Marines not welcome in Oakland Airport

[SMiTTY]

Anyone else see the blurb on Fox News a bit ago? I tell you I'm absolutely fuming! :flipoff: California!

-- snip --
From : http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,298842,00.html

John Edwards always talks about "two Americas," but I don't think he's talking about these two Americas.

On a flight from Phoenix to San Antonio, a flight attendant came back to coach and quietly informed a young soldier returning from Iraq that a woman in first class wanted to switch seats with him. He went to the front ? to the big seats and the hot lunch ? and the first class lady came back to his bag-of-peanuts coach seat.

Passengers around her applauded and a few were moved to tears. Acknowledging the applause the first class lady said simply: "I did it because he deserves it."

Cut to the San Francisco Bay Area where soldiers and Marines returning to their home base in Hawaii stopped for a layover, but found they were not welcome in the passenger terminal.

This comes from noted neocon Michael Ledeen in the National Review, who reports receiving an e-mail from a Marine chaplain returning with troops from Iraq. The chaplain said when troops got to Oakland International Airport in Oakland, California ? not far from San Francisco ? the welcome mat was not out:

"On September 27, 204 Marines and soldiers who were returning from Iraq were not allowed into the passenger terminal at Oakland International Airport. Instead they had to deplane about 400 yards away from the terminal where the extra baggage trailers were located."

This was not a security measure. After going through super-tight security, checking for contraband, ammunition and explosives in Kuwait, the soldiers and Marines had been allowed in the terminal building in Germany and at JFK in New York. But on the far-left coast they were quarantined from civilians.

This smacks of the bad old days in the Bay Area when returning Vietnam vets were spat upon. Some high-ranking military person should make sure it never happens again. Our Iraq vets should be welcome anywhere and everywhere.

That's My Word.

-- snip --

[UnlimitedFun]

That's just plain WRONG :mad:

[sweater]

That's My Word.

How angry can you get about an op-ed piece? No sources, no references, and it's Fox News.

:shrug:

- mike

[Pilot]

What crap. Who the hell authorized that at Oakland International? Heads should roll! I'm in San Fran right now on business and this place is a funny farm!

[SMiTTY]

How angry can you get about an op-ed piece? No sources, no references, and it's Fox News.

:shrug:

- mike

Are you fawkin kidding me! :flipoff2:

I saw it first on the TV, they were interviewing all kinds of Senators and shit. Both Dems/Reps are outraged!

Go put your head back in the sand!

[Steve]

How angry can you get about an op-ed piece? No sources, no references, and it's Fox News.

:shrug:

- mike

Wow. If it's true, does it matter what the source is Mike? Does it coming in an op-ed piece or Fox News make it okay? If it's proven to be true it's flat-ass wrong, and whoever made the decision should be unemployed - immediately.

[SMiTTY]

What crap. Who the hell authorized that at Oakland International? Heads should roll! I'm in San Fran right now on business and this place is a funny farm!

Amen to the funny farm ( oh wait, that might piss off the people in Boulder and California :flipoff2:)

I worked in SF for 2 years....That place is a loony bin!

:beer:

[Gags]

First of all, I'd like the interview substantiated meaning was it done for safety purposes. If it was done out of disrespect...Well, I'd actually put my hands on someone if I was there. Since I can't, I will believe that the person who made that call needs their ass kicked.

[DADA_JEEP]

was there ever a reason cited?

[Gags]

Further, I believe our people really love our troops. Almost everyone I know has someone they care about fighting. I really didn't think that people would be disrespecting them...Now the person who sent them...He's up for debate.

[Swat]

Outragious! Send the left wing radicals to the slaughter in having them try to defend our country. They are clueless!

There are two California's, the liberal coast and the sane folks inland. Don't lump them all together. The north tends to be more liberal than south as well.

[SMiTTY]

First of all, I'd like the interview substantiated meaning was it done for safety purposes. If it was done out of disrespect...Well, I'd actually put my hands on someone if I was there. Since I can't, I will believe that the person who made that call needs their ass kicked.

There is an investigation going on....But the low down was that they were able to get things to eat and use the restrooms and terminals just like anyone else when they landed in Germany and JFK....Not until they got to Oakland did the left wing weenies step into action and piss on OUR marines!

[SMiTTY]

Outragious! Send the left wing radicals to the slaughter in having them try to defend our country. They are clueless!

There are two California's, the liberal coast and the sane folks inland. Don't lump them all together. The north tends to be more liberal than south as well.

I concur.....I grew up in Elk Grove/Sacramento.

[Gags]

I'm shaking my head in a bit of amazement. I want someone to prove this false so I don't have to believe it. I take that disrespect of our sons and daughters seriously.

Why the hell would someone feel the need to give that order?

[sweater]

Wow. If it's true, does it matter what the source is Mike? Does it coming in an op-ed piece or Fox News make it okay? If it's proven to be true it's flat-ass wrong, and whoever made the decision should be unemployed - immediately.
Sure it matters what the source is. That article read more like an opinion than anything else, an inflammatory at that. Just remaining skeptical, is all...

- mike

[Steve]

I'm shaking my head in a bit of amazement. I want someone to prove this false so I don't have to believe it. I take that disrespect of our sons and daughters seriously.

Why the hell would someone feel the need to give that order?

It's true according to this ContraCosta Times newspaper article. (http://www.contracostatimes.com/ci_7063381) From the article:

Oakland International Airport officials admit that they prohibited a group of Marines from entering the passenger terminal during a layover Thursday, prompting conservative pundits and bloggers to hold up the incident as an example of the "Left Coast" dishonoring U.S. troops.
The airport says that the exclusion was based on security protocol and blamed a military-chartered airline for failing to make proper arrangements in advance.

It goes on to say that the airport "received information that the passengers were not screened by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) at their originating airport and that weapons were on-board the aircraft."

"Together with our security partners, the airport made a decision to park this aircraft at a remote location on the tarmac," the airport statement says. "It is the responsibility of the charter airline that its operation is compliant with TSA screening requirements."

The Transportation Security Administration disavowed any involvement in the incident, and further stated that the same troops were allowed off North American Airlines flight 1777, screened by U.S. Customs and permitted to enter New York's Kennedy Airport after arriving from overseas.

I'm not sure about the liberal accusations, but they did in fact pull one of the more boneheaded moves in a lot of years. Somebody from the airport needs to step up and admit they made a collosal mistake and apologize for it instead of trying to justify it.

Yes, it did really happen Mike. Apparently even Fox News doesn't always tell outright lies. :rolleyes:

[sweater]

Maybe sweater will believe it happened now since more than op-ed articles and Fox News say it happened.

Touch?. :D

This is clearly an example of how much California hates our troops.

- mike

[SCOUTMAN67]

Sounds like airport mgmt. was following TSA rules instead of using common sense.

[Jake_Blues]

Sounds like airport mgmt. was following TSA rules instead of using common sense.

I doubt the TSA would find any humor in the airport using common sense instead of following government regs under normal circumstances. I'm sure they are happy to disavow any active participation in this particular incident, but in general they don't seem to have a sense of humor.

I agree though, it sounds like they didn't get the right paperwork from the charter flight, and followed procedure.

-E

[DADA_JEEP]

sounds like airport mgmt blaming TSA (who isn't at fault and isn't taking any BS) for not screening, and the quote of "there were waeopns on board" well excuse me for point out the obvious...... NO SHIT THERE WERE WEAPONS ON BOARD, THEY ARE MARINES!!!!!

[Jeffro600]

I highly doubt that an airport is going to discriminate against military members just for the hell of it...theres got to be more to this story that someones not telling.

[FirecrackerKTM]

Come on you guys, take 2 seconds to look it up on Google News.

http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_7064236

Sounds like it was a mistake/security measure, not some evil left-wing plot.

Yeah, it sucked. But I don't think it was deliberate.

[sames]

Sure it matters what the source is. That article read more like an opinion than anything else, an inflammatory at that. Just remaining skeptical, is all...

- mike

Fox News is no different (better or worse) than any other media with an agenda. Why is it that you believe CNN or whomever and not Fox News? Is it because they present a point of view you don't agree with? Do you believe the lies others tell because you want to believe them. I have never understood why Fox is bad and CNN is good, unless you like hearing what you want to hear. I work with a recent journalism grad and she was "programed" to hate Fox and believe the NY Times and others like it totally and completely. It is not logical to believe neither has opinions and agendas that show up in their reporting. The news has always been presented with a "point of view". If you don't believe that, read the book about Henry Luce, If I remember correctly it is titled Luce, and how he blatantly managed reporting about China to serve his own purposes. It is only one example of news bias.

This abhorrent disrespect for men and women that protect and defend our country and its people disgusts me.

[Budman]

I highly doubt that an airport is going to discriminate against military members just for the hell of it...theres got to be more to this story that someones not telling.

Come on you guys, take 2 seconds to look it up on Google News.

http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_7064236

Sounds like it was a mistake/security measure, not some evil left-wing plot.

Yeah, it sucked. But I don't think it was deliberate.

The airline did not follow proper procedures, and there were weapons on board. The status of those weapons was not passed to the airport. This happens more than you might think. Traveling on commercial airlines with weapons into civilian airports is sticky.


Edit: Buy me a couple of beers sometime when you have a couple of hours to kill and I will tell you about traveling with weapons on commercial airlines.

[Jeffro600]

Thanks for clarifying budman! :thumbsup:

Someone needs to send foxnews's writer a STFU letter... :rolleyes:

Figured it was BS when he started a sob story about how proud "some" people are.

[Budman]

Thanks for clarifying budman! :thumbsup:

Someone needs to send foxnews's writer a STFU letter... :rolleyes:

Figured it was BS when he started a sob story about how proud "some" people are.

Well I saw the story early this morning on fox, and they played the entire story to incllude a statement from the airport, and the TSA.

[sames]

Thanks guys for clearing this up, I probably reacted too quickly. I still stand by my news comments

[signman2007]

Me being a former Marine that did a year in Saudi back in 1990 am appalled right now to here this BS. The person who made this decision should be forced to live in Iraq and never come back. This country is truely becoming more and more pathetic with these so called activist and anti-war pukes treating the soldiers bad when they don't even have enough damn sense to realize that its Bush's fault. These are the same people that would be begging for the soldiers protection if a terrorist was close by. I cannot think of a better word then PATHETIC and i would not piss on them if they were on fire!:mad:



[edit]Well I was so mad I jumped and posted my comment before reading the rest of the thread but even know there was an explanation it still happens and i still feel this way!!!!!

[Budman]

It only took 28 posts to blame it on bush.

[signman2007]

It only took 28 posts to blame it on bush.

Did you think it should have come sooner or not at all???

[TheCopperCowboy]

:popcorn: Cool avatar! :thumbsup:

[Steve]

It only took 28 posts to blame it on bush.

Dang, that's pretty good actually. :rolleyes:

I don't buy the liberal-bashing or that it was politically motivated, but whoever made the decision is a bonehead. If they didn't know what would happen when the news got out they're not smart enough to work at an airport.

[signman2007]

My comment that it is Bush's fault has nothing to do with what happened at the airport but the reason the soldiers are fighting a senseless war and its not the soldiers fault that they are over there but you still have moorons out there that take it out on the soldiers like its their decision to be there.

[sames]

My comment that it is Bush's fault has nothing to do with what happened at the airport but the reason the soldiers are fighting a senseless war and its not the soldiers fault that they are over there but you still have moorons out there that take it out on the soldiers like its their decision to be there.

Senseless war? And how do you know that with certainty? Have you thought that say, 20 years from now this "war" might have made a difference in our long term security. I don't know if that will turn out to be the case, but I do know there are many people, much more informed than you and I and they are making decisions about this country's security with information not available to the general public. Have you read or studied about Pres Truman firing Gen MacArthur? At the time it was a very unpopular decision. History has proven Truman made the correct decision. It is possible that long term thinking does not yield immediate popular results.

[SMiTTY]

You are way off base....Do some searching...It wasn't FOX that started the fawkin' story....Though they were smart enough to pick it up! Unlike the single point of view CNN station you worship.

I'll leave it at that....You ass-hats know who you are! :flipoff2:

[Oscar]

:popcorn: :beer:

[SMiTTY]

Me being a former Marine that did a year in Saudi back in 1990 am appalled right now to here this BS. The person who made this decision should be forced to live in Iraq and never come back. This country is truely becoming more and more pathetic with these so called activist and anti-war pukes treating the soldiers bad when they don't even have enough damn sense to realize that its Bush's fault. These are the same people that would be begging for the soldiers protection if a terrorist was close by. I cannot think of a better word then PATHETIC and i would not piss on them if they were on fire!:mad:



[edit]Well I was so mad I jumped and posted my comment before reading the rest of the thread but even know there was an explanation it still happens and i still feel this way!!!!!

Fully agree!!!

This shit just torques me....Growing up Military and serving from 91-97, I get so pissed when the ass-hats...MOST of which have never set foot outside this country, slap this country in the face. Maybe they need a 1-way ticket outta the states to the country of our choosing :flipoff2:

[CLYDE]

And people wonder why I get so angry at the sheeple that follow the liberal crap that the media forces down their throats every waking moment..

I cant really comment on this without using language that would get me banned from the board.:rant: :flipoff: :flipoff: :flipoff: :flipoff: :pissed:

[Jake_Blues]

And people wonder why I get so angry at the sheeple that follow the liberal crap that the media forces down their throats every waking moment..


As opposed to all the inbred rednecks that believe the conservative crap that radio hosts spew is the word of God :D The far right has just as many blind, deaf, and dumb followers as the far left.

-E

[TheCopperCowboy]

Hey! You all know me and perhaps the opposite holds true. Maybe, just MAYBE, the evil liberal media was at the airport waving American flags and flying a big banner that read "Welcome Home Troops!", and someone decided that the bias, evil, liberal media shouldn't be allowed to interview returning American troops for whatever reason. :mad: Normally, this is done at a military base for the very same reasons cited. Mostly, and lately I've noticed, it doesn't take much for some of you to fly off the handle and bang away at the keyboard anymore. What's the deal? Elections are still over a year away. :D

[CLYDE]

As opposed to all the inbred rednecks that believe the conservative crap that radio hosts spew is the word of God :D The far right has just as many blind, deaf, and dumb followers as the far left.

-E
Sorry if your talking about the drug addled one , I dont have much use for him, or any of the rest of the media, I get all my military news from the source, As the father of two service members, I have plenty of sources for the real stories, about whats happening in country, and elsewhere.

Funny you would comment about inbred rednecks :shrug:

When it comes to a story like this, My temper gets up pretty quick. I hope somebodies head rolls at that airport, whatever the reason was for it.

[CLYDE]

Hey! You all know me and perhaps the opposite holds true. Maybe, just MAYBE, the evil liberal media was at the airport waving American flags and flying a big banner that read "Welcome Home Troops!", and someone decided that the bias, evil, liberal media shouldn't be allowed to interview returning American troops for whatever reason. :mad: Normally, this is done at a military base for the very same reasons cited. Mostly, and lately I've noticed, it doesn't take much for some of you to fly off the handle and bang away at the keyboard anymore. What's the deal? Elections are still over a year away. :D
I could care less about the elections at this point, theres not a single candidate that is viable in my opinion at this point. But when it comes to mistreatment of our troops, your damned straight i will be banging away on the keyboard, and would express my rights to free speech physically to anyone I saw do it in person. As far as I am concerned all politicians are evil, as is the lying media.

[Jake_Blues]

When it comes to a story like this, My temper gets up pretty quick. I hope somebodies head rolls at that airport, whatever the reason was for it.

I think it's pretty clear from the news reports that this was just people doing their jobs. The CO on the airplane didn't object, and the airport was following security procedures. I know I've sat on board airplanes in airport holding areas for hours myself and no one claimed it was a travesty of justice.

It is only a news story because OTHER people want to turn it into a political statement. The only heads that should roll are the people on the outside who are trying to use this as a political tool.

Sorry if your talking about the drug addled one , I dont have much use for him, or any of the rest of the media, I get all my military news from the source, As the father of two service members, I have plenty of sources for the real stories, about whats happening in country, and elsewhere.

Funny you would comment about inbred rednecks :shrug:


You were lumping the liberals together as non-thinking sheep, and three-toothed rednecks were the first stereotypical conservative group that popped into mind. Just trying to be fair and balanced. You know, sheep and the rednecks that love them, they just go together.

As far as I am concerned all politicians are evil, as is the lying media.

On that, we can agree :D

-E

[Yota]

I'm not sure who made that call but this also smacks of some 20-yr-old airport lackey blindly following some overbroad rule.

But make no mistake - there are plenty of people out there who really do NOT support the troops. In fact, we're seeing more and more outright animosity toward and attacks upon the troops.

But Oakland deserves to have some light shined upon it over this. We'll find out what the real story is. I'll reserve my full-scale ire until I get more details.

[TheCopperCowboy]

...and with that we can all find relief. :flipoff2:

[Yota]

...and with that we can all find relief. :flipoff2:

Damn right. :flipoff2:

[Joker]

Just a little more info....

http://michellemalkin.com/2007/09/30/what-happened-to-our-troops-in-oakland/

By Michelle Malkin ? September 30, 2007 10:58 AM

Two days ago, an e-mail about the rude treatment of Marines and soldiers returning from Iraq started making the rounds on the Internet. The brother of one of the mistreated troops who described the incident at Oakland Airport works on the Hill. The brother forwarded his family member?s e-mail around. The e-mail is real, contrary to the Daily Kos (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/9/29/19643/6091) nut who dismissed it as ?fake? without any evidence whatsoever (can you say p-r-o-j-e-c-t-i-o-n (http://michellemalkin.com/2007/08/08/winter-soldier-syndrome/)). I contacted the Navy chaplain who serves with the Marines to verify the e-mail on Friday. He confirmed.
You can read the whole thing here (http://www.ocblog.net/ocblog/2007/09/oakland-airport.html) or here (http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Mjk1NDAxMWZjNDhhODI2Mjc5Nzk1MWMzNWIyYTI0NjY=) at The Corner from Michael Ledeen.
In short: ?On September 27th 204 Marines and soldiers who were returning from Iraq were not allowed into the passenger terminal at Oakland International Airport.Instead they had to deplane about 400 yards away from the terminal where the extra baggage trailers were located. This was the last scheduled stop for fuel and food prior to flying to Hawaii where both were based. The trip started in Kuwait on September 26th with a rigorous search of checked and carry on baggage by US Customs. All baggage was x-rayed with a ?backscatter? machine AND each bag was completely emptied and hand searched. After being searched, checked bags were marked and immediately placed in a secure container. Carry on bags were then x rayed again to ensure no contraband items were taken on the plane. While waiting for the bus to the airport, all personnel were in quarantined in a fenced area and were not allowed to leave.? Nevertheless, Oakland forbade them from entering its terminal. According to the Marine, a Lieutenant who served in Afghanistan with the same unit in 2006 noted that Oakland had treated troops the same way before. He ?was almost arrested by the TSA for getting belligerent about them not letting the Marines into the terminal,? despite more rigorous screening prior to landing in Oakland. Both JFK airport and in Germany had no problem with the Marines entering their terminals.
I have also obtained the Port of Oakland?s response about the incident to Captain David Epstein of the Reserve Officers Association. The Port official blames a lack of ?clear communication? from the charter airline hired by the military. In other words: it?s the troops? fault:
Thank you so much for sharing with me the information you had regarding the incident at the airport. As you know sometimes the way things appear initially regarding an incident turn out to be different after looking into the details. We checked into this once you had called me and raised your public relations concern, so again thank you. Here is the background information I have about the incident as well as the procedures and policies that affected decision-making that day.
In the case of North American Airlines Flight #1777, a military charter flight that arrived at OAK on Thursday, September 27, aircraft parking and passenger service arrangements were coordinated and approved in advance between the ground handling company and Airside Operations. The airport received information that the passengers were not TSA-screened
at their originating airport and that weapons were on-board the aircraft. Together with our security partners, the airport made a decision to park this aircraft at a remote location on the tarmac. It is the responsibility of the charter airline that its operation is compliant with TSA screening requirements.
Upon landing and parking at OAK, the pilot-in-command advised the ground handling company that the parking and passenger handling provisions did not meet expectations. Upon learning this, Airside Operations and Aviation Security worked with the ground handling company and other law enforcement partners to coordinate a plan that was satisfactory to the pilot and passengers, and which was compliant with all airport safety and security standards.
Oakland International Airport (OAK) makes customer service a priority for all its passengers, whether they are traveling on commercial, military or general aviation aircraft. Charter airlines operating at OAK can choose to contract with a number of ground handling companies. Ground handlers coordinate flight services such as passenger handling, and aircraft fueling, cleaning and catering. It is the responsibility of ground handling companies to communicate aircraft and passenger operational needs to OAK?s Airside Operations Office in advance so that special accommodations can be coordinated to ensure that all airport operational, safety and security concerns are addressed.
The scheduled arrival and departure time of the flight is set by the aircraft operator. Time is needed to refuel the aircraft, perform maintenance inspections, refresh the catering, and give passengers time to stretch to break-up long travel periods. An analysis of the incident and prior correspondence between OAK?s Airside Operations and the ground handler determined that the airport did not receive clear communication in advance from the charter airline that was hired by the military.
I am out of town starting tomorrow for a convention. If you have any further inquiries about this incident and the way it was handled, Rosemary Barnes who is part of our Public Affairs team would be happy to speak with you. You may also call Joanne Holloway, the acting manager of the Port?s Community and Customer Relations Department.
Kindest regards,
Marilyn Sandifur
Port Spokesperson
Port of Oakland
?The airport did not receive clear communication? is not a satisfactory explanation. The bottom line is that Oakland officials made the final decision (?the airport made a decision to park this aircraft at a remote location on the tarmac?). The Port of Oakland?s p.r. flacks have passed the buck and seem to believe they can blow off this incident without bothering to apologize to the troops who felt mistreated and without pledging to ensure that the troops are received properly the next time they touch down at that airport.

[Gags]

Did you think it should have come sooner or not at all???

Sorry if it seems like a hijack but I work with American McGee and Ken Wong. They are the guys who created your avatar. They have done three wine labels for me.

[Jake_Blues]

The Port official blames a lack of ?clear communication? from the charter airline hired by the military. In other words: it?s the troops? fault


How the hell do you make the leap from "the charter airline didn't communicate with us" to "it's the troops' fault"? Sounds like another biased reporting job. No, a lack of "clear communication" from the charter airline = the charter airline's fault, not the troops.


In the case of North American Airlines Flight #1777, a military charter flight that arrived at OAK on Thursday, September 27, aircraft parking and passenger service arrangements were coordinated and approved in advance between the ground handling company and Airside Operations. The airport received information that the passengers were not TSA-screened
at their originating airport and that weapons were on-board the aircraft. Together with our security partners, the airport made a decision to park this aircraft at a remote location on the tarmac. It is the responsibility of the charter airline that its operation is compliant with TSA screening requirements.

Upon landing and parking at OAK, the pilot-in-command advised the ground handling company that the parking and passenger handling provisions did not meet expectations. Upon learning this, Airside Operations and Aviation Security worked with the ground handling company and other law enforcement partners to coordinate a plan that was satisfactory to the pilot and passengers, and which was compliant with all airport safety and security standards.

Oakland International Airport (OAK) makes customer service a priority for all its passengers, whether they are traveling on commercial, military or general aviation aircraft. Charter airlines operating at OAK can choose to contract with a number of ground handling companies. Ground handlers coordinate flight services such as passenger handling, and aircraft fueling, cleaning and catering. It is the responsibility of ground handling companies to communicate aircraft and passenger operational needs to OAK?s Airside Operations Office in advance so that special accommodations can be coordinated to ensure that all airport operational, safety and security concerns are addressed.

Sounds to me like the howling mad witch hunters who think that someone must hate the troops should be looking at the ground handling company that the charter service used. They were the ones responsible for making all this happen, by all accounts I've read.

I'm sorry, but if I'm an airport operator and I'm told a plane landed with unscreened passengers with possible weapons on board, you can bet your sweet ass I'm not gonna just let them pull up to a gate and unload. Now, if the people on the plane WERE TSA screened, then whoever passed that bit of misinformation along should be the one getting grilled, and it sounds to me like that was the ground handling company, not the airport officials.

-E

[Swat]

No good explanation! Once they landed and did know it was a military charter some ^&#$*&(*! made a very bad decision!

It should have been a simple as this. "Oh it's a military charter"? "Let me double check this. "What were the prior stops"? Call and check it out. "Oh sorry for the delay." "Procede to the gate and deplane".

Glad they saved Oakland from those gun toting Marines!

Oakland is gay!

[Yota]

Yeah this sounds like a typical bureaucracy problem where everyone is supposedly following orders but no one is thinking. Mindlessness.

Communications problems DO happen and they can cause a lot of problems. But there has to be more accountability on the part of OAK. Sounds like there was no one thinking outside the box that day. I don't see any evidence of hatred of the troops tho.

[Trango]

BTW "Military" doesn't necessarily mean US military... there are plenty of cross pollination exercises that bring foreign service people to the states.

No judgement on OAK actions.

[sweater]

I don't buy the liberal-bashing or that it was politically motivated, but whoever made the decision is a bonehead.

I guess I should have clarified my point about that first post, the first references article, and Fox News in general, then.

The original article referenced was so obviously biased as to have a high probability of inaccuracy. Even the title of this thread "Marines not welcome in Oakland Airport" and the ensuing comments about "left wing weenies piss on our Marines" was just knee-jerk stoking of the anti-liberal fires.

I never doubted that the incident happened, I just think it's pretty retarded that people were jumping to the conclusion that the political leanings of an entire state caused this situation, followed by the way-overused bashing and defamation of "liberals" when it seems that it was more security-related than anything else.

Yup, someone [I]really screwed up. But in the day when you're dumping out your water bottle for some stupid fear-mongering reason before the security checkpoint at the airport, does anything really think that the possibility that there was a planeload of people with actual, real-live firearms sitting on the tarmac wouldn't have had any possibility of overreaction?

:shrug:

Tell people that they need to be scared of anything over 3oz of hand lotion long enough and you're bound to get some unintended consequences, methinks.

- mike

[Trango]

True story - I was in an airport recently, and behind a column next to the queue for security, someone had left a bottle of water. You see that alot.

What you don't also see is that right next to the waterbottle is a half-full handle of Canadian whiskey.

That, friends, is dedication to a pasttime. "Whoops, forgot I had THIS in there!"

[Tom N]

1. Whatever the reasoning, this was a regrettable incident, somebody messed up somewhere.
2. I grew uo in the SF bay area, San Jose to be exact, and comparing Oakland to San Francisco is like comparing Aurora to Boulder. :D :stirpot:

[Batgirl]

Seems stupid? Yes. But they were following protocol in Oakland.

The charter airline blew it by not coordinating security procedures properly- it's unfortunate that the Marines paid the price.

We could start a whole thread on this kind of thing- stupid security rules and ridiculous applications: a Marine Honor guard who was strip-searched while escorting the remains of a fallen brother; Marines having their Leathermans and pocket knives confiscated while being allowed to carry their loaded rifles; the Marine being put on a terrorist "no-fly" list because his boots had shown gunpowder residue on a previous flight (He's a MARINE! Gunpowder on his boots? Imagine that!)

Viva the TSA and the Patriot Act, right? Can't have it both ways. :(

[Gags]

Seems stupid? Yes. But they were following protocol in Oakland.

The charter airline blew it by not coordinating security procedures properly- it's unfortunate that the Marines paid the price.

We could start a whole thread on this kind of thing- stupid security rules and ridiculous applications: a Marine Honor guard who was strip-searched while escorting the remains of a fallen brother; Marines having their Leathermans and pocket knives confiscated while being allowed to carry their loaded rifles; the Marine being put on a terrorist "no-fly" list because his boots had shown gunpowder residue on a previous flight (He's a MARINE! Gunpowder on his boots? Imagine that!)

Viva the TSA and the Patriot Act, right? Can't have it both ways. :(

Good post :beer:

[sweater]

We could start a whole thread on this kind of thing- stupid security rules and ridiculous applications: a Marine Honor guard who was strip-searched while escorting the remains of a fallen brother; Marines having their Leathermans and pocket knives confiscated while being allowed to carry their loaded rifles; the Marine being put on a terrorist "no-fly" list because his boots had shown gunpowder residue on a previous flight (He's a MARINE! Gunpowder on his boots? Imagine that!)

Viva the TSA and the Patriot Act, right? Can't have it both ways. :(

x eleventy Brazilians, Batgirl.

:thumbsup:

- mike

PS: Mmmmm... Brazilians....

[ZappBranigan]

This whole thing has been overblown. It's not an instance of anti-military bias, it's just bureacracy and rigid adherence to policies without tempering them with common sense. It happens all the time. I've run into it myself.

In 2003 I was mobilized with a small group from my NG unit to deploy to Afghanistan after the main body had already departed. Because we were a small group (about 8 of us) we flew commercial from Colorado Springs to Atlanta, where we would pick up an AMC (AKA MAC) flight to Germany and from there a C-17 to Afghanistan.

This was right after they started requiring random searches of bags for residue of explosives. So they pulled me out and had me dump one of my bags. It happened to be the bag that had my LBV (Load Bearing Vest - the vest that carries combat equipment including weapon magazines). So they took my LBV and they swiped it with their pad, and put it in the reader. Holy Crap! A positive hit for explosives residue! :eek:

Well, No Shit, Sherlock! I had spent the previous day at the range putting about 500 rounds through an M-4 Carbine and then putting the magazines back in my vest! :rolleyes: So that meant they had to test everything else in my bag and go through all kinds of other stupid procedures. We were in civilian clothes but had all our military gear and uniforms, duffle bags, etc - it was pretty obvious we were military folks on our way overseas. But the TSA clowns had a set of rules to adhere to, and by God they were going to adhere to them.

What can you do? That's the government for you. :shrug:

[Yucca-Man]

We could start a whole thread on this kind of thing- stupid security rules and ridiculous applications: a Marine Honor guard who was strip-searched while escorting the remains of a fallen brother; Marines having their Leathermans and pocket knives confiscated while being allowed to carry their loaded rifles; the Marine being put on a terrorist "no-fly" list because his boots had shown gunpowder residue on a previous flight (He's a MARINE! Gunpowder on his boots? Imagine that!)

Viva the TSA and the Patriot Act, right? Can't have it both ways. :(Don't forget Gen Joe Foss, USMC, MOH who was stopped by the morons with TSA because he was travilling with a pointy object:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/74/Moh_right.gif

TSA, Patriot Act, Department of Homeland inSecurity...all a buncha feel-good motions without teeth (or in the case of the Patriot Act, teeth in the wrong place).

[Jake_Blues]

My favorite is the shoes. They've x-rayed eleventeen kajillion pairs of shoes after ONE FREAKIN GUY tried to light the fuse on his Chuck Taylors. Come on retards! Your violent knee jerk reactions to past failed bombing attempts aren't fooling anyone. Muhammad Q. Public and his friends can still bring half a dozen three ounce containers each filled with bomb making materials on board. You ain't solving shit! And yes, we all love paying for this idiocy through our "9/11 fees".

I once asked the guy if I had to take my shoes off or not. He said, "No, you don't, but we would have to give you extra screening".

"Would this extra screening involve removing my shoes?"

"Yes"

"So, um, senior dipshit, that would mean that I *do* have to remove my shoes, now wouldn't it, huh now?"

I didn't include that last bit in the actual conversation, though, since I value my rectum and don't want a man's rubber gloved hand in it.

-E

[Da Kine]

What 'sane' person would ever think that a group of Marines would be a security risk? These are the very people that are the security details for all of our embassies around the world. These are the very men and women who put their lives on the line to keep us safe.
Whoever made this decision needs to be marched down to the Marine base in San Diego for a lesson in what it means to be a Marine. No one, I repeat, no one has any grounds to say that Marines are anything other than the bravest of the brave and the best force in our military or any other military. Those men and women are THE example of Honor and commitment.
I spent 20 years on Submarines and folks thought I had it hard, but it was nothing compared to what they go through.
Whoever made that call, needs to get down on their hands and knees and lick the dust off the boots of those Marines they disgraced and beg for their forgiveness.

[Funrover]

Amen to the funny farm ( oh wait, that might piss off the people in Boulder and California :flipoff2:)

I worked in SF for 2 years....That place is a loony bin!

:beer:
I don't care if it pisses em off!!!
:flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2:

California has some serious issues!!! as does boulder!

[Leon Phelps]

I don't care if it pisses em off!!!
:flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2:

California has some serious issues!!! as does boulder!

Some of us former residents arent bleeding heart liberals who want weed, free love & peta to flourish. :flipoff2:

[Pilot]

OK, lets be real. All these security measures and the TSA (thousands standing around) are just feel good measures to give the APPEARANCE of doing something. None of them address the real security risk of buying off service employees who make minimum wage to plant a device on a plane or in an aiport. That is the real risk. A custodian, food service worker, mechanic, baggage handler, etc can be persuaded to plant something if give enough $$$. I can't believe it hasn't happened yet.

[Gags]

OK, lets be real. All these security measures and the TSA (thousands standing around) are just feel good measures to give the APPEARANCE of doing something. None of them address the real security risk of buying off service employees who make minimum wage to plant a device on a plane or in an aiport. That is the real risk. A custodian, food service worker, mechanic, baggage handler, etc can be persuaded to plant something if give enough $$$. I can't believe it hasn't happened yet.

After 9-11 my father was offered the job to run airport security for the Country. He turned it down because he didn't feel like we could TRULY make it safer. He did get legislation passed that required bomb dogs at all international airports.

[Funrover]

Some of us former residents arent bleeding heart liberals who want weed, free love & peta to flourish. :flipoff2:


I know..... but you are also "FORMER" residents.. I have friends in CA and from CA.... but most of the ones I meet....... I can't stand!

[Steve]

He did get legislation passed that required bomb dogs at all international airports.

If there's such a law, where are all the dogs? I've never seen one at a US airport. They're quite visible at European airports. :shrug:

[Gags]

If there's such a law, where are all the dogs? I've never seen one at a US airport. They're quite visible at European airports. :shrug:

Steve, that was back in the early 90's. Things may have changed. At the time it was only airports that accepted international flights.

[Pilot]

If there's such a law, where are all the dogs? I've never seen one at a US airport. They're quite visible at European airports. :shrug:

I was in Toronto recently and the Canadians had bomb sniffing dogs as we were going through customs. One woman was using a German Shorthaired Pointer which I also have. I asked her about it and she gave me the weirdest, suprised look. Guess they're not used to people talking to them.

[Batgirl]

If there's such a law, where are all the dogs? I've never seen one at a US airport. They're quite visible at European airports. :shrug:

All of the U.S. International airports have bomb-sniffing dogs.

Here's an article from 2/2007, stating that there are 420 dogs being used through the TSA at our airports.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-02-18-security-dogs_x.htm

A San Jose Police Officer client of mine handles/owns one of the bomb-sniffing dogs at the SJ international airport. You will rarely see them out and about at the public areas of the airport, but believe me, they're there.

Working dogs get tired easily. Instead of using the dogs as visible security deterrents (which has it's merits) they use the dogs to work the bags.

[Steve]

All of the U.S. International airports have bomb-sniffing dogs.

Again, I ask, where are they? I fly through international airports a LOT. For example, I fly to/from Atlanta at least once/month. (Not just through with connecting flights, but to/from.) I have never, ever, seen one there - ever. If they're only in the non-public baggage handling areas, that does no good at all for passengers and carry-on baggage.

I have seen them in customs and other public areas, including at the gate while boarding, at European airports, but never at any airport in the U.S. :shrug:

[Tom N]

The only time I have ever seen a sniffer dog at an airport was back in 1999 at the Atlanta airport while going through customs. I figured it for a drug sniffing dog back then. It was a Beagle.

[sweater]

OK, lets be real. All these security measures and the TSA (thousands standing around) are just feel good measures to give the APPEARANCE of doing something.

When I think of the words "feel" and "good" together in the same sentence, I sure do picture some sort of fantasy like Kate Beckinsale (http://images.google.com/images?q=kate+beckinsale&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&sa=N&tab=wi) getting frisked by the TSA in LA...

WAIT! It's not a fantasy!

http://www.planetbantz.com/imghost/co4x4/100407katebeckinsale.jpg

More pics here (http://www.wwtdd.com/post.phtml?pk=2966) (site NSFW for some language, possibly some ads or something)

God knows how much we need to protect our borders from hot limey vampire chicks.

- mike

[Steve]

I hate flying in/out/through LAX. Perhaps I should change my mind on that. :D

[Budman]

TSA is actually working on aquiring more dogs at a high rate. The problem is they Have a seperate set of requirements for training than your average run of the mil LE dog. We got a flyer at work a while ago asking for volunteer families to keep TSA dogs for 6 months to a year to get them used to human contact. We thought about it, but I got the orders.