[anupmathur]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

Consider another example: Indian authorities consider it necessary to arrest an airplane. Their airforce fighters will escort that plane to the airport determined by India. The pilot of that plane would have to do as instructed.

For "India" in my examples and reasoning, substitute any nationality or territory, the reasoning must be the same.

Thad, the example you have given is a bit tricky.
When do fighter planes 'escort' an airplane to force land at an airport?
Answer: When that craft has already committed an offence like being in a country's airspace without clearance from the relevant authority.
That does not detract from the fact that the craft remains territory of the flag state. The pilot/commander would have to do as instructed since he is considered to be a violator of a law/code of conduct. He is, in fact, 'under arrest'!

[joslicx]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

It does not make any sense to suggest that a country ends at passport control. There is a whole, big, thriving community in the airport beyond that point. What law are they subject to? What authority primarily investigates accidents involving aircraft at Indian airports?

This jurist (utterly unqualified, of course ) would suggest that you are in India whilst you remain in Indian airspace, and that you are subject to Indian law.

Consider another example: Indian authorities consider it necessary to arrest an airplane. Their airforce fighters will escort that plane to the airport determined by India. The pilot of that plane would have to do as instructed.

For "India" in my examples and reasoning, substitute any nationality or territory, the reasoning must be the same.

Dont know about other people but once your passport is stamped then I think its a different situation. Probably the 'others' have some special permissions etc? I'll try to find from somebody in AAI...

Anybody seen that Tom Hanks movie (The Terminal it was I think?)

[CaliAtenza]

CO issued the apology..but on its website, TSA states this:

''TSA requires that all passengers and their accessible property are screened for any items listed on the prohibited items list. There are reports that the government of India has an official list of VIPs and their spouses that are exempt from pre-board screening procedures. However, such a list does not mirror US requirements for passengers that are exempted from pre-board screening when travelling aboard US commercial aircraft. While travelling from an international location to the US on an US commercial aircraft, former heads of state and other VIPs, are screened according to the same screening procedures as for any other passenger.''

The statement adds that if required, private screening would be made available to such dignitaries on request. TSA has stated that its review of the incident confirms that Continental was only following TSA regulations. "

[RX135]

Originally Posted by CaliAtenza

CO issued the apology..but on its website, TSA states this:
''TSA requires that all passengers and their accessible property are screened for any items listed on the prohibited items list.
<snip>...
TSA has stated that its review of the incident confirms that Continental was only following TSA regulations. "

Good for TSA!

Let them follow their rules and we'll follow ours Simple, isn't it? Since it is on Indian soil, our rules take preference over their. It can be exactly opposite when the aircraft is in US.

[ASHISHPALLOD]

Originally Posted by RX135

Good for TSA!

Let them follow their rules and we'll follow ours Simple, isn't it? Since it is on Indian soil, our rules take preference over their.

Exactly,
i was trying to say that thing but some posts here is like......

one should understand pride of nation, protocol and dignity of ex president but.....

[CaliAtenza]

Originally Posted by RX135

Good for TSA!

Let them follow their rules and we'll follow ours Simple, isn't it? Since it is on Indian soil, our rules take preference over their. It can be exactly opposite when the aircraft is in US.

True and i agree with you, but what if the aircraft is denied entry to the US because they didnt screen every passenger?, regardless if that passenger is on exemption list. Indeed, While travelling from an international location to the US on an US commercial aircraft, former heads of state and other VIPs, are screened according to the same screening procedures as for any other passenger.'' So i guess this applies to India as well.

[anupmathur]

Originally Posted by CaliAtenza

True and i agree with you, but what if the aircraft is denied entry to the US because they didnt screen every passenger?, regardless if that passenger is on exemption list. ....

That is why these matters are generally reciprocal arrangements!

[CaliAtenza]

Originally Posted by anupmathur

That is why these matters are generally reciprocal arrangements!

well knowing the TSA it may not be reciprocal...

[amitk26]

In last two years I have traveled 8 times to USA taking transit at either frankfurt , Narita , Hethrow and Inchon as per the route before final leg of the journey.

The Security check was done for hand carried baggage and passengers are required to pass through metal detectors only at the airport before passengers reach boarding gate At no point frisking was involved or any additional security check was done on aerobridge.

Other traveling to US can verify this.

how come this particular TSA requirement is not enforced on those airports and they relied on Ground security of Airport rather then extra staff just to frisk passengers before boarding aircraft. None of those planes from BA , Lufthansa , United, Korean Air or SIA were denied entry to US airports.

It is clear that manpower and landing slots do not cheap in Europe or Japan so they conveniently overlook TSA recommendation.

So this claim of mandatory TSA requirement must be followed is Bunkum. Even if it is TSA requirement on Indian soil Indian rules take precedence

Originally Posted by CaliAtenza

True and i agree with you, but what if the aircraft is denied entry to the US because they didnt screen every passenger?, regardless if that passenger is on exemption list. Indeed, While travelling from an international location to the US on an US commercial aircraft, former heads of state and other VIPs, are screened according to the same screening procedures as for any other passenger.'' So i guess this applies to India as well.

Originally Posted by anupmathur

That is why these matters are generally reciprocal arrangements!

[GTO]

Lets look at this incident from another perspective : Did Abdul Kalam want us to take away something from this incident?

Dr. Kalam, as an ex-premier citizen & leader of India, has taught us an incredibly essential lesson of life = that of Humility. I mean, here is a man with no false airs about his position, who willing adheres to an external protocol and walks away smilingly. All of us know very well how most of our ministers or celebrities would have behaved in a similar situation ("do you know who I am", "let me make one phone call and I'll have your licence cancelled" etc. etc. etc.). Leaving aside the potential moans & cries, Dr. Kalam didn't even so much as inform the media in April. He just went on with his job, clearly having more important things on his mind.

Indeed a lesson in greatness and sheer class, Dr. Kalam. We are indebted.

[T_Girl]

I would completely agree with that. He is a great guy. He could have thrown a tantrum or done just anything to display his clout but he was so modest just walked away as if nothing happened.I wish we could have few more guys like him in our social circuit.

[pjbiju]

Breach of protocol? Not right.

Protocol itself? Not right.

Dr. Kalam not making an issue of this? Absolutely right.

In my opinion, many of our protocols making politicians demi-Gods are perhaps legacies we carry from the British times. They should be abolished. Most of us crib when we have to stand by to make way for a political person's motorcade. Why make exceptions? We have politician's who smuggle people and who carry weapons/bullets in planes. So frisk everyone. Every rule for every one.

Interesting thoughts here - please read through them:
IBNLive : Sagarika Ghose's Blog : 'Don't you know I am a VIP?'
'Don't dare touch me. I am a VIP.':Politically Incorrect:Shobhaa De's blog-The Times Of India

[diabloo]

It appears like Kalam doesn't care for protocol. Look at the size of the chair in the picture below. Kalam was President & Commander-in-Chief of the Indian armed forces, when this photo was clicked. Where were objectors when Kalam was disgraced then?

Originally Posted by diabloo

Pity that Kalam didn't knew about the protocol. If he indeed knew it, then he must have protested and could have avoided embarrassment to Indian Govt.

[straightdrive]

Originally Posted by diabloo

It appears like Kalam doesn't care for protocol. Look at the size of the chair in the picture below. Kalam was President & Commander-in-Chief of the Indian armed forces, when this photo was clicked. Where were objectors when Kalam was disgraced then?

"Disgraced" seems too strong a word for this situation. I don't think Kalam would have minded sitting on a smaller chair.

[Spitfire]

We are taking this too far.

If the person involved is not bothered why do we need to create unneccassary issues. This shows how egoistic Indians are.