| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Oakland Airport found legitimate in troop treatment |
| 2008-02-01 |
| The Oakland International Airport did not break any laws or regulations when it denied 200 Marines and soldiers access to the passenger terminal during a layover last year from Iraq to the troops' home base in Hawaii, the Transportation Department says. Isn't that always the case with these pricks? Calvin L. Scovell III, the department's inspector general, blamed the mix-up on security concerns and a communication failure between the Defense Department and the Homeland Security Department. Of course. Not the pinheads who made the decision to treat them like criminals. The contract to allow military layovers at the California airport "did not require that military personnel have access to the airport terminal; it only required that military personnel be allowed to deplane and stretch their legs on stops lasting over one hour," said a report released yesterday to House lawmakers who requested an investigation into the matter. Uh oh! Better include something about breathing Oakland air and going to the bathroom for the next version of the contract! The Sept. 27 layover was the last stop for fuel and food, but the troops, who were returning from a tour in Iraq, were denied access to food and bathroom facilities. Yeesh, I thought I was kidding in my last comment! A Marine reported the incident to Rep. John L. Mica, Florida Republican and ranking member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and said it "felt like being spit on." It was. Airport officials were concerned that the flight's ground staff could not provide "an adequate level of escort and control of such a large group of military personnel in or around the terminal area," the inspector's report said. Sounds like a child's excuse to me. But then again, this is Oakland. The report also said the Homeland Security and Defense departments have no coordinated policy to conduct security screenings or a communications process to allow the Marines and soldiers in passenger terminals. Good enough to protect the country the airport is in, but not good enough to trust with the airport's security, eh? Who you gonna call if you want folks to carry guns around the airport in the next terrorist attack? The review also found "miscommunication about the proper storage and safeguarding of weapons carried on board aircraft during the layover" and that the airport "could not confirm that weapons [on the plane] would be secured and safeguarded in accordance with Department of Defense regulations and that the Marines and soldiers would leave their weapons on board." The guns were only an excuse they are grasping at. If it were not for the guns, they would have come up with some other excuse. An airport spokeswoman and a Defense Department spokesman said they received the report but were not prepared to comment until their Calls for comment to the Transportation Security Administration were not returned. They've learned not to answer the phone unless it's someone they know from Berserkley calling. The inspector general recommended the establishment of a task force with representatives from the Homeland, Defense and Transportation departments, along with representatives from the airlines and airports, to develop a uniform process for handling service members on all military chartered flights at U.S. commercial-service airports. As if it's that tough to figure out. The establishment of this committee must justify why management there couldn't figure out the right answer in time to make these soldiers lives a little nicer. The lack of protocol for treating military personnel during transport is "no excuse for the poor treatment these brave men and women received in exchange for defending our freedoms," Mr. Mica said. So who's going to get smacked? Mr. Mica said he and Rep. Tom Petri, Wisconsin Republican and ranking member of the Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee on aviation, will follow up on the inspector general's report. Be very careful how you write this. The recipients are the decietful ingrates. "The shocking thing is that there is no protocol for handling our returning troops, and at Oakland they got a very rude welcome," Mr. Mica said. "We just need to get some regular order of the process so we don't have a recurrence of what we saw happen here." Only Oakland couldn't figure it out? Hmm. Suspicious, don't you agree? Well, I'm sure the soldiers will feel better when they receive their individual signed apologies from TSA and Oakland Airport "officials". |
| Posted by:gorb |
| #6 IIUC, here in San Diego, they use Miramar MCAS for security and ease, isn't there something similar in the bay area, or the AF base near SAC? Bypass the shoe-checking assholes and lessen the $ paid to the regions that are treasonous. Let Congress punish them financially |
| Posted by: Frank G 2008-02-01 19:41 |
| #5 I think the US needs to USE the established facilities we have for handling passengers - I.E., McChord, Travis, and all the other Military Airlift Command facilities that are specifically designed to handle large numbers of transits. Cut the civilians out completely (and also cut out paying them for servicing these aircraft). Watch who squeals THEN! Hell, every military airfield in the United States has, at a minimum, a Base Operations building, and most have a small passenger terminal with at least vending machines. They're also secure, so we won't have to worry about the "weapons" on board. Let the "civilians" eat dirt. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2008-02-01 19:28 |
| #4 Probably much better of a reception than they would have gotten in S.F. airport. I have no doubt that they wouldn't have even let them off the plane onto their precious piece of shit liberal tarmac. My father lives right outside Oakland and he didn't hear a word about this until I told him. They burried it in the Bay Area. |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2008-02-01 11:47 |
| #3 Of course. Not the pinheads who made the decision to treat them like criminals. No, I believe they would have let murders, thugs, and child molesters roam the airport free-range. This is Oakland after all.... |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2008-02-01 10:20 |
| #2 Curse Oakland. I will never use that airport again. Curse it. Damn them to hell. |
| Posted by: newc 2008-02-01 09:15 |
| #1 Airport officials were concerned that the flight's ground staff could not provide "an adequate level of escort and control of such a large group of military personnel in or around the terminal area," the inspector's report said. It's very rare that I think the TSA is concerned about flyers, I think what happened is they weren't concerned. |
| Posted by: Pancho Uninemble1793 2008-02-01 08:33 |