Air Marshals
Jul 30th, 2003, 07:32 AM
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air Marshals
Did anyone notice that the federal government has decided that it's too costly to put undercover marshals on long flights due to the cost of motels/hotels so they have stopped this security measure?
Did anyone notice that there is heightened intelligence suggesting that there might [underscore MIGHT] be other suicide plane attacks?
Does anyone notice the seeming incongruity with these two issues?
Jul 30th, 2003, 08:27 AM
#5
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
agreed that 'on the plane' is only last stop measure. we need to learn from the Israelis. Their security people say that the U.S. searches for 'weapons' while they search for 'terrorists'. The Israeli security spends most of its airport time talking with passengers as they are standing in line. They are trained to recognize suspicious behavior. The U.S. security spends its time confiscating toe nail clippers and wanding people's bare feet.
Jul 30th, 2003, 08:34 AM
#6
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Additionally, every El Al flight has more than one armed air marshall on it.
But on my LA to NY flight in June, there was an armed air marshall on it, sitting on the aisle in Business Class. I only know this because we had to meet with the Customer Service manager to resolve a ticketing problem. While at the entrance to their security office (next to CS), this tall, strapping fellow walked up, showed some documentation, his gun in holster, then got some papers and Surprise! showed up on our flight. It is possible he was law enforcement, but I has happy he was on the flight.
But on my LA to NY flight in June, there was an armed air marshall on it, sitting on the aisle in Business Class. I only know this because we had to meet with the Customer Service manager to resolve a ticketing problem. While at the entrance to their security office (next to CS), this tall, strapping fellow walked up, showed some documentation, his gun in holster, then got some papers and Surprise! showed up on our flight. It is possible he was law enforcement, but I has happy he was on the flight.
Jul 30th, 2003, 09:27 AM
#9
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting! I just read an article on MSNBC which states that the federal government has done an about face and has put marshals BACK on the long flights.
Hmmmm, do you think the power-that-be in Washington read Fodors?
Jul 30th, 2003, 10:05 AM
#10
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As someone pointed out on the other thread about the heightened security alert - Americans are much more likely to attack a hijacker now than before 9/11, so air marshals or no, any one who decides to hijack a plane is going to have a much harder time.
Jul 30th, 2003, 10:10 AM
#11
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I understand, the new [potential] threat to the US comes from flights from overseas destinations (such as Rio de Janerio).
So, air marshals aren't really an issue, anyway.
Jul 30th, 2003, 10:11 AM
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
TIA's explanation is a bugdet-cutting one - apparently TIA is $900M over, and cutting the marshalls will save $104M.
What's the offset is a plane goes down? $104M?
Yes, this cut comes at a time when intelligence suggests more five-person teams taking over airliners.
Lets examine the larger issue: Bush cut taxes, and now the Feds lack revenue for essential programs, even TIA. Apparently the public is fixated on getting its child child credit get-back in the mail and the hell with national security. Except those who earner under $26.5K, the rich no-goodniks! How silly of them to think they could afford a baby.
So, lets get everyone some tax rebates, including the wealthy (who need it most), and forget who has to pay for what we have in the US.
When the marshalls leave your flights, it's because you decided to pocket the money and favor irresponsible tax cuts. Next fall, you'll get another opportunity to vote for that same national policy. Apparently most of you will, if the polls are accurate.
But please, no tears about the marshalls. Let them sleep in the airport lounge.
What's the offset is a plane goes down? $104M?
Yes, this cut comes at a time when intelligence suggests more five-person teams taking over airliners.
Lets examine the larger issue: Bush cut taxes, and now the Feds lack revenue for essential programs, even TIA. Apparently the public is fixated on getting its child child credit get-back in the mail and the hell with national security. Except those who earner under $26.5K, the rich no-goodniks! How silly of them to think they could afford a baby.
So, lets get everyone some tax rebates, including the wealthy (who need it most), and forget who has to pay for what we have in the US.
When the marshalls leave your flights, it's because you decided to pocket the money and favor irresponsible tax cuts. Next fall, you'll get another opportunity to vote for that same national policy. Apparently most of you will, if the polls are accurate.
But please, no tears about the marshalls. Let them sleep in the airport lounge.
Jul 30th, 2003, 10:38 AM
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Doc, upbeat? positive? about the tax cut? The marshalls? I'm sorry - what can I say to help you feel better about everything you see on this website. Sorry to have disappointed you. I took my cut and spent it on moi. But I'd prefer that the government spent it on something useful. Is that okay? You can vote for W next year, and that will make you feel all good again.
Jul 30th, 2003, 11:05 AM
#15
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that the problems with the TIA budget, as well as other programs are a direct result of Bush's irresponsible tax cuts. I am glad to have read Jack O'neill's earlier post from today that the Government has decided to put air marshalls back on the transcontinental flights. These are the flights most at risk.
I also think that we should take some lessons from the Israelis and begin to interrogate passesngers as they do and use profiling to better detect a terrorist.
Sealing up the borders is also a very improtant issue. Apparently as the law stands currently, anyone making a connecting flight through the US does not need a visa. I hope that the government changes this policy to better insure our safety. Safety is something that we should not put a dollar figure on. It is priceless. Maybe if we repealed the tax cuts for the wealthy and weren't spending $40 million a month in Iraq we wouldn't be in such a budget crisis.
I also think that we should take some lessons from the Israelis and begin to interrogate passesngers as they do and use profiling to better detect a terrorist.
Sealing up the borders is also a very improtant issue. Apparently as the law stands currently, anyone making a connecting flight through the US does not need a visa. I hope that the government changes this policy to better insure our safety. Safety is something that we should not put a dollar figure on. It is priceless. Maybe if we repealed the tax cuts for the wealthy and weren't spending $40 million a month in Iraq we wouldn't be in such a budget crisis.
Jul 30th, 2003, 11:16 AM
#16
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apparently, the potential new threat may come directly from those entering the US (on a flight, for instance, from Rio to Atlanta, continuing to London) without a VISA.
Security is now (finally) supposed to keep closer tabs on the non-VISA people. Some airports have designated "lounges" in which the non-VISA holders are to wait for their connecting flight.
I guess before they could just go anywhere they pleased.
Jul 30th, 2003, 11:22 AM
#17
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Protect America remaining American! Our fathers gave their blood and lives for our freedom and "WE" are responsible to protect our Constitution and respect the sacrifices made for us, that it may be restored for our children's, children's children!
Jul 30th, 2003, 12:09 PM
#18
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Planet Earth to Smileworld: Bush's tax cut is more important than the fight against terrorists? I think public opinion is about 100 to 1 the other way.
Agreed that airline safety begins on the ground and that American airline travelers are more prepared to intervene in situations (like those courageous people did on Air France). I usually size up a few fellows before boarding and try to make chitchat, just to try to get an idea who might be an asset if it ever came to it.
Agreed that airline safety begins on the ground and that American airline travelers are more prepared to intervene in situations (like those courageous people did on Air France). I usually size up a few fellows before boarding and try to make chitchat, just to try to get an idea who might be an asset if it ever came to it.
Jul 30th, 2003, 12:13 PM
#19
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aren't there transit areas for those passengers connecting thru the US between two foreign airports? I believe they'd have to go thru an immigration check in order to leave the transit area. I don't think they can just 'go anywhere'.
