Posted on 08/15/2006 3:46:32 PM PDT by Pokey78
AIRLINES attacked the inconsistency of the Government’s new security rules yesterday, saying that terrorists could switch their focus to flights coming into Britain, which are not covered by the restrictions on hand luggage and liquids.
The new rules apply only to flights leaving British airports and arrivals from the US. Passengers boarding flights to Britain from anywhere else in the world are not subject to any additional checks and can take large pieces of hand luggage and as much liquid as they can carry.
A terrorist could therefore circumvent the extra security at British airports by catching a train or ferry to France and boarding a flight from Paris to London. There are no extra security checks at Channel ports or the Eurotunnel or Eurostar terminals.
The extra checks will continue to cause cancellations and long delays for at least two more days. British Airways said that it would cancel 46 flights from Heathrow and Gatwick today, six fewer than yesterday. The airline said that it would cancel 18 short-haul flights from Heathrow tomorrow, but that it expected long-haul flights to return to normal.
The special restrictions on flights leaving Britain prompted concerns yesterday that Heathrow could lose its position as the world’s biggest international airport.
JP Morgan, the investment bank, said that other European airports would benefit from the “reputational damage” suffered by Heathrow since last Thursday. Many of the 23 million passengers who change planes at Heathrow would choose to fly via Frankfurt, Paris or Amsterdam to avoid the risk of cancellations and the hand- luggage restrictions.
The British Air Transport Association, which represents 13 airlines including British Airways, Virgin Atlantic and bmi, said that the stark differences in security rules in different countries undermined public confidence.
Roger Wiltshire, the association’s secretary-general, said: “We need credible, consistent international standards. Passengers will want to know why they are subject to one security regime on the outbound flight but a very different one on the return.”
The inconsistencies will be discussed today at a meeting of European security ministers in London, attended by John Reid, the Home Secretary.
Security officials from across Europe are expected to meet in Brussels later this week to attempt to draw up a common approach to airport security.Even Britain and the US, which imposed simultaneous bans on hand luggage last week, have different rules on liquids. Britain believes that liquids purchased in shops beyond security checkpoints do not pose any threat. But the US is still banning passengers on flights to and from Britain from taking on board any liquids, even bottles of water bought in the departure lounge.
Ryanair described the Government’s revised rules, which allow passengers to take one small piece of hand luggage, as “nonsensical and ineffective”.
Michael O’Leary, the airline’s chief executive, said: “What security expert decided that a large briefcase was safe as hand luggage but the normal carry-on wheelie bag isn’t? Surely common sense would suggest that if the safety and security of British citizens is under threat, why has the Government not banned luggage, liquids and gels on the London Underground or on Eurotunnel? “We call on the UK Government to return air travel to normal, to eliminate the queues, delays and cancellations at the London airports, which will prove to extremists everywhere that Britain’s airports and airlines will not be disrupted or grounded by their futile attempts to undermine normal life.”
A Department for Transport spokesman said: “We are in contact with international partners, but variations do exist because each country takes an assessment of its own threat. We can’t impose airport security regimes on other countries.” He said that the threat identified by the security services had been to aviation in Britain, but declined to comment on the possibility of terrorists switching to incoming flights.
# The duty-free industry has lost millions of pounds as a result of the stringent measures concerning hand luggage at British airports (David Rose writes).
Sales at airport stores worldwide have fallen by up to 15 per cent since Thursday’s terrorism alerts. This is mainly owing to a loss of alcohol and perfume sales, which account for 50 per cent of sales in the £14.2 billion industry.
Heathrow took £475 million in sales last year, and the impact of the disruption has been so far-reaching that shares of beauty companies have fallen. Estée Lauder dipped more than 5 per cent and Elizabeth Arden almost 4 per cent last Friday.
Retail accounts for 27 per cent of revenues at London airports operated by the British Airports Authority, which is owned by the Spanish construction group Ferrovial.
I agree.
This is madness.
Give people back their Diet Coke, water, and toothpaste, and start profiling men of Middle Eastern descent - period.
British security and the TSA are not, repeat, NOT making anyone "safer." All they are doing is making themselves feel they are doing something.
Profile the people who look like these guys and be done with it.
Wouldn't this apply equally to flights into the U.S. from destinations other than Britain?
Weren't they doing second checks at the gates? I read they were.
That means that in the security area such a terrorist is to be administered a strong kick. It would be better for everyone concerned if he explodes while still on the ground.
Well, its about time.
Someone(s) who has an ounce of common sense finally has the temerity to admit the truth.
WHETHER OR NOT THE TERRIES SUCCEEDED IN THEIR ATTACKS, THEY HAVE WON, JUST THE SAME.
Doesn't anyone else realize that "they" are sitting back laughing at all of the tumult, turmoil, and disruption to everyday life they have caused?
Where will it end.
Will we ALL have to wrapped in those silly see-thru bags and not be allowed to have ANY luggage of any kind (to be sent to wherever by military planes under guard, probably) and have to sit strapped in for 3, 4, or 8 hours in utter misery?
As for me, unless it is a case of up most and extreme emergency, I hereby and henceforth will refuse to fly.
You have no idea what was going to be used in those explosives, do you?
Close the mosques, return Pakistanis to Pakistan, etc, etc. The United Kingdom needs a new crusade for is own self. Do this not with rancor, anger, or spite. Just for safety's sake, and to ensure that folks who really don't want to be British aren't forced to be, at least in Britain.
It doesn't matter. This is getting out of control. The TSA doesn't have a clue, and even if they did, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I don't want good intentions. I want profiling of Middle Eastern males now, for starters.
I argue that that will make us 10 times safer than frisking US Senators, Medal of Honor war heroes and former state governors like Joe Foss, infants, grandmothers, and good looking blond females (the TSA selectee of choice).
Moreover, if this keeps up you won't be able to bring anything on an aircraft. And I mean anything.
Stop this madness now and profile.
Think about it - the luggage matches made them use hijackers to wreck the planes on September 11th, then the bomb sniffers made them resort to placing an explosive in Richard Reed's shoe to get it on the plane.
This method was tried by Ramzey Yousef and it worked. Someone else realized that it was a way around the current methods.
Next trick - find a white muslim with blonde hair whose death wish extends to his wife and children and have them carry the stuff on for you.
That's what I would do.
How many of those do they have at their disposal versus young Middle Eastern males between the ages of 18 and 42?
There is no evil that that cannot conceive of. But what TSA is doing now is a joke compared to what they could accomplish if they would just profile.
But they won't. Political Correctness Uber Alles.
Won't work. If you profile for middle-eastern males aged 16-35, the terrorists will adapt and use white or black converts.
Random screening is the only thing that keeps these guys on their toes. In conjunction with human intelligence, it is the only way to go.
Oh really? You know this 100%? Wow. You must be so wise and all knowing.
Thanks for dismissing it so easily. BTW, you never acknowledged that the terrorists have a much greater percentage of Middle Eastern males between the ages of 18-42 to draw on as assets in their murderous campaigns as opposed to:
find a white muslim with blonde (sic) hair whose death wish extends to his wife and children and have them carry the stuff on for you.
But hey, why focus on the details.
Moreover, if "random" screening keeps these guys on their toes then, statistically speaking, increasing the screening to Middle Easterners (both male and female) as a fait accompli will hamper their efforts even more.
But we don't do that. Because CAIR, the ACLU, and other enemies scream bloody murder.
Profile Middle Eastern males makes sense, and you just won't admit it. I don't know if you are affiliated with TSA or airport security, but it appears your opinions are part of the problem, not the solution.
Allow me to apologize jude for being a bit harsh with my words in my previous post. It was uncalled for. I let my frustration get to me.
Unless we can profile for religion (even though Islam is not a religion, it's a cult), there's not going to be much value in it. And they'd just lie about their religion, in any case.
The Israelis interview passengers based on a set of profile characteristics (countries to which they have travelled, past travel history, etc.) and this technique has succeeded, but Israel is a small country and I can't see every passenger at JFK or Gatwick being interviewed
The only way to stop this stuff is to stop Islam, although I don't know how we're going to do that. But we can't just continue to restrict ourselves more and more every day from doing the simple, ordinary, routine things that go into modern daily life. They are evil and will continue to think up ways to use normal modern life-activities to kill us - until we finally put an end to Islam itself, somehow.
Did you see The Post today?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.