so, the terrorists win...

[Dalton]

Originally Posted by anitram

This is totally absurd. Business class travelers in particular are going to be thrilled about giving up 90 minutes of work time. WTF is even the point of paying for business class anymore in those circumstances?

I'm sure all terrorists will politely only act in the last hour of flight.

You realize they're still FLYING right?

[ntalwar]

Originally Posted by bigjohn2441

right, cause the civil liberties group from san francisco knows EXACTLY how CBP operates.

The pattern of complaints can't be ignored though - for every complaint filed, there are perhaps hundreds of incidents. I have a Chinese-American friend (a US citizen) who takes his family to China every so often, and he mentioned that he no longer flies in through SFO because of harassment there. I think even yolland had posted that she was "detained" in a room by CBP for a while, without explanation. The "very limited rights" at the border seems unconstitutional - it's as if anyone reentering the country is considered a suspect or something.

[anitram]

Originally Posted by Dalton

You realize they're still FLYING right?

What?

[blueeyedgirl]

Originally Posted by KhanadaRhodes

it's okay because australia's fucking awesome and the us sucks and americans are stupid.

We have that printed at every Australian airport

[Liesje]

Ironic that my brother in law is on the "watch list" for air travel and is usually pulled aside for additional search and questioning, but this clown was not even after being reported by his own father.

My solution involves a lot more dogs, since people apparently are not doing the job. Let a dog work every bag.

[martha]

I'd rather be sniffed by a dog than body-scanned by some random clown from the TSA.

[bigjohn2441]

Originally Posted by martha

So if we all insist that these new procedures are fucking stupid, and we fill out the little cards, they'll stop?

im talking about customs & immigration stuff. the "new procedures" you speak of are most likely the new TSA and airline guidelines. again compairing TSA to Customs is also apples and oranges.

[bigjohn2441]

Originally Posted by ntalwar

The "very limited rights" at the border seems unconstitutional - it's as if anyone reentering the country is considered a suspect or something.

actually it is the constitution that gives them that power.

US Constitution Annotated - Border Searches

[AliEnvy]

Originally Posted by bigjohn2441

it's nothing personal, they are just being vigilant and doing their jobs.

True. No matter how inconvenient, or how rude one or more of them might be (having a bad day or just being an ass), you're better off being ultra-cooperative and polite.

It's always been my impression from colleagues or friends who've had trouble that giving a customs official any type of grief - even in body language, tone or facial expressions - can get you flagged for extra attention in the future.

Is that true bigjohn?

[coolian2]

Originally Posted by martha

I'd rather be sniffed by a dog than body-scanned by some random clown from the TSA.

i'd rather be body scanned and through the lines in 10 minutes than the current 40+ minutes at almost all times for what gets done (completely ineffectively) now.

[ntalwar]

Originally Posted by AliEnvy

It's always been my impression from colleagues or friends who've had trouble that giving a customs official any type of grief - even in body language, tone or facial expressions - can get you flagged for extra attention in the future.

So involuntary facial expressions or tone (especially after a long flight) are considered grief? In that case everyone should rehearse in a monotone in advance. How about travelers who are ultra-cooperative and polite, and get a secondary search anyway for no good reason?

[KhanadaRhodes]

Originally Posted by ntalwar

So involuntary facial expressions or tone (especially after a long flight) are considered grief? In that case everyone should rehearse in a monotone in advance. How about travelers who are ultra-cooperative and polite, and get a secondary search anyway for no good reason?

they're just doing their job. if they're just asking standard questions and a person starts getting rude with them or something, i don't blame them for then asking more questions or something. i would imagine their belief in the matter is if you have nothing to hide, a few questions shouldn't bother you. if you start getting testy, then maybe you do. again, i'm not saying i think this or anything, but just what i'd imagine they find out in training or something.

[ntalwar]

Originally Posted by KhanadaRhodes

they're just doing their job. if they're just asking standard questions and a person starts getting rude with them or something, i don't blame them for then asking more questions or something. i would imagine their belief in the matter is if you have nothing to hide, a few questions shouldn't bother you. if you start getting testy, then maybe you do. again, i'm not saying i think this or anything, but just what i'd imagine they find out in training or something.

I'm referring to situations in which they go beyond the standard criteria, and bring in personal biases or profiling, as has been alleged. I agree they're doing their job when they stick to the guidelines of their job description. When they exceed those guidelines, however, they are no longer doing their job.

[bigjohn2441]

Originally Posted by AliEnvy

Is that true bigjohn?

how am i supposed to know?

yeah, certain body language can be indicators that the person is up to something. however, the officer must take into account the person could be tired, cranky, etc etc and isnt doing anything wrong. and just because a passenger gives you shit doesnt always mean they are hiding something, and doesnt always mean the officer will use that as reason for further inspection. 9 times out of 10 they will say "have a nice day" and send them down the road, as long as everything else is ok. it's the officer's descretion.

[bigjohn2441]

Originally Posted by ntalwar

How about travelers who are ultra-cooperative and polite, and get a secondary search anyway for no good reason?

might be random inspections, issues with their documents, matching a name or description of someone they are looking for, etc etc.

[A stor]

Originally Posted by MoodyJ

I still don't understand why these restrictions only apply during the last 60-90 minutes of flight time. What about the other 6+ hours or so?

I understand the need for enhanced security, however adding these latest measures just makes the thought of flying completely unbearable. I can easily see where the only people deterred from flying will be regular travelers. Terrorists won't care, they'll simply adjust their plans accordingly.

I agree. Sadly, these terrorist have come up with methods of killing. None of us would even think of. Is it true, that the man in question, didn't have a passport and was allowed to board the plane?

[AliEnvy]

Originally Posted by bigjohn2441

it's the officer's descretion.

Exactly.

Similar to a regular cop who may or may not give you a full speeding ticket when you get caught depending on your previous record and how honest etc. you are when he approaches.

[MrsSpringsteen]

Originally Posted by A stor

Is it true, that the man in question, didn't have a passport and was allowed to board the plane?

Allegedly that's true, and he allegedly had some other man with him who told the person at the counter that he didn't have a passport but he had to get on the plane. That's what at least one eyewitness said. He bought a one way ticket, paid for in cash and supposedly had no luggage.

It certainly appears that there were multiple failures in that situation. But gee, the system worked. Oh yeah, that statement was taken out of context..

[martha]

Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen

Allegedly that's true, and he allegedly had some other man with him who told the person at the counter that he didn't have a passport but he had to get on the plane.

Are you fucking kidding me? He had no passport and somebody let him get on the plane? WTF????

[INDY500]

"As I’ve watched the events of the last few days it is clear once again that President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war. He seems to think if he has a low-key response to an attempt to blow up an airliner and kill hundreds of people, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if we bring the mastermind of Sept. 11 to New York, give him a lawyer and trial in civilian court, we won’t be at war.

“He seems to think if he closes Guantanamo and releases the hard-core Al Qaeda-trained terrorists still there, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gets rid of the words, ‘war on terror,’ we won’t be at war. But we are at war and when President Obama pretends we aren’t, it makes us less safe. Why doesn’t he want to admit we’re at war? It doesn’t fit with the view of the world he brought with him to the Oval Office. It doesn’t fit with what seems to be the goal of his presidency — social transformation — the restructuring of American society. President Obama’s first object and his highest responsibility must be to defend us against an enemy that knows we are at war."

-- Dick Cheney

Once again Cheney nails it.