What is this new int'l flight to the US security thing?

[bumbershoot]

DH was on a flight to the US from outside the other day. And right now he's waiting for another flight from outside the country to get back home.

And both times, they are making everyone wait until inside an hour before their flight to go through security to their gates.

HOW is this helping security? We can't figure it out!

I'm used to weirdness in the States. But this isn't IN the States.

In Japan after xmas, everyone got patted down before getting on the plane. This was at the gate. He was fine with that (though honestly it tells me that they don't think their security procedures are good enough); he'd rather have that than wait until his flight is an hour away to get into line!

Can someone explain?

 

[bavaria]

You will need to be more specific - from which country is he flying?

It is something your DHS/TSA has imposed on other countries. Some are choosing to comply, others are not if they violate their own laws, constitutions, charter of rights, etc.

For the most part it is business as usual in many airports around the world.

And I can assure you that security in Japan is very good indeed - it isn't about show but rather about the substance.

 

[bavaria]

As to specifics? This is what the US is asking for and which some airports have long practiced

• secure areas for US bound flights
• personal interviews for all passengers
• WTMD at the gate
• physical check at the gate
• check of carry on at the gate

That was already in place in many places. What makes less sense is the 'extra' check they want to place on some passengers. Canada for instance implemented the hand luggage restrictions because they refused to violate their Charter and just target certain passenger profiles, so they checked everyone, which resulted in those long waits to fly from Canada to America (on those routes only) Germany refused to install the new security machines because they have not been fully tested and there isn't yet proof of their ability to prevent things. None of this would have prevented the 12/25 incident.

All those daily commercial flights from Cuba and Afghanistan to America are supposed to get extra screening.

If I were to fly from America to Kabul I would go via FRA or MUC via Lufthansa, connect in DEL, and then I would take a local carrier to Kabul. There is no carrier which can fly that entire route. So I don't have any documentation that I flew from Afghanistan to America, just from Delhi to America.

And some countries issue their citizens on request two passports so that one can be kept 'clean' ie with no stamps or visas.

pr surfer will need to fill you in on the holes in what I just wrote, or go to the flyertalk.com Travel Safety and Security Forum and read for awhile. You may be shocked by what you read, and the difference between what is the perception of security and the reality.

Edited to add:
Page 2 of this thread has some information on security in Europe; there is also a long thread from after Christmas where some of us outline how security is tighter in foreign airports. http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=2385109&page=2

Also here
http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=2358062

 

[bumbershoot]

I've realized that with DH's job, I can't be as open as I was before on where he is/has been. So alas, I probably shouldn't be specific. But the countries aren't close to each other *at all*, and there's nothing on the websites of either city where this happened about "don't be too early b/c we won't let you in".

When he was in the same places last year that he's been to in the last week and a half, they did NOT have the "now sit here and wait until 50 minutes before your flight to go through security" thing for flights going to the US. So this is new.

The Japan pat down...if their security is good, then WHY the extra show at the gate? That was right after xmas. But that's not the problem; hubby didn't mind that (though he says it wasn't a particularly thorough patdown). He's been flying in and out of Asia since he was a kid, he's fine with their security measures.

But today especially, he just really wanted to get to his gate and sit. After a fiasco at the end of last year, when his agency gave him way too little time to traverse through the same airport (I'm sure they thought he wouldn't have to do customs there, thinking he would do it at the end city, but his second flight was leaving as he got to the counter to check in for the flight inside the country, because he had to do customs/immigration, move to a different terminal, check in, go through security, and off to the other area), he makes sure he has plenty of time in each airport. His first flight today came in 3 hours before the second takes off. He thought he was doing a *good* thing.

To sit outside security, just waiting until you're allowed in, and to have that called security measures...just makes no sense.

But then shortly after I wrote, he called to let me know that he headed over there and they had started letting people into the line...at probably 80 minutes before his flight, not the 50 minutes, and they hadn't announced it (as they said they would). Since he's a product tester he has to give himself time in security, in case they need to check out his company letter, etc etc etc. He's never needed the extra time for that (all security people have been very impressed by how organized and quick he is), but just in case, he pads his time. Which is why he went over to check ahead of time.

It just seems so odd. To have this group of US-bound passengers sitting outside the secure area, waiting to be allowed into line...

 

[bumbershoot]

Reading your links...neither is a Schengen airport, as neither airport is in Europe.

 

[bavaria]

Ok, I am probably not the one to write this, as if CarolA or uva185 or pr surfer posts it they don't get the heat, but security in American airports is not what many here seem to believe, and it is not up to the standard of many major international airports.

Anyone who read my posts over the years knows that I did not jump on the anti-TSA bandwagon and even defended individual screeners. Our resident TSA agent used to get PMs from me of support.

But what has really caused me to speak up is a combination of factors - posts like yours from people who only see the surface and don't understand the substance, a recent long list of blunders by TSA, and some of the comments people made here after the 12/25 attempt.

Security around the world is very different than in American airports. On one of those threads I linked uva185 asks why more people in America are not upset and I can only think that it is because they don't know the true situation. I am upset and that is because I DO fly on American domestic flights and I DO want security to be better.

I'm too tired and frankly too angry to write much so will cut and paste from another thread shortly, but let me highlight some areas

• many major US airports don't have one way exits to the secure area; witness the EWR terminal dump a few weeks ago. Even the grocery stores in MUC have one way exits
• not everyone who enters the secure area in US airports is screened; as recent events showed over the years LEOs and airline pilots others in positions of authority can engage in acts of violence against others
• the shoe carnival doesn't reveal anything which the WTMD doesn't reveal

Maybe it needs one compact list, maybe it just needs more people to read and get angry, or maybe it needs some of our long departed posters to return and speak up. But most of them gave up, and I cannot say what I think because many here just apply look at my user name and make assumptions. (And I can assure you that patriotism holds no place in my belief system)

Some posters asked similar questions, and they did bother to read what we wrote, or went and did some research, and came back and thanked us. It may be time to put personal emotion aside and actually read up on the subject.

You may be shocked, and you may be motivated to speak up.

Edited to add: that is the general 'you' not the personal 'you' as English no longer uses two tenses as in German

 

[lost*in*cyberspace]

I just got back from a trip to Madrid, the first international trip I have taken since the latest security incident. Leaving the US was a breeze - no difference in security. Leaving Madrid to return to the US was a different story. I got a grilling at check-in due to the two Turkish visas in my passport. The agent wanted to know if I had met anyone in Turkey (still not sure what she wanted to know, it has been almost a year since that trip). Going through the first security checkpoint was the usual walk through x-ray with carry-on luggage x-rayed (and yes, we all had to remove our shoes). Then we had to clear a second security checkpoint at the gate, with an extremely thorough pat-down, and a complete examination of all hand luggage, which involved completely emptying everything from all carry-ons to be carefully examined. I was glad that I had checked my main bag, which I usually do not do, but probably will do on future international trips.

 

[bavaria]

From one of the threads that I linked:

Some more reference points

• EU and CATSA (Canadian) regulations prohibit some items in carry on luggage which TSA does permit
• rules are rarely bent in the EU airports - witness 'the rules are the rules' and carry on restrictions and limits are strictly enforced
• in many airports around the world one cannot enter the terminal without showing valid ID AND a ticket and/or boarding pass for a flight that day ie relatives/friends/visitors are not permitted inside the terminal unless flying
• in many airports around the world ALL travellers are subject to a full physical search (not a 'pat down')
• in many airports around the world there is nothing once one has passed through final security, other than the gate area ie no shops, no restrooms, no eateries
• in many airports around the world carry on bags receive a tag from the airline, which is in turn stamped once it is checked by security. If the tag is missing or the stamp is missing, one is not permitted to board
• in many airports around the world ALL carry on baggage is hand searched
• in many airports around the world the outside of the terminal is guarded by the military
• the American TSA just a few short weeks ago certified the airport in Lagos as ICAO compliant

And so I would turn the original question on its head and ask the OP why airport security in the US is so lax in comparison to 'international' airports.

(To clarify, this is from another thread and I am not referring to bumber with that comment - and the OP of that thread was very polite and open to hearing what people had to say)





As to your husband, many airports around the world keep the gate area 'sterile' until they are staffed and ready to do checks at the gate. That happens in FRA for US bound flights - anyone sitting in the gate area must exit, and then they start the pre-flight screenings, which are on top of the regular security which occured earlier in the process.

 

[bumbershoot]

It seems that this might be part of the "sterile" area you've mentioned, bavaria. It's definitely new, as he didn't have this same thing last year when traveling in the same countries/airports!

And I'm still trying to figure out what it does for them.



Oh, and when they did let him through...he noticed the following. They were thoroughly patting down and talking to about 20 people. Then they'd let 50 through. Then 30 people thoroughly checked. Then 40 people just breezed through.

I'm sure the statistics work, but the "what ifs" get to me!



This is REALLY tangential and it's possible that only I can see the connection....

As a background of why the statistics of possibly missing the important person (while doing 20 checks, 30 free, etc) bugs me...my mom worked for the CIA in the counterterrorism group. I never knew this until after she died, and when I met her boss she was amazed I didn't know; it was NOT a secret. My mom focused on listening to chatter from the middle east (and here I thought the big maps she had in the basement were just out of religious interest!).

My mom was diagnosed with leukemia in December '99, and died March 11, 2000. About a week, week and a half later, my stepdad and I got special permission to clean out her desk. Well, I got the permission; he worked there too.

They hadn't touched her desk OR her computers for those almost 4 months. This was HUGE area of missed info, because they didn't know what info she had in the computer. (I'm sure there were others monitoring, but my mom was a really intuitive person that could put things together in really interesting ways.)

One and a half years later...I always wondered what had been missed, during those 4 months of no one looking at her info/thoughts/memos. I can't help but still wonder if that group still wishes they'd gone through her computer earlier, that maybe it would have made a difference. After all, communication between agencies and within agencies was cited as being a problem...and there's nothing more basic than seeing what a person who works there was thinking...20ish months before it happened.

Things slipped through the cracks. And I hate the idea that someone might get lucky, because they were number 21 in line.



These are not good thoughts to think of as DH is boarding a plane....

 

[bumbershoot]

But what has really caused me to speak up is a combination of factors - posts like yours from people who only see the surface and don't understand the substance, a recent long list of blunders by TSA, and some of the comments people made here after the 12/25 attempt.

Oh, I don't think the US has much security... But I am wondering what the sterile area does.

And I'm not even sure it was a sterile area. I'll have to ask DH tomorrow. But it sounded like he got to the international terminal, then just sat with everyone else going to the US. While others went on through because they were going to other countries.

[*]in many airports around the world there is nothing once one has passed through final security, other than the gate area ie no shops, no restrooms, no eateries

Oh what a bummer! The best parts of Seatac are past the secure area...well, at least the FIRST part of security. I have actually never been on an international flight from Seatac so I don't know what it's like over there.


As to your husband, many airports around the world keep the gate area 'sterile' until they are staffed and ready to do checks at the gate. That happens in FRA for US bound flights - anyone sitting in the gate area must exit, and then they start the pre-flight screenings, which are on top of the regular security which occured earlier in the process.

That sounds like a reason, hmm.



I have no quibbles with proper security, FYI. Although I was in a haze as I entered (and was a teary crying mess as I left) Ireland in '95, there might very well have been armed guards (it was during a peaceful time between Ireland and Northern Ireland) there. And I don't mind that.

It's exactly the theater that I mind. And this "sit here and wait" *feels* like theater to me. That's why I'm asking.

 

[bavaria]

Well at least you are asking! Not enough people do, I think. Remember, DHS/TSA can impose rules on other countries if they want to fly planes to America. So all of the rules are not set by that country; some are actually set by America.

And that is why some people are saying it isn't logical - just as you are thinking, some of it is for show, when there was already more in depth security happening earlier in the process. And like you say, picking person number 24 and 44 and 64 may not make sense, which is why everyone is screened at airports around the world. Just because someone wears a uniform of something or has minor political standing shouldn't make them absolved; think about recent times when persons in authority did harm to others.

As I said earlier, I am too tired and too dispirited to explain correctly. If someone else wants to have a go at it, hopefully this discussion can continue respectfully and not become something unpleasant.

 

[bumbershoot]

It took me WAY too long to get it, but now I think I do.

This new thing has been mandated by my country of birth. Which means that, most likely, it's theater.

Grrrrreattttttttt. I feel like DH is soooo much safer.


I just love living in a country governed by sound bites and the appearance of doing things. Fabulous. I'm even more embarrassed than usual about where I live. (as if McDonalds wasn't bad enough!)

I fear I just turned my own thread ugly, but I was born here, I live here...I have very strong feelings about my own country and sometimes they come out! Gah!

 

[bicker]

I think you've hit the nail on the head, when you indicated that you turn your own thread ugly.

It is clear that many people don't like inconvenience, and so when they are subjected to inconvenience, they will often refuse to acknowledge that other reasonable people may have legitimate, critical objectives that are best achieved in the manner that they're being achieved (even though that results in inconvenience).

We charge people with responsibilities -- in this case, to foster a safe and efficient transportation system. Going through the effort of selecting such people carefully, for their expertise and professionalism, and then refusing to grant the legitimacy of their expertise and professionalism, is literally insane.

 

[eliza61]

But what has really caused me to speak up is a combination of factors - posts like yours from people who only see the surface and don't understand the substance, a recent long list of blunders by TSA, and some of the comments people made here after the 12/25 attempt.

Security around the world is very different than in American airports. On one of those threads I linked uva185 asks why more people in America are not upset and I can only think that it is because they don't know the true situation. I am upset and that is because I DO fly on American domestic flights and I DO want security to be better.
I'm too tired and frankly too angry to write much so will cut and paste from another thread shortly, but let me highlight some areas

• many major US airports don't have one way exits to the secure area; witness the EWR terminal dump a few weeks ago. Even the grocery stores in MUC have one way exits
• not everyone who enters the secure area in US airports is screened; as recent events showed over the years LEOs and airline pilots others in positions of authority can engage in acts of violence against others
• the shoe carnival doesn't reveal anything which the WTMD doesn't reveal

Maybe it needs one compact list, maybe it just needs more people to read and get angry, or maybe it needs some of our long departed posters to return and speak up. But most of them gave up, and I cannot say what I think because many here just apply look at my user name and make assumptions. (And I can assure you that patriotism holds no place in my belief system)

Some posters asked similar questions, and they did bother to read what we wrote, or went and did some research, and came back and thanked us. It may be time to put personal emotion aside and actually read up on the subject.
You may be shocked, and you may be motivated to speak up.

You're not far off the mark Bavaria,

Us Yanks are very emotional people. Some times it serves us really well ( when we respond to disasters) and some times it bites us in the you know what (look at the health care debate).

Also remember that we are very, very new to this whole "national security" issue. Pretty much our Civil War was the last time we've had armed conflict on our soils. So for many Americans national security = our armed forces (navy, army, marines). We are use to defeating enemies by conventional measures and it's taking some time to get our collective minds around the simple fact that those methods (which have served us well in the past) will not work this time.

Also in terms of travel we are also pretty much newborns. Like we said on other threads about prices of air travel, it's only been in the very recent time period that large numbers of Americans even went abroad. I'm 50 and when I was a little girl, only the really wealthy went to Europe.

Lastly, As much as I love my fellow countrymen Biker is right, collectively we have the patience of a knat. After 9/11 every one swore up and down that no security procedure was too much, that the slight delays were worth it to ensure as much as possible our safety. Here it is not 10 years later and we've thrown that mantra out the window. Not only that we're not use to solutions that are what I would call "ongoing". Every body wants a "magic" bullet that will solve some thing without any pain or inconvenience and terrorism is not that type of problem. No one procedure is going to fit all circumstances.

Don't count us out yet though, we're slow but we generally come around. LOL

 

[seashoreCM]

But will the airline honor your ticket as-is on the next flight if you miss yours? This is where the magic bullet sits.

 

[eliza61]

But will the airline honor your ticket as-is on the next flight if you miss yours? This is where the magic bullet sits.

Don't know? Maybe a question should be, should they have to put you on the next flight if a security concern comes up. For example. When JFK had that security breach when the guy simply walked in the "exit" area when the TS guard was gone. All those folks were delayed and I know quite a few missed flights. Did you notice on TV all the people were gripping about how they were inconvenienced? Very few expressed concern that an unknown person was now in the airport without clearing security? Had some thing happen though you would have had a huge outcry as to why he got through security.

We want the impossible. We want to fly but we want rock bottom prices and top notch security we just don't want to be inconvenienced to much and we don't want our morale sensibilities offended.

 

[bumbershoot]

I was expecting to come back to "if you hate your country so much, leave." That's the "ugly" I thought I'd gone to by expressing my "gah" feelings. It's gone a bit differently than what I expected!


I am asking a question. I am not "questioning". There is a difference.

I don't ever expect pixie dust here, but I generally give good responses, good reasoned responses, to people over here, and I feel like bicker just called me "literally insane", due to an assumption that I am *questioning*, rather than *asking a question*.

To have an assumption that I just don't like inconvenience (DH was at the airport THREE HOURS BEFORE HIS FLIGHT...he was prepared for inconvenience) is just rotten.


DH and I are good travelers. DH is complimented by security people at how organized he is, and how easy he makes their job with him. He has traveled all over the world (except to Europe, still hasn't been there for work or play) and knows what all sorts of security looks and feels like.


This was something he hasn't experienced before. Not even at the same airport yesterday that he went through last Fall. And the other country where this same thing happened, he had been through last year as well (though not the same airport), and they didn't do this. It's NEW.


He talked to me about it, while worrying that he was there 3 hours early, but they might cause him to miss his flight, and I decided that I would ask here. And so I asked a question.


And I gave waaaaaay more information that I expected I would, about my own background of how I know that just having one person missing might have let a horrible thing be planned without people noticing, causing a horrifying event 1.5 years later...and how that relates to not being happy when silly things are put into place. I doubt if there's another person with that same background...and I'm still not sure how it correlates 1 to 1 to this question, but it comes up in my brain and heart when I talk about security at airports; it's part of the background chatter in my own head.


If the answer is: "it's theater", say that.
If the answer is: "it's not theater but I can't tell you how it works, but it does work", say that.
If the answer is: "I don't know", say that.



"After 9/11 every one swore up and down that no security procedure was too much, that the slight delays were worth it to ensure as much as possible our safety."

I never once said or thought that. Even despite my background from my parents.

I thought..."wow, that 'human' who planned this probably didn't expect the integrity of those two buildings to fall apart like that; he's probably stinkin' shocked that that happened."

I thought..."and now America enters the rest of the world, which has been dealing with this for millenia."

I thought..."sometimes junk happens despite the best efforts."


And when I was patted down in the underwire area, and my shoes were checked because I had steel toes (adorable shoes, no idea why they had those toes), but then the TEN hairpins I had to hold up my hairbun were OK...despite the pins being probably 2 inches long, double-ended, and most were missing their rubber tips, meaning I was walking on board with 20 2 inch metal weapons in my hair...onto a plane going to DC on September 18, 2001...I was fairly sure that America probably shouldn't be in charge of any airport security.

And when we got home, and I realized that part of my keychain had gotten unscrewed from itself, and therefore I had a bit of metal that looked like a bullet roaming in my carryon, and no one had noticed...that feeling was just solidified.

But I personally have never said that no security measure was too much.



And all I wanted to know was...what purpose does this new procedure serve?

 

[bicker]

I've never seen a constructive discussion about such procedures take place in a discussion thread. This is evidently the wrong kind of medium for such communication. So, given that, I think it is always best for such inquires to be directed to the authorities themselves:

http://www.faa.gov/email_page/?title=Contact FAA&pageurl=/contact/index.cfm&sid=true

I hope this helps satisfy your curiosity.

 

[bavaria]

Don't worry, I chose to overlook some things, and had a little heads up before I even returned to the thread.

I have often said that I prefer when people don't agree, and don't have the same view point, as it means that we can discuss and debate and learn from each other. Some of the posters I respect most here are also some of the ones with whom I disagree most often in fact.

The challenge comes when people are so blinded by their emotion or passion and don't play fair and are not open to hearing what others have to say or consider it as an option. I am often quite self-disparaging and heck even agree that there is some very good non-German chocolate in the world. I have chosen to learn a lot from people here over the years.

I would far rather have an animated respectful discussion which forces me to think and to explore and to learn, rather than just to sit here and nod in agreement with everyone.

 

[crashbb]

Don't worry, I chose to overlook some things, and had a little heads up before I even returned to the thread.

I have often said that I prefer when people don't agree, and don't have the same view point, as it means that we can discuss and debate and learn from each other. Some of the posters I respect most here are also some of the ones with whom I disagree most often in fact.

The challenge comes when people are so blinded by their emotion or passion and don't play fair and are not open to hearing what others have to say or consider it as an option. I am often quite self-disparaging and heck even agree that there is some very good non-German chocolate in the world. I have chosen to learn a lot from people here over the years.

I would far rather have an animated respectful discussion which forces me to think and to explore and to learn, rather than just to sit here and nod in agreement with everyone.

I think that I just saw a pig flying out my office window.

What I think is crazy is the implication that anyone who questions security is doing so because they don't want to be inconvenienced. I'm happy to be inconvenience, IF it is going to keep me safe. Inconvenience for the sake of show, is not helpful.

I do agree that a lot of it is perspective. I remember traveling by Tube in London as a child and being confused by the lack of garbage bins. Until I was told that they had been removed/sealed because of fear of IRA bombs. I had never lived somewhere where bombs (or other terrorist activity) were an issue, so it just didn't occur to me that would be the reason.