Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush: Use Guard to Protect Airports(Federalizing Airport Security)
Yahoo ^ | 9/27/2001 | SCOTT LINDLAW

Posted on 09/27/2001 9:12:23 AM PDT by Solson

Thursday September 27 11:04 AM ET Bush: Use Guard to Protect Airports

Bush: Use Guard to Protect Airports

By SCOTT LINDLAW, Associated Press Writer

CHICAGO (AP) - President Bush urged governors Thursday to call up National Guard units to protect U.S. airports while he implements a long-term plan to secure airlines from terrorist attack. The package includes putting the federal government in charge of airport security.

Hoping to reassure jittery travelers, Bush also proposed spending $500 million on aircraft modifications that would deny or delay access to cockpits.

Terrorists hijacked four airplanes Sept. 11, crashing two into the World Trade Center in New York and one into the Pentagon outside Washington. A fourth crashed in Pennsylvania, apparently after passengers struggled with the hijackers. U.S. air travel has dropped sharply since the attacks.

The White House released an outline of Bush's air-security plan shortly before the president left for Chicago, where he was discussing the proposals with airline workers.

Hundreds of workers gathered outside an airport hangar to greet the president. Two jets were parked nose-to-nose at the event - one each from United Airlines and American Airlines, the carriers hijacked Sept. 11.

For the second time this year, Bush was having lunch here with Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat and brother of Al Gore's campaign chairman last year.

Bush said Wednesday he was offering the ``confidence-boosting measures and some concrete proposals'' to ``convince the American public it is safe to fly.''

``One of my concerns is that this terrible incident has convinced many Americans to stay at home,'' Bush said. ``And one of the keys to economic recovery is going to be the vitality of the airline industry.''

Bush's plan includes:

-Expanding the use of federal air marshals aboard commercial airliners. ``The requirements and qualifications of federal air marshals are among the most stringent of any U.S. federal law enforcement agency,'' the White House statement said.

-Spending $500 million on plan modifications, including efforts to restrict the opening of cockpit doors during flights, fortify cockpit doors to deny access from the cabin, alert the cockpit crew to activity in the cabin and ensure continuous operation of the aircraft transponder in the event of an emergency. The transponder allows air controllers to track a plane.

-Putting the federal government in charge of airport security and screening, including the purchase and maintenance of all equipment. The government would supervise passenger and baggage security and perform background checks on security personnel. Uniformed federal workers would manage all operations; federal and nonfederal workers would share the security work.

``Fully implementing the extensive security proposal may take four to six months,'' the White House statement said. ``During that time, the president will help ensure that every airport has a strong security presence by asking the governors of the 50 states to call up the National Guard - at the federal government's expense - to augment existing security staff at every commercial airport nationwide.''

Bush's trip to Chicago was the second time he has traveled on Air Force One since the Sept. 11 jetliner attacks on New York and Washington that left nearly 7,000 dead or missing.

White House officials said the administration has several other options under consideration, including installing cameras to monitor jetliner cabins. Bush also hopes to reopen Reagan National Airport outside Washington, the only airport still closed due to the Sept. 11 attacks, but is not yet convinced that flying there would be safe, aides said. He is examining options that could lead to the reopening of the airport.

Bush's plan does not include arming pilots, action requested by the pilots themselves. ``There may be better ways to do it than that, but I'm open for any suggestion,'' Bush said Wednesday, as aides privately confirmed that he is cool to the idea.

Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta boarded a commercial flight Thursday at Baltimore-Washington International Airport to demonstrate his confidence in the air system. He was bound for Chicago to join Bush, accompanied by Jane Garvey, head of the Federal Aviation Administration.

Mineta waited in a long line at a BWI security checkpoint. He placed a leather bag on a scanner's conveyor belt, took out his keys and walked through the metal detector. It beeped, prompting a security guard to give Mineta a thorough sweep with a hand-held detector before allowing him onto Concourse A.

Mineta called the system safe, secure and stable.

Bush's father, the nation's 41st president, planned a news conference at Logan Airport in Boston to reassure Americans before flying from Boston to Houston.

The White House is also eager to convince the public that life is returning to normal, and getting Americans back onto airplanes is part of the effort.

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said the number of commercial flights each day had returned to near normal, now at about 5,500, compared with the maximum before the attacks of 6,500.

However, relatively few people are on those flights. Delta Air Lines, for example, says its planes typically are only 35 percent filled.


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 next last
To: Solson
This is getting way out of hand
First we can't take pictures anywhere ner the WTC and now the Feds are going to control the airports.
Something is sure beginning to smell.
21 posted on 09/27/2001 10:37:21 AM PDT by asneditor (editor@allsouthwest.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aurelius
For that matter, would a real Texan have stood for the singing of "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" at a national memorial service?

Bush requested that the "Battle Hymn" be sung. It was his choice.

What was wrong with it?

22 posted on 09/27/2001 10:42:39 AM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: jimmy bob's uncle
I agree with post 17. We are allowing government largesse for no reason.
23 posted on 09/27/2001 10:45:33 AM PDT by rodeocowboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
What's Security Worth at the Airport? News/Current Events Announcement Keywords: AIRPORT SECURITY GUARDS Source: Anchorage Daily News 9-19-01 classifieds Published: 9-19-01 Author: Rocky Dippel Posted on 09/19/2001 20:21:11 PDT by Issaquahking It was a terrible and horrid event that happened 0n 9-11 but what efforts do we make to insure our safety on airline flights? We get a bunch of guys looking like rent a cops hoping to move up life's food chain to get a job that will pay the bill's. Harsh? look at what we pay these guys! AIRPORT SECURITY SCREENERS Immediate FT/PT positions at: TED STEVENS ANCHORAGE INT'L AIRPORT We offer $7.50/hr to start w/step increases to $8.50/hr and paid holidays, vacation, training & uniforms. HS diploma/GED, 10-yr background verification & drug testing required. Seniors encouraged to apply! EOE. Call the Huntleigh USA Job Hotline @ 907-243-5242 Huntleigh Sorry about the cut and paste from The Anchorage Daily News, but it's the truth. I don't know what everybody else gets for their work at what level they work at in the community, but the risk/knowledge seems to be out of proportion for our safety in the air. I would much rather pay a guard $20+ and a package than to feel at risk by someone who is on the bottom of the pile reading want ads trying to improve his lot in life! I'm sure there are some real professionals in the these jobs......but I'll bet they are far and few between. Would rather pay the high price and have a guy from a police acadamy trained and deadly than anyone else on the spot; or if they are good guards at the spot allready, let's pay them. Everyone thinking that is a lot of money, let me ask you this....If that is a lot of money what price is to much? Right now we are looking at over 5,000 dead and missing, the World Trade Center is gone at how many billion, how hard did the airlines say they are being hit for, and everyone downstream from them (world markets included)? If I'm knee jerk re-acting call me on it.....i'm all ears for a better idea.From my point of view, let's try to keep it in the private sector rather than having the government except responsibility for private activties.

Let's cover theFULL spectrum that makes up air security.
24 posted on 09/27/2001 10:47:05 AM PDT by Issaquahking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mr Fowl
You said:"We're probably looking at a force of about 25,000 (or more) skymarshalls and a bureaucracy to support them."

I work at a glass plant that runs 24/7 and we need 4 shifts to run 24/7.

I would also think the same thing for skymarshalls since planes take off 24/7.

I bet we will need 100,000 skymarshalls to cover 24/7"

Nope, just enough non-uniformed marshalls that don't disclose their identities. If you aren't sure which ones have the cops on them, you'd be hard pressed to want to hijack one. Otherwise, just allow the pilots/crew to carry.

25 posted on 09/27/2001 10:47:33 AM PDT by TheRealLobo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: peteram
So, which airline is paying these people? Or are they being paid by the Airport Authority?

I've always thought that airport security was provided by the airport owner, and not any individual airline. And most large airports are owned and run by some local government or other. I could be way wrong about this, I'm no expert on this...just an impression I've always had.

Regardless of who pays them though, aren't they all following "guidelines" set by the FAA? The federal agency responsible for air safety in this country, I believe. :)
26 posted on 09/27/2001 10:51:25 AM PDT by jimmy bob's uncle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: peteram
I agree. You nailed it. Life is about comparative choices and lessor of evils. Neither choice will usually be perfect. This will be an improvement over the minimum wage types that are doing it now.
27 posted on 09/27/2001 10:54:53 AM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Even if he personally likes it, he should realize that singing it, in a supposedly national service, is an affront to the South.
28 posted on 09/27/2001 10:55:25 AM PDT by Aurelius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Kirk&Burke
"We're probably looking at a force of about 25,000 (or more) skymarshalls and a bureaucracy to support them. I can't wait for the next tax increase and $1,000 domestic plane tickets to cover the cost. (We haven't even begun to consider the cost of increased ground security)"

Considering the cost of the planes flying into the buildings, I wonder whether the increased cost of security will match that. Not that I'm into more gov't tax dollars being spent on this, but how many of our tax dollars are being spent on the clean up/rescue/rebuilding? I know that insurance companies are taking a hit upwards of 20 billion dollars, but that's exclusive of what the rescue guys overtime, etc. If the gov't spends 20 billion on clean up/rescue, how much would they spend on it next time WITHOUT skymarshalls? (Just a thought, not looking to get in a debate)

29 posted on 09/27/2001 10:55:50 AM PDT by TheRealLobo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: rodeocowboy
As do I. If I have to go to an airport where military personal are all over the place. Pacing with loaded military weapons. Fly on planes with armed guards, then I do not need to fly.

The terrorist have WON! While proving the USA is a paper tiger, they closed down the air industry of the USA. I fear this is only the begining.

30 posted on 09/27/2001 10:56:27 AM PDT by desertfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Henrietta
Yea man, the private sector has done a great job so far, oh wait a minute………………Nevermind.
31 posted on 09/27/2001 10:58:19 AM PDT by CJinVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: peteram
For years many European airports have had machine-gun armed soldiers wandering the concourses. On a short layover in Brussels about ten years ago I was amazed to see this sight. I think it's an idea whose time came years ago but was ignored by the FAA, airlines, and various administrations.
32 posted on 09/27/2001 10:58:36 AM PDT by ChocChipCookie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: longleaf
I have over a million miles on American, and almost as many on two other airlines. I will minimize flying until the pilots are armed. Sky marshals on the occasional flight are no protection against suicide hijackers who may try to commandeer a dozen planes at the same time, knowing that most will have no protection. And the media have shown that even after September 11, it is possible to take weapons aboard.
33 posted on 09/27/2001 11:02:39 AM PDT by thucydides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Henrietta
It seems like an easier solution would be to have standards for security checkpoint employees, and let the private sector handle it. We don't need more government goons who will abuse their power and then be immune from prosecution therefor.

I'm sure you're so certain because that's worked *so* well before now, hasn't it? Give me a break.

Show me: where that's worked, where the gov't has had sufficient inspection resources, where the previous fines (hello, Logan airport) for non-compliance of existing security requirements caused your blameless private sector to do its job.

Your sainted private sector (do I smell a Limbaugh corporate apologist?) couldn't care less about its duty and responsibility to the flying public. In charge of security, they whine, campaign donations in hand, to Al Gore about costs. Gore ensures his safety commissions recommendations are toothless. Nothing gets done, they take no action on their own and continue to shrug off federal fines.

Ask the women assaulted by that jerk congressman at the security checkpoint, how much she likes her job. Airport security is thankless. It has a extraordinarily high turn-over rate and pays nothing.

Your sainted private sector, openly admitted by Boeing, even includes *one* lock on all cabin doors. Brilliant.

Do I need to mention this same sainted "private sector" has just taken possession of it's first taxpayer bailout dollars?

I say we give W's plan a chance to work.

34 posted on 09/27/2001 11:06:40 AM PDT by newzjunkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: hopespringseternal
I will drive.

If they dropped all security altogether, you would still be safer flying than driving. There are a heck of a lot more bad drivers than terrorists.

35 posted on 09/27/2001 11:14:19 AM PDT by RobbyS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Henrietta
...let the private sector handle it.

That's why we're here to begin with. I despise biggov/police state as much as the next guy. However, I have seen this from the inside.

The free market has absolutely failed in this function. By delegating their responsibility to the airlines, the FAA created the situation where low bid contractors hire minimum wage illiterates at a rate outpaced by the desertion of hiree's predecessors. A 100% PER MONTH turnover is not unheard of. Why? Having spent a lot of time at checkpoints in all the CatX and most Cat1 airports, I have come to the regretable conclusion that most of our fellow American's are insufferable pr*cks, (or at least become pr*cks when they enter the airport). The abuse of checkpoint personnel by the travling public is astounding.

36 posted on 09/27/2001 11:14:35 AM PDT by j_tull
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Comment #37 Removed by Moderator

To: newzjunkey
The Feds have always been the problem. More federal law and feds will only lead to more tragedy. It is the feds that have destroyed the ability of an average citizens to defend his self. Fed policy is that only criminals should be armed.

Do you feel safer now that Bush and the feds have given the right, to mid-level airforce Generals, to shoot down American passanger planes flying in American air space. I don't. I would not fly now, even if it were free.

38 posted on 09/27/2001 11:24:03 AM PDT by desertfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ChocChipCookie
Spent almost 30 years in Europe. American security was a joke in comparison, and still there was the occasional incident in Europe. Just keep flying, just like you keep driving. Two years ago my wifer and I was going ona tour to Istanbul, leaving from Frankfurt. Just as we were about to take off, they suddenly ordered the evacuation of the plane. We were moved to another terminal and had to be individually searched. Most of the people aboard were Turks except for a handful of Germans and Americans. 6 hours later they let us back aboard the airplane. One of our fellow passengers were the Turkish wife of an American officer. She had a cell phone and called her husband. He determined that there had been a bomb aboard, planted by followers of a Kurdish rebel whom the Turks had just captured. So we got back aboard the airplane and went on to Istanbul, to continue our tour. After all, the airplabe was clean. What are you going to do? Crawl under the mattress and refuse to come out? This is the way the world really is. Life goes on--until it ends. And it will end one way or another. Meanwhile the skies are safer than they were a month ago.
39 posted on 09/27/2001 11:27:54 AM PDT by RobbyS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Solson

Guard Today, UN Tomorrow?

On June 28, 2001, Col. Cuppett was advised of, "a serious report of plans to allow UN police units to patrol US international airports in the event of an Arab-Israeli war in the Middle East." These troops will also be placed at nine European airports and will be used to derail an Israeli "call-up of reservists for military duty." Further, the UN will prevent ships carrying reservists from sailing for Israel.

"The UN shall soon declare Zionism to be racism...affirm that settlements are a crime against humanity and equate the Jewish people with the likes of Hitler and Stalin...When the war breaks out, Moslems will riot in the US, and Jews, trying to go to Israel, for any reason, including bringing funds to aid the besieged state, will be arrested at the airports.

"All the above information was relayed to me by a Field Grade US military officer, a US Army LTC and a USAF Major."
 

40 posted on 09/27/2001 11:36:10 AM PDT by Israel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson