US Security Needs Anger Some Europeans

LONDON (AP) - Fears of a new airborne terrorist attack have brought heightened tensions, grounded flights - and created turbulence for U.S.-European relations.

Some European nations have balked at the United States' tough new aviation security measures, which include armed guards on aircraft and preflight scrutiny of passenger lists. Airlines, hit by rising security demands, want governments to handle part of the cost.

``There are tensions within Europe on how to handle U.S. requests,'' said Philip Butterworth-Hayes, editor of Jane's Aircraft Components. ``Politically, it's a complete nightmare for Europe.''

Meanwhile, France is searching for an Afghan on a U.S. list of suspected terrorists because someone with his name failed to board a Christmas Eve flight across the Atlantic that was canceled amid security fears, officials said Wednesday.

A passenger surnamed Hai was ticketed for Air France Flight 68 to Los Angeles but did not show up, French officials said. They said investigators have not yet established whether the passenger is the Abdou Hai on a U.S. terrorism watch list or someone with the same name.

The name was one reason why security on trans-Atlantic flights was stepped up over the holiday season. In all, six Air France flights between Paris and Los Angeles on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day were canceled amid concerns members of the al-Qaida terrorist network might try to board planes.

Investigators said Abdou Hai is not known to French intelligence, and France's judiciary has not opened an investigation into him, meaning he is not now suspected of wrongdoing.

Secretary of State Colin Powell, asked at a news conference Wednesday if there was a single potential terrorist loose who is a source of grave concern, said he was ``not aware of any one particular individual who is loose.''

But Justice Minister Dominique Perben confirmed Wednesday that French and European authorities were searching for someone who failed to show up for an Air France flight.

``We are looking for someone, but I can't say more,'' Perben told RMC radio. ``What's important when someone doesn't take a plane is to know why he didn't take it,'' he added.

The Air France flights were canceled after U.S. intelligence told their French counterparts that al-Qaida operatives would try to board the planes over Christmas, French officials have said.

Since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, many airlines around the world have acceded to U.S. requests, installing bulletproof cockpit doors on aircraft and agreeing to share passenger lists with U.S. authorities. But for some, the demand for armed sky marshals on flights to the United States was a step too far.

While a European Union-wide aviation safety agency is being established, each member country has been free to take its own position on sky marshals.

The Irish government, which took over the rotating presidency of the European Union on Jan. 1, said Wednesday it was organizing a meeting of EU aviation chiefs in Brussels, Belgium, next week to discuss the U.S. request.

On Dec. 29, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced that airlines would be required to place armed law enforcement officers on flights to the United States ``where necessary.''

The announcement came after U.S. authorities raised their terrorism alert to orange, the second-highest level, and increased security surrounding international flights. More than a dozen flights to the United States on British Airways, Aeromexico and Air France have been canceled or delayed since New Year's Eve because of security fears.

British Transport Secretary Alistair Darling called the deployment of sky marshals ``responsible and prudent'' and said passengers would have to get used to increased security. France and Germany, alongside nations such as Canada and Australia, also agreed to the U.S. request, with Germany saying it has had sky marshals on some flights for more than two years.

But civil aviation authorities in Denmark, Sweden, Finland and Portugal all said they would not allow armed marshals to fly and would instead cancel flights if there was a strong suspicion of a planned attack.

Denmark's Transportation Minister, Flemming Hansen, told the Politiken newspaper that ``putting armed guards on passenger planes is the same as saying that the terrorists have won.''

Package tour operator Thomas Cook, which operates charter flights between London and Orlando, Fla., also said it would not accept sky marshals, and pilot organizations in Britain, Spain and other countries expressed strong reservations.

``We do not accept that it is necessary to introduce armed officials on to aircraft,'' Conor Nolan, director of safety for the Irish Airline Pilots Association, was quoted as saying by the Irish Examiner newspaper. ``The aircraft should be the last place for security measures. They should have taken place on the ground before takeoff.''

Aviation expert Butterworth-Hayes said the trans-Atlantic disagreement ``partly comes from differences of culture, for example on the issue of arming pilots. The U.S. is much more bullish about that.''

Cost is also a factor. Heightened security measures since Sept. 11 have cost major airlines between $90 million and $180 million, according to aviation analyst Nick van den Brul of BN Paribas.

Sky marshals are not the first American demand to have met a mixed reception. In December, after months of negotiations, the European Union agreed to share flight passenger lists with U.S. authorities. But the EU won concessions to comply with European privacy rules, including an agreement to hold the data for 3 years rather than the 50 years originally proposed.

And on Wednesday the Australian airline Qantas bridled at a U.S. request that it discourage passengers from gathering in groups during flights to America. Australian Transport Minister John Anderson described the request as ``a little bit hard to handle.''

Darrin Kayser, a spokesman for the U.S. Transportation Security Administration, said Wednesday that passengers were free to wait in line for airplane bathrooms. But he said the agency had asked all airlines flying to the United States to discourage people from congregating on planes, possibly by making announcements to that effect before takeoff.

Other nations have been irked by the U.S. introduction of fingerprint scanning and photographing for visitors from all but 27 mostly European nations. Last week, Brazil began fingerprinting and photographing arriving Americans in retaliation.

On Tuesday, the Brazilian foreign minister met with the U.S. ambassador to ask that Brazilians be exempted from fingerprinting and that they ``be treated with dignity,'' according to a government statement.

David Learmount, an aviation expert with Flight International magazine, said U.S. authorities would have to accept a compromise on some of its security demands.

The effort against terrorism should be ``about people working together, not America bulldozing its way around, telling everyone what to do,'' he said.

The Wall Street Journal recently tallied the costs to our country and economy, of the September 11th attacks.

They include:

$7.8 billion in lost income for the families of the more than 3,000 victims-money that would have gone to pay for braces and summer camps, schools and colleges.

$21 billion sent to New York City for direct damage costs.

$4 billion for the victims fund.

$18 billion to clean up the World Trade Center site.

$700 million to repair the Pentagon.

As much as $6.4 billion in reduced or lost wages and salaries for workers in New York industries.

1.3 million net jobs lost nationwide.

$150 billion in reduced GDP.

$50 billion in costs to the insurance industry.

$11 billion in lost business to the airline industry.

The bankruptcy of two airlines, even after a $15 billion federal bailout.

$38 billion in costs for new border security, protection against biological threats, and emergency preparedness.

$1.3 billion in costs to state governments for homeland security, and

$33 billion in spending by the private sector for new protective services.

..hey Europe, it's a new ballgame today. Get over it...

Actually, it's an old ballgame, which Europe knows only too well and doesn't want to see again.

Wasn't it East Germany, where gatherings of more than three people were deemed to be a potential conspiracy?

"Wasn't it East Germany, where gatherings of more than three people were deemed to be a potential conspiracy."

You can't compare that to today's situation. Our aim is to stop terrorist attacks not make Europeans uncomfortable. You'd think they would be a little more tolerant considering the hell we went through on 9/11....but we are talking about Europe, so their selfishness doesn't surprise me.

...it's war and if the Europeans don't want to follow OUR rules, then they can just stay home. It's up to us to protect ourselves....not Europe!...

Banning Aussies from queueing for QANTAS toilets won't protect anyone, Arpege. It's just another bit of rank stupidity which'll make travellers' lives more difficult and accomplish nothing, security-wise. You guys arguing that this craziness is somehow of benefit remind me of a liberal who's never been mugged. You'd change your mind about this pretty quick after a cavity search at LAX. Trouble is, most of you have never left Peoria and don't give a stuff about air travellers, or anyone but yourself.

I can remember when the United States was the freest country in the world. We used to scorn at other countries that had gestapo police make citizens "show their papers" before they could enter government offices, or before they could travel. Of course, back then we had a lot of conservatives who would not let our government intrude on the freedom of the american citizen.

Right. Thank you. Three hundred and fifty billion dollars, one and a half million jobs lost (at least) and Ridge keeps right on regulating those toilet queues.

Gee, I feel so much safer.....

Bullocks. This is a new age with a new warfare.

And we see the BS on euro tv - you guys despise us. So why should we trust you to consider our safety? Like you did for the Czechs at Munich? Or when you turned your back on the Poles when they were invaded, despite FOUR frickin "treaties" promising support?

You see, its not that we don't trust International Law or treaties or "firther UN negotiations" - its simply that all these pieces of paper have as much value as the one Chamberlain brought back from Hitler.

Stay home. Stew in your Socialist sewage. We don't trsut you.

Byron, I have traveled all over Europe, and I don't mind my country's new desire for security. I have been to your beautiful country, on R & R back in 69. You have as much too protect that we do. I do not mind a security check three times taking off shoes, belts, even once down to my undershorts. It was somewhat uncomfortable, but it was even better that the plane did not get flown into a building, or crash om a hillside. Life has changed for all of us since 9/11. Let's live with it as we strive to catch the bad guys. If not don't come to the USA,

"It's just another bit of rank stupidity which'll make traverlers' lives more difficult."

Oh well then....lets keep these people happy because we aim to please. How selfish of us to force inconvience onto you.

"Trouble is, most of you have never left Peoria and don't give a stuff about air travelers, or anyone besides yourself."

Horse Hockey....Although I don't have the exact number yet, thousands upon thousands of US citizens died fighting foreign wars. We don't have to prove a damn thing to anyone anyway.

BTW....as a "Peoria" person, I have traveled greatly. As do thousands of Americans serving over sea's!!!!!

US Security Needs Anger Some Europeans

Hey, paying for the security needs of Europe for the last 50+ years was kind of annoying to us, as was bailing out Europe from two world wars, but we didn't complain, did we?

I'm sure the thousands of Americans buried on European battlefields were a little inconvenienced, too.

What amazes me is that people like the Eurotrash that spout this crap can even look their ungrateful selves in the damned mirror.

..and we see the BS on euro tv - you guys despise us. So why should we trust you to consider our safety?...

You see what you want to see, bozo- but the facts are that these ridiculous measures don't make anyone safer. What you want is to feel safer, right?

..Byron, I have traveled all over Europe, and I don't mind my country's new desire for security...

There's no 'security', Doc. There's just regulators, regulating. The only security is their own jobs, as long as those regulations keep flowing.

Thank heavens Homeland Security wasn't created straight after the Cole attack. You'd need a cavity search and biometric tag to buy an outboard, now.

..are you saying that the reason for the job loss is europeans not flying on US airlines?...

A part of it. Domestic paranoia's a big part, too.

How about one of you guys answer the questions, for once? You, Caisson- tell me, please, how banning queueing for toilets on flights from Sydney to Hawaii makes you safer. Thanks in advance, Byron

...I do not mind a security check three times taking off shoes, belts, even once down to my undershorts. It was somewhat uncomfortable, but it was even better that the plane did not get flown into a building, or crash om a hillside...

Doc, have you ever considered that the success of Bin Laden's attacks is based in part on the way the security services are always responding to the last one?

..hey, paying for the security needs of Europe for the last 50+ years was kind of annoying to us...

Well, it's not annoying to Australians. Fighting in other people's wars is a sad part of any commitment to freedom. But I'll tell what is annoying: being told by an ally with whom we fought in WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, you name it, that because of ridiculous paranoia we can't queue for the toilet on flights to your country.

ridiculous paranoia

What are your qualifications to judge these actions "ridiculous?" Homeland Security, FBI, CIA, FAA and others spent a lot of time and brainpower assessing vulnerabilities. I know for a fact that some of our best SpecOps guys gamed the system in Red Cell exercises to see what they could accomplish if they had been terrorists.

That kind of analysis has driven the security measures we have taken, and, if the reasons are not immediately obvious to you, that's too bad. You do not have "need to know" for every detail and rationale behind our counterterrorist measures. You have a choice: Comply with the conditions, or stay out of my country.

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.