give you an example: I work for a software company. It's a big one, you probably know their products. We have a history of security problems. We used error on the side of convenience, instead of on the side of safety. People just wanted stuff to work, they didn't care so much about the safety because it had never caused them problems before. Then, some BIG problems cropped up. People complained, a lot. They stopped using the product because they didn't trust it. So, we had to change our attitude. Now, whenever there is a question about whether a change is safe or easy, we always go with safe, even if it hurts some customers. Then, we figure out a way to help those customers out, later on, in the safest way possible.

Now, when the possibility is someone blowing stuff up and killing people, you MUST error on the side of safety, then refine the process so that you get fewer false positives. I want my government to do this for me. I'm willing to be patient, since I know you cannot get it 100% perfect just because you want it that way.
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
 
airbusfanyyz
Posts: 1410
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 1:01 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:31 am

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 20):
The 5-hour YYZ-YVR flight spends most of its time over US airspace...

Sorry Neil that is NOT the case, I have been flying to YVR about once a month for the last 5 years on business and it's very very rare that we fly over US airspace. I think in my experience I've been over the US a total of 4-5 times.
The usual routing out of YYZ is up over Lake Huron just west of Owen Sound to St. Ste. Marie then over YWG following a track from there just south of YQR and YYC before making the slight turn south down the fraser river valley into YVR. In fact I'll probably doing that route two days from now on AC.

Quoting Sebring (Reply 30):
-I'm am getting sick and tired of American politicians lecturing Canada about its border securities policies...

I don't like American politicians lecturing Canada and Canadians about ANYTHING quite frankly.. fix your own mess first EH!

Cheers,
Kaz
 
ahlfors
Posts: 1281
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2000 1:44 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:33 am

Quoting Lemurs (Reply 42):
Someone mentioned the conflict in the middle east as one of the "out of control" scenarios that could arise from a policy like this. I know they meant a passenger on a forign airline, but acknowledge that this ALREADY goes on in the entire region when it comes to flag carriers. El Al has to go through all kinds of loops because of airspace restrictions, and yet not many people here bat an eye.

Yes, I specifically stated passengers inside foreign planes (say an Israeli inside a Lufthansa plane over Iran) because I know El Al has some serious restrictions put on it.
Just think of the mess if an airline is flying say London-Singapore. Depending on the routing have to check through the no-fly lists of various EU countries (maybe one list for them?), Switzerland, Bulgaria, Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, India, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore and maybe a few others enroute. What kind of a mess would that create?

I don't think that the US would be amused if an American citizen flying on British Airways from London to Singapore was yanked off the flight because he/she was born in Jerusalem and Iran forbids overflights by anyone who had anything to do with Israel.
 
Arrow
Topic Author
Posts: 2325
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2002 7:44 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:55 am

Quoting Lemurs (Reply 42):
Man, I started off trying to be as reasonable as possible here, but everyone seems to think they know what's best for America and Americans.

Actually, I'm concerned with what's best for Canada and Canadians. Americans are welcome do whatever they want to protect themselves and their rights and freedoms -- unless it's at the expense of my rights and freedoms. Your right to wave your fist in the air stops at my nose.

In this case, the US wants to unilaterally impose it's rules and regulations on someone else. We're talking about air travel between two Canadian domestic locations-- not flights to and from the US. You can argue about your right to control your airspace all you want, but if Canada imposed a costly and inefficient regulation or two of its own, unilaterally, that subjected US citizens to a "screening" by the RCMP (including a possible "no-fly" order) on all U.S. to Europe or Asia traffic, Washington would scream bloody murder -- justifiably. Explain to me how a Chicago to Anchorage flight would manage if it had to avoid Canadian airspace.

The problem isn't the screening, we all understand the need for that. The problem is the unilateral development of a no fly list and all its opportunities for abuse. What's needed here is an international protocol, not unilateralism.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
 
Lemurs
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 5:13 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 6:06 am

Quoting Arrow (Reply 47):
What's needed here is an international protocol, not unilateralism.

I would agree with you 100%, except for the fact that international protocols tend to be VERY easy to manipulate as needed...and don't get me wrong, I know the US is as guilt of this as anyone. We treat the U.N. as convenient when needed, useless when not.

My issue is with it is that when you have a safety imperative, giving someone else a veto tends to cause serious issues in making it effective.

I'm concerned about abuse of the system as well, but not nearly as much as the lack of control over the system that existed before. Too many people associate the policies of this current government as something that the entire country is behind. There are a lot of people here who concern themselves with these issues daily. Groups like the ACLU watchdog these things, and while the pendulum is far to Right (capital R) right now, I'm pretty confident it will swing back. In the meantime though, there needs to be a set of rules and method to protect us from a known vector of attack. Sending things off to committee to get an international agreement 5 years from now is not acceptable.
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
 
Arrow
Topic Author
Posts: 2325
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2002 7:44 am

RE: AC Hit By US "no-fly" List Requirements

Fri Apr 15, 2005 6:24 am

Quoting Lemurs (Reply 48):
Too many people associate the policies of this current government as something that the entire country is behind.

Well, yeah. You (collectively) did re-elect the guy with a convincing majority. But I understand your approach, and I understand the concern. I was at Ground Zero last week (for the first time) and talked with a few people who were there and watched it all. Pretty humbling experience.

It's just that we've had our toes stepped on once too often on this file, and we're a tad sensitive about it. When you see polls that say a significant majority of Americans still believe the 9/11 terrorists entered the country through Canada, it causes stress up here. None of them did.

I agree that international protocols take too long -- but if that process had been started a couple of years ago there might have been some progress by now. Failing that, surely Canada and the US can work something out on a bilateral basis that is a little more inclusive than an edict from Homeland Security. I really don't trust that agency, and I'd feel a lot more comfortable if it had to report openly on what it was doing and who it was locking up. More power to the ACLU.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.