Veiled women boarded Air Canada flight from Montreal - Macleans.ca
 

Veiled women boarded Air Canada flight from Montreal

“Serious threat to security,” says Transport Minister John Baird


 

A video posted on YouTube this weekend shows two women boarding an Air Canada flight at Montreal’s Trudeau airport wearing niqabs that block all but their eyes. In the grainy video posted by a British tourist on the same London-bound flight, it appears that neither woman was asked to remove her face-covering as employees checked their passports at the gate. Federal Transport Minister John Baird called the situation “deeply disturbing,” saying it “poses a serious threat to the security of the air-travelling public.” He’s asked staff to report back with recommendations.

Montreal Gazette


 
Filed under:

Veiled women boarded Air Canada flight from Montreal

  1. instead of ridiculing these women for chossing to dress this way we should be ridiculing the administration that is trying to tell us how we can and can't dress. By the way i'm not a muslim i'm a man who believes in freedom

    • Please do not misunderstand. This is not a matter of ‘freedom’. This is strictly and entirely a safety issue.

    • Not only can't you spell….you are an idiot.

    • Were you alive for 9 11 or have you forgotten? I for 1 will never forget – and never want another family to go though such a terrible, evil event.

      • 9 11 is in my heart as well. I has changed the world, but there is no doubt that 9 11 was inside job. So enough blamming muslims for what your politicians have done to you. Look around the world and you will know that you people are number one terrorist not the muslims but this is hard for you to understand now but time will show all facts

        • U mean Bush hired muslim araba and pakis to do the job on 9/11 ?

    • That is probably the dumbest thing I've read so far.

      • No. Read Jim's comment above (about 9-11 being an inside job). That's the dumbest thing you've read so far. Or it will be once you've read it. CLO finishes a very distant second.

    • you are not so much a man that believes in freedom as you are an IDIOT

  2. So what exactly is going to stop someone from veiling there face then taking down a plane or even worse. Then they find out this veiled woman is a man on a no fly list. I agree something needs to be done but what?? Can't change a persons religion, maybe some kind of bioscan or fingerprint scanner???

    • I believe there is already regulation in place that anyone has to show his/her face for identification in institutions such as banks, airports, and others. It is just a matterof enforcing these rules by the people who are suppose to be responsible.

    • Can't change her religion. But do we need them in our country?

      • Plus 3 rating for this comment? Really? Macleans.ca is becoming CBC.ca

  3. {@CLO—An opinion like yours COULD result in a loss of many of the freedoms you enjoy today if those you mistakenly defend eventually assume power over you. You are just a useful infidel idiot to those who seek power and influence. Then, a mere ‘belief” in freedom is all you might have. } Anyway:
    1-This "apparent" oversight or double standard is not unique and because it happened at (Pierre Elliot) Trudeau International airport that was named after the man who gave us “all cultures are equal” multiculturalism and all its benefits and downsides, maybe it is time for a Trudeau retrospect. In Trudeau's speech “An Implementation of Policy of Multiculturalism Within Bilingual Framework” he confidently stated, “For although there are two official languages, there is no official culture, nor does any ethnic group take precedence over any other. No citizen or group of citizens is other than Canadian, and all should be treated fairly. A policy of multiculturalism within a bilingual framework commends itself to the government as the most suitable means of assuring the cultural freedom of Canadians…”

  4. 2–“…Such a policy should help to break down discriminatory attitudes and cultural jealousies. National unity, if it is to mean anything in the deeply personal sense, must be founded on confidence in one's own individual identity; out of this can grow respect for that of others and a willingness to share ideas, attitudes and assumptions. A vigorous policy of multiculturalism will help create this initial confidence. It can form the base of a society which is based on fair play for all.” Pierre Trudeau OCT.1971
    Today many group and individual rights take great precedence over others. Will this be just one more example that Baird will quietly sweep under the multi culti carpet when the hoopla has calmed?

  5. 3—How's Trudeau's vision of “no official culture” working for you or your offspring who were not considered for a federal job because they did not fit the “visible profile”etc? How is anyone, but esp. those who are searching for “meaning, purpose, and a sense of identity” encouraged to “assimilate” in any way within a self proclaimed hedonist “cultural nullity” (Steyn) that routinely surrenders its own existing cultural norms for others in the name of progressive multiculturalism? It makes me wonder what awaits Canadians esp. those like CLO at the end of Trudeau's grand vision and how much of our original “no culture” state will remain whether we have a Conservative government or not. A recent Leger poll stated that 54% of multi culti obedient Anglophones oppose the wearing of the bhurka while 73% of Quebecers oppose it. I am with Quebec on these 'cultural issues." http://www.abheritage.ca/albertans/speeches/trude

    • "3—How's Trudeau's vision of “no official culture” working for you or your offspring who were not considered for a federal job because they did not fit the “visible profile”etc?"

      Apparently, it's working better than a white male like myself might have expected, that is, were I to take your word for how government hiring practices work. Good thing I don't pay crackpots much mind.

      • You sure buried me in cogent complex facts rather than a cheap ad hominem attack didn't you crapola! Nice of you to use only your own personal experience as justification for your lofty self assurances. Did you ever think about what your son's and grandsons chances might be. Unfortunately, I don't have time to give you proper personal attention but you can read my hasting replies to Steve and then read this promising factual article about white males written by a white woman. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/the-

        • My apologies. When you asked "3—How's Trudeau's vision of “no official culture” working for you or your offspring who were not considered for a federal job because they did not fit the “visible profile, etc.," I thought that was the question you were asking, and so I answered it. If you were looking for anything particularly cogent or complex, it wasn't immediately apparent.

          But where did I engage in ad hominem, of the "crapola" variety? I worry that you let your paranoia get the better of you.

          • Craigola- Who were you referring to when you said, " Good thing I don't pay crackpots much mind." if that isn't an ad hominen attack I don't know what is. (def' -Argumentum ad hominem is the logical fallacy of attempting to undermine a speaker's argument by attacking the speaker instead of addressing the argument.)

          • MR. CRAIGOLA; Who were you referring to when you wrote, " Good thing I don't pay crackpots much mind." If that isn't an ad hominem attack, I don't know what is. (def.Argumentum ad hominem is the logical fallacy of attempting to undermine a speaker's argument by attacking the speaker instead of addressing the argument.)

      • CRAIGOLA; Who were you referring to as a crackpot? If that isn't an ad hominem attack I don't know what is. (def.Argumentum ad hominem is the logical fallacy of attempting to undermine a speaker's argument by attacking the speaker instead of addressing the argument.)

        • I'm not sure whether I want to answer the question just yet, or wait and see how many more times you ask it.

        • Just kidding. I was referring to you as a crackpot. And I'm sorry for it. I should have instead addressed the assertion as one commonly made by crackpots.

          • Ad hominem attacks like yours are ones "commonly made" by people without cogent arguments. As for the repetitions, I am relatively new to this "crackpot central" site and my counter posts to you kept disappearing until now. Next time I won't bother to even respond or write "crackpot" nonsense on MacLean's commentaries. So "crackpot hunter" you'll have to find other convenient prey who might "try to offer" a thoughtful opinion that conveniently sets you up for another one of your nasty slurs.

          • I agree that you were convenient. I'll give you +1 for that.

          • Craigola;
            You are such a pompous, snide indolent twerp. How's that for ad hominem CRAPOLA.

          • Seeing as you asked, to be completely honest, I've seen better. But to be fair, it was quite convenient as well for you to come to me and ask, instead of my having to go out and look for old coots to be an indolent twerp to, so I'll give you +1 as well.

            Happy now? No, I didn't think so.

    • STEVE ; A SIDE ISSUE-Male taxpayers are still funding the Status of Women Canada as an official arm of the federal bureaucracy while male propsects seem to be steadily diminishing. Read this article if interested. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/the-

  6. Canada's main multicultural enforcer the CHRC is well known for its egregious cultural double standards where only some people can claim to have been offended or discriminated against while others are soundly rejected because they do not fit the "visible profile" or their current whimsical analysis. Perhaps the tented women can just file a complaint with the CHRC if they are actually asked to show their faces and their own identity info. When Francophone Trudeau made his grand speech to smiling Liberal faces, hefailed to mention at the time that an army of CHRC (and prov) commissioners, investigators, litigators, employment equity compliance officers and even a "Human Rights Maturity Model" etc would be required to tame and scare the backward heathen Canadians, who still believed we had a culture of our own, but were neither racists nor “crazed right wing hate mongers.” It is also interesting that it was mainly the former "trappings" of English culture that seem to have been altered most by multiculturalism, while proud talk of an original cultural identity seems to only emanate from Quebec.

    • Perhaps you should detail how it is that multiculturalism has made British North American culture in Canada so insolvent, whilst a more organic and essentialist view of culture remains politically viable in Quebec. Perhaps, instead, you are blaming the symptom for the cause. After all, the proponents of multiculturalism's first line of argument is that this worldview is a natural extension of the Whiggish liberal individualism underscoring both Canadian and American political cultures.

      Can you identify a coherent movement of Canadian traditionalists and loyalist conservatives at work at the moment? I cannot. Canadian conservatism has for a long time been more of a replica of the American case where conservatism was subsumed into a kind of national liberalism. Certainly the current party in power has taken this bent further than any government to date.

      Specific discrepancies with the CHRC and diversity quotas aside (and my views are certainly mixed on these matters), what exactly would you propose to replace an official policy of multiculturalism in Canada? Remember, the initial debate surrounding 'multi' culturalism came from the descendants of Eastern European migrants who broke in the West, who argued against the original legislation that called for an official bi-culturalism. It wasn't until later in the 1970s and 80s that multiculturalism became equated with post-colonialism as it is today.

      • How about replace multiculturalism with nothing? Does government need any sort of cultural policy at all?

        • I guess that was the original intent of the policy, a declaration of "no official culture." So scrapping the whole thing all together does seem like a logical step. Its sort of like affirmative action… there is a built in realization that it will out live its purpose eventually.

      • The style of your reply suggests that your intention is not to discuss but to both discredit my ‘inferior” opinion by loading up your questions (Perhaps you should detail etc.) and to display your superior “intelligence.”(whilst, organic and essentialist view etc.). But in case you are partly sincere, I will attempt to answer your professorial liberal university questionaire as my time permits. (Home after midnight last night PSTand off again soon) Be back shortly.

        • No No. My intention is discussion. Liberal university education can make anyone sound like a toff if they're not careful, but I think my argument is clear enough. In rejecting Trudeau's "no official culture" you are offering a replacement for British Canada – inspired by Quebecois 'politics of culture' no less (something I would rather avoid).

          What I'm trying to get across is that Trudeau's multiculturalism has had very little to do with eroding "English culture" in Canada as you are arguing.. it is an argument that the state shouldn't endorse any particular ethnic/religious/cultural heritage, and that people have the fright to whatever cultural association they wish. This is the surest way to balance individual and group rights. Have their been excesses? No doubt. And there should always be checks-and-balances and debate to keep things reasonable. But as a whole, IMHO it sure beats the nastiness you can sometimes find in Quebec cultural nationalism..

    • Answers for “sincere” Steve:
      1–First, I never said, “that multiculturalism has made British North American culture in Canada insolvent… (not yet anyway) etc. I merely said that, “It is also interesting that it was mainly the former "trappings" of English culture that seem to have been altered most by multiculturalism, while proud talk of an original cultural identity seems to only emanate from Quebec” so I won't argue “in detail” about something I never said, but trappings are defined as “the outward signs, features or objects” like the original Royal Mail that Trudeau purposefully renamed Canada Post etc. or the most recent controversy where Bhurkas could soon be a common “trapping” in English Canada but it doesn't look promising in Quebec?

    • 2- Multiculturalism's ceaseless momentum and the statists at the CHRC have permitted and even encouraged the continued subjugation of women due to an intransigent, pious belief in cultural relativism and a double standard approach to documents like the Charter and the CHRA. Elements of the Muslim, South Asian, Sikh and Hindu etc communities are still living under religious patriarchies with undeniable male dominating intentions and attitudes that exploit Section 27 of the Charter that seeks “the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians” while ignoring or disrespecting Section 28 that “guarantees equality to male and female persons.” To continually deny this evident “ethnic” loophole contradiction (as one easy example that even Trudeau never intended) is unwise and cruel to many Canadian women. This conflict must be corrected by ensuring that Sect 28 (etc) has precedence over Sect. 28.

    • 3.-Trudeau's bilingualism Canada has also been widely outstripped by the mass immigration of people who do not speak either official language or do not wish to. For “one” example, if you are not Asian and do not speak Mandarin, Cantonese or you are not of Indian ancestry and do not speak Hindi etc. you will not be hired in many businesses in Richmond, Surrey etc. These non assimilating ethnic segregated businesses are increasing not shrinking where I live, while an English speaking native born Canadian (esp a white male's) chances of landing a federal job or other under the “Employment Equity” (EE) provisions are slim to none with affirmative action assisting the hiring of specific quotas of visible minorities and new immigrants without due consideration for merit. (Though many immigrants are obviously needed, competent and capable of course, but so are those who do not suit the EE )

    • 4– Despite these multicultural aids for visible minorities it is “definitely” acceptable for some ethnic communities to ignore the CHRA's demand “not to limit, segregate, classify or otherwise act in relation to an individual (not of their ethnicity) in a way that would deprive the individual of employment” in their business.(CHRA) In addition, The CFIA requires suppliers to label products in both English and French, except for local grown produce etc. But if less than 10% of the residents in the area speak one of the official languages, then French or English to not have to be printed on food labels.” Not surprisingly more and more “ethnic” areas seem to fit into the less than 10% category. Thus Chinatown and Richmond stores can sell Chinese only labelled products while “white” B.C. grocer Deb Reynolds was given seven pages of infractions relating to labels missing bilingual information (French) or nutrition tables and had some items confiscated when she mostly sells locally grown and packaged produce.

    • 5– Historical name changes are becoming the latest liberal fashion like the recently renamed Haida Gwaii that was formerly Queen Charlotte Islands.(named after an early ship) The Haida and the Tlingit were war like slave traders who routinely raided and terrified much of coastal B.C. and Washington state for centuries in search of other natives to enslave, but historical facts like that are only applicable when applied to slavery conducted by the “evil whites.” I do not condemn the present day 1st nation's people for any of the cruelties of their raider/slave trading ancestors but I also wish they would accord those of us with English “colonial, imperialist” ancestry that never owned or pursued a slave the same respect and consideration instead of incessant condemnation.

    • 6–You asked, “Can you identify a coherent movement of Canadian traditionalists and loyalist conservatives at work at the moment?” Ans. “No,” but a lack of an “official” movement does not surprise me (not incl. the Harper Cons.) because Conservatives by my “ideal definition” are a disparate mix of free thinking, freedom loving, self reliant individuals who have their own “way of understanding life, society and governance…such as a belief in liberty, the dignity of the individual and an ordered society”; while many liberals today believe strongly in the supremacy of state control (ie CHRC thought police) as they “concoct one pretext and grievance after another to manipulate public perception and build momentum for the divestiture of liberty and property from its possessors.” (Levin) Also, by their very nature, Conservatives are less likely to surrender their individuality to an organized “movement” like “some” liberals that enjoy subordinating individual thought to group think.

    • 7–Your question, “what exactly would you propose to replace an official policy of multiculturalism in Canada?” should more accurately have been written what should “we” propose as an alternative. First “we” should all be collectively discussing and identifying all the double standards, loopholes and outrageous unintended consequences etc.of all the many misguided “multi culti pieties” and decide collectively how best to redraft, eliminate or amend these policies with a more sensible and realistic approach that accounts for today's aforementioned realities and does not ignore them. But minority parties naturally seek to minimize their involvement in hot button political issues regardless of need so this a remote possibility.

    • 8–But the CHRC should be the first place for “us” to examine in earnest as this type of whimsical pseudo judicial system of thought enforcers has morphed beyond its basic intended purpose and has even tried to expand its Section 13 agenda. (QC Lynch's recent HOC committee appearance) The outrageous experiences of Levant (Shakedown) and Steyn/MacLeans (triple jurisdiction prosecutions because of one offended muslim radical) and those presently occurring to Guy Earle over a 3 year span for a mutual interpersonal spat or the DBIA etc. has shown the dangers of handing committed statists expandable powers over the citizenry. Any organization that “resolves major societal disputes” but provides legal assistance only for a complainant but not the defendant and is not bound like a real judge on the Queen's bench to ensure due legal processes and strict rules of evidence are followed will always be a lurking danger to society.

    • 9–Many would like to see a complete elimination of all HRC's while others seek the elimination of section 13 and a curtailment of much of their power. Personally. I would not be upset at either proposal as long as “genuine” cases of “hate induced” violence are addressed by a revised well defined Criminal Code amendment or that truly racist employers (in all cultures), sexual harassors etc would be dealt with fairly, equitably and judicially in a proper balanced court procedure. Aiding and supporting a complainant against a wealthy employer but ignoring the needs of a poor defendant who can not afford counsel is just not right and must end. (Steve—Sorry for the unedited rambling due to time and job but if you were sincere and I misjudged you; thanks for the reply to my post.)

  7. Okay, how about a little facts with our "news".

    The Need to Know editors should be ashamed of themselves for taking the incendiary part of the report they are linking to, without the more common sense REST of the story. Which you'd be able to read if you clicked on the link and read the article . . . if the link worked, which it doesn't for me.

    So try this one.
    http://www.montrealgazette.com/life/YouTube+storm

    • Exactly. There was definitely a failure by the Air Canada official to follow the company guidelines by performing a final identity check at the gate. But she would have already been screened by Canadian Air Transport Security Authority before getting anywhere near the gate. Much ado…

      Minister Baird should be ashamed of himself. But he won't be.

      • Had I been on that flight I would have liked her to receive the final ID check. It isn't out of the realm of possibility that she could have switched burqas from the security gate to the boarding gate.

        But then, I always fly in an X-wing fighter, so my safety is always in danger.

        • It isn't out of the realm of possibility that she could have switched burqas from the security gate to the boarding gate.

          And what damage would that cause? Both of them would have been cleared by security. The only concern I can imagine is if the screening thoroughness is dependent on the destination of the traveler. But even then, its a stretch to make this worthy of a news story.

          Also, if you are constantly in danger, you need to upgrade your astromech. What's the point of having an astromech if it can't plot a basic jump through hyperspace?!?

          • Oh, my droid is fine, it's the Imperial TIE fighters I worry about.

            But then I always worry about people that fly with their faces covered.

          • TIE Fighters aren't even equipped with hyperspace drives. It seems that if you are traveling in your X-Wing, Tie Fighters would be the least of your worries.

            You'd think you'd be more worried about flying through a star or bouncing too close to a supernova. That'd end your trip real quick, wouldn't it?

  8. Hi guys stop discussing start reacting …

  9. In airports I have been in recently, security screening isn't performed at the gate at which passengers board the aircraft. It's performed well before then at a common security checkpoint. Presumably, the niqab and hijab-wearing women were screened at the security checkpoint; if they weren't, there's obviously a problem with security, but we don't know anything about what happened at the security checkpoint.

    Baird is just pushing buttons to try to create a wedge issue and pick up swing votes. This is standard Conservative operating procedure (as is also happening right now with the Russian jet flying into the Canadian buffer zone but not into Canadian airspace).

    • Out there, for international flights, it's required to reshow your ID. This flight was headed to the UK. It's a good policy.

    • In Canada the airport security officials (CATSA) do not verify ID when you go through a security check point. So long as you posess a simple boarding card, veiled or not, you are good to go. You are required to show picture ID and your boarding pass for verification at the boarding point (gate).

      I am a flight attendant and just as passengers would rely on me to get them out of a burning wreckage fast, I rely on airport and fellow airline employees to ensure that the passengers on my flight will not jeopordize my safety and that of those on board with me.

      I would much rather hand out a nice cup of tea than have to put my hijacking training to use :)

  10. instead of calling this a country, lets call it a church. lets call our laws our religion. dont want to respect our religion.go home. have a nice trip.

  11. Anyone can get past a checkpoint and put on a beekeeper outfit and get on a different aircraft than was indicated when they got to the airport.

    The head to toe covering IS NOT a traditional muslim costume.: it comes from Saudi Arabia in the 1970s.

    • How can they get on a different aircraft without a boarding pass? They check boarding passes against passports at the gate.

      I suppose that one passenger could swap boarding passes with another – but since no one can get into the boarding area without passing through the security checkpoint, I fail to see what the security risk is here (assuming that the original screening at the central security checkpoint was thorough enough).

  12. send the imigrants right back where they came from!!!!!!

    • First of all learn to spell Jimmy. You are ignorant to make such a comment. Check to see what your back ground is… and if you are not Aboriginal to Canada then you too Jimmy are considered by "your" definition an "imigrant" . As are your relatives who moved to any place out side of your home country. Get some education and get rid of ignorance that is holding your thinking back. Furthermore, learn to spell IMMIGRANT properly before posting. So what makes you better then an IMMIGRANT? You can't even spell…Most of them can…

    • are not you or your parents immigrant too. you should be sent back to yuor native backyard as well. Sorry dude

    • We are all immigrants in this country, some are here longer than others, but that still makes them immigrant. And Jimmy should your suggestion becomes edict, you will be sent back too where your grandparents or great great came from.

  13. I don't entirely understand what happened here. Were they allowed to board without an identity check – i.e. face-match to the passport photo? Or were they already checked prior to this video?

    If they weren't face-matched to their passports then that's a serious problem. Seems to me the obvious solution is to check with someone who can speak for the local Muslim population about what it would take to do this without scaring them away from flying. I'm pretty sure a small side-kiosk with a female agent to do the face-check would accomplish this, and that should be fairly easy to implement while satisfying all concerned.

    • That idea sounds simple enough to probably work quite well. I am just wondering why passports could not include a fingerprint ? Match the print on the passport to the traveller..just a thought.

      • My above reply was to Gaunilon.. oops!

      • Yeah, in the end the whole thing has to move to a true biometrics check using either fingerprints or iris scans, which would eliminate this sort of problem entirely. But that's still quite a ways off for general use in airports.

        • I just got back from a trip to Disneyworld, and the first thing I had to do with my multi-day park pass was scan in my fingerprint, so that they could check my pass against my print from time to time to make sure I was the valid holder of the pass (they don't scan your print ALL the time, just periodically when the lines to enter the park aren't totally insane – but every turnstile had a fingerprint scanner ). My laptop has fingerprint identification access as well. Technologically, I don't think biometrics are far off for general use at airports at all – the problem with biometrics is more political imho.

  14. It is this type of situation that makes us wonder what type of country do we want. Do we want one with social standards where some people may not be able to do as they feel. or do we want one with no social standards where anything goes,because there is no middle grounds. What type of country would you rather live in?

  15. Under those head bags, expect to find at least a few MEN–an al Qaeda operative wanted by the authorities tried to make a dash through Heathrow's security this way, a few years ago.

    Headgear gets used in all sorts of creative ways, for non-religious purposes. At a local grocery store, a Sikh man actually tried to smuggle a raw chicken (!) under his 'sacred, non-removeable' turban (the store caught him, when they noticed blood dribble down his face and the cloth unravel). A young relative saw a classmate slip a Bluetooth earset under her hijab in the washroom, just before entering an exam (the issues with this are obvious). And who can forget the stink Muslim groups made before the Vancouver 2010 Games, when the cops brought bomb-sniffing dogs onto the Sky-Train (was it Islamic cynophobia, or just a fear of chipati flour and peroxide specials being sniffed out?).

    The shocker, here, is that the media and government are actually covering this as a–duh!–real security issue. Even after 9/11, this sort of thing got swepped under a PC rug. As with the affirmative action thing, some sort of seismic shift in the public mood is in the works, regarding Trudeaupian-Mulroneyist 'diversity' policies. And that's a good thing.

    • So what is the difference here with a non-Mulsim or non-Sihk man hiding things in his regular clothes? Are we to ban hoodies, toques and scarves as well? France banned the open display of all religious insignia in public schools – there has got to be a more pragmatic way to move around these issues.

      The only story here that I am concerned as a particularly religious/cultural issue is the woman hiding an exam aid in her hijab. And schools should probably have the authority to set reasonable policy measures to prevent cheating in this way. The point is that there are solutions that don't rest on straw man arguments that amount to little but race baiting. Its a free society, and we are not going to find the right solutions by yearning for some romantic homogenous past. As long as there is one law, and an understanding of basic freedoms guaranteed in this law, than these issues should not be blown into the proportions they often are by those in the anti-multiculturalism industry.

  16. I don't think it would be practical to have a small side-kiosk at every gate – large airports have dozens of gates.

    I have assumed all along that primary screening – including removal of face covering to verify identification – happens at the primary screening checkpoint. If it isn't happening there, then there is a serious problem.

    At the gate (again, I am assuming), all they're really doing is checking boarding passes against passports or other ID, to ensure that the passenger doesn't get on the wrong plane by mistake. Since all passengers have already been screened for security earlier on, additional screening isn't required at the gate. Or have I missed something?

  17. Every country in the world would have to add a biometric check to its passport. Some countries probably can't afford that.

    • I'm not entirely comfortable with the idea of the government having my fingerprints.

      • I don't have a problem with the Government having my finger prints, or better yet, should I have a problem with them having my prints ?

        • Not sure. But I have the same gut reaction to it as I did when I was prompted to enter my direct banking information for my tax return. It just doesn't seem necessary to get the job done.

          • Your right.. I got that same feeling in my gut that you did when asked that, That being said, something has to be done before these minor breeches in security are going to turn into a full blown incident !

          • You're a hard right ultra-libertarian privacy nut, then.

          • Its true! I admit it!

            Except, I do like universal health care…

          • Olaf, I am a privacy nut…But i do not have a clue what a ''hard right ultra-libertarian '' is (honest) I even googled it…anyone explain ? (in plain english please .)

          • Agree.. Thankyou for the info RunningGag, Just a couple of hours ago i couldn't pronounce ''hard right ultra-libertarian'' now I am one, I might have a hard time convincing my wife on the spanking topic that was in the thread though….

      • As I mentioned to Gaunilon, Disneyworld has one of my prints now, as they required me to scan my print with my mulit-day park pass when I was there last week. I don't disagree with your trepidation in the slightest, but I have a feeling that biometrics of some sort are rapidly becoming a fact of life that we're just going to have to live with. If I can be convinced that reasonable measures are put in place to ensure that the data is used for identity verification and NOTHING ELSE, then I think I can probably live with it. I'm not even sure with most biometric systems that the system actually "has" your print, so much as that it has an alphanumeric code that can only be re-generated by your print, and the scanner uses your print to re-generate that number for comparison (or something like that).

        • If I can be convinced that reasonable measures are put in place to ensure that the data is used for identity verification and NOTHING ELSE, then I think I can probably live with it.

          I always have trouble believing government when they tell me that they only want my information for one purpose.

          Speaking of which, BoingBoing was featuring this article:

          http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20012583-281.html

          For the last few years, federal agencies have defended body scanning by insisting that all images will be discarded as soon as they're viewed. The Transportation Security Administration claimed last summer, for instance, that "scanned images cannot be stored or recorded."

          Now it turns out that some police agencies are storing the controversial images after all. The U.S. Marshals Service admitted this week that it had surreptitiously saved tens of thousands of images recorded with a millimeter wave system at the security checkpoint of a single Florida courthouse.

          This follows an earlier disclosure (PDF) by the TSA that it requires all airport body scanners it purchases to be able to store and transmit images for "testing, training, and evaluation purposes." The agency says, however, that those capabilities are not normally activated when the devices are installed at airports.

        • No matter how high tech, there is no such thing as 100% secure. Everything is open for abuse. Criminals, are most of the time, a step ahead of what is current in technology.

  18. Unfortunately Islam believes that everyone is already a Muslim, Moses, Abraham, Issac, Sarah, King David, Jesus and on and on where MUSLiMS. Every person in the world is a Muslim, and ANYONE not practising Islam MUST BE REVERTED to the true faith! This is to be done by deciept, marrige, force and death! IT IS AN HONOR for a Muslim to KILL anyone that will not REVERT! For any person that wishes to maintain any freedoms, human rights and live in a democracy you must FIGHT the scourge of Islam at every single opportunity! Learn, read, understand the Koran, its DEATH to the Infidals! WAKE UP WORLD!

    • Stop feeding people with crap. I am a student of comparative religion and know more about religions than your average university professor. There is no such thing in Islam as killing those who donot revert. Nonsense

    • Dear Suzanne,

      I am a Muslim women. I also attended an Islamic School for over 10 years. Plus, i have studied all the world major religions in depth. Education in everything and anything is encouraged in Islam. Muslims are taught to question and seek answers to questions, even regarding our own faith! Islam teaches us to base decisions based on facts and education. Furthermore, I am married to a loving open minded man who comes from a Catholic background. Islam teaches that deceit is also a massive sin. We are taught never to push the religion on to anyone under any circumstance! If someone is interested in Islam, it has to be introduced the proper way, that meaning being open and honest and having any questions answered by no other source then the Quran… No deceit through marriage or otherwise is forbidden….

      Going back to your Killing comment.

      The Qur'an explicitly forbids killing in the next quote:

      "Whosoever kills a human being for other than Murder or Creating Mischief in the Land, it is as if he had killed the whole of Human Kind and whoso saved the life of one as if he has saved the life of all Mankind The Holy Qur'an, Chapter 5, Verse 12 "…. Suzanne i welcome you to check this source.

      The religion does NOT teach to kill anyone who is not Muslim. Killing any one under any circumstance is a massive SIN, as stated in the Quranic except above. The Quran states the this ridicules blood-shed in the world is wrong. Those people indulging in killing are committing crimes against Islam because Islam teaches never ever to kill anyone. Especially, those who have never wronged you.

      The only time it is justified is in self defense, and someone else is physically threatening your life and will kill you, and you have no choice but to fight back to protect your self. That is the only time Islam says it OK to protect your life from being taken. No other time is justified! This needs to be clear.

      Furthermore, It is NOT an HONOR to kill anyone in ISLAM. It is one of the worst things a Muslim could do. I encourage you to read to Quran just for information/education sake. As the information you have posted is very wrong and i'm not sure where you learned about it.

      Kind Regards,

      Iayisha

      • Thanks for your post. The problem is not, and never has been, Islam. There is nothing inherently violent or oppressive about Islam, any more than any other religion. The problem is the way Islam has been twisted and radicalized by fanatical clerics financed by Saudi Arabia's ruling class. The Saudis have poured huge money into exporting the radicalization of Islam since the late 1970s. They do so in order to appease the fanatical zealots amongst their own population, as this helps them maintain their grip on power.

      • …so why almost every terrorist is a muslim ?

    • In that case, peace be upon you, Suzanne Weinstein.

  19. Where will we draw the line? We are suffering from this ridiculous phenomenon of hiding the face. It threatens our security with the stupid excuse it is “our freedom to choose what we wear”. For example, we are suffering of it in schools during the exam time. The onus now is on the educational system to go to the extra measure to verify the identity of the student. In several Moslem counties, wearing the veil is forbidden in the universities particularly during the exams where several incidents have been discovered including false identity, hiding cell phones under the veil, etc. However, our Canadian universities are afraid of even debating this issue. I wonder what will happen if I go tomorrow to the airport or attending an exam or to the bank wearing a mask with the excuse that “it is part of my religion” or that “forcing me to remove the mask violates my personal freedom”.

    • So the old Bluetooth under the schmatta trick is more common than I thought…

  20. Calm down people. Everybody is checked before boarding the plane.. What do you think our airports are? From passports to luggage to scanning the individual. Stop this nonsense and grow up!

  21. Where the issue of religion and 'race' (a term that has succumbed to definition creep) comes in is the fact that, unlike a hoodie or ballcap, you can't make a person take a bag/rag off their face, or head, because you're insulting their religious sensibilities. Just what kind of 'reasonable' thing is a school to do–have female teachers lift the cloth on every Hijabed girl's ears? And the sniffer dogs represent another case where a socio-religious system that's grossly incompatible with Canadian norms tries to thwart the use of a very useful public safety tool. Actually, I wonder if Muslims refuse things like porcine heterografts for heart valves, or just play the 'haram' card when it comes to enabling terrorism.

  22. What irks me is that the lack of checking is PC gone awry.

    I'm sorry, but the whole reason we're all getting checked these days is because a bunch of Muslim terrorists decided to fly planes into some buildings.

    So therefore, all these security measures are forced upon people of all relgions, ethnicity. Fair enough.

    Except it isn't. Ironically, it isn't being enforced on the one group that started this debacle. So then what is the point of all this?

    To me, what is acceptable are the 2 situations:
    1. You profile those who are most likely going to do something stupid.
    2. You don't profile and you search everybody – NO PC sentiment allowed. Don't cloak it as 'well, as a Muslim woman, I have to wear this veil'.

    • Your evil Sith logic will not work on us…our skulls are much too thick!

      No amount of reason will lead us off the path of political correctness!

    • Check everyone equally and to hell with their fained injury. It won't kill them and whatever god they believe in will hardly hold it against them. This PC crap is starting to cut off it's own foot to spite itself.

    • The failure had nothing to do with a systemic policy of not checking Muslims, and everything to do with an airline official failing to follow a company policy with regard to performing a secondary ID check upon boarding.

  23. What we all need to remember from 9/11; the shoe-bomber and the underwear bomber is that the people involved tried to blend in by wearing north american style clothing. They didn't announce that they were "extremists" by dressing in traditional garb but rather looked like everyone else. We need only look to the tactics used by the airlines in Israel. They use psychological profiling to help identify possible terrorists. They ask lots of questions and watch for people who are acting nervous or give inconsistent answers.

    • It could be one among many tactics; could'nt a well trained person beat the spotters? people do beat the Polygraph

  24. I have connected from Heathrow a few times on my way to Toronto and on all those ocassions i was just praying inside that the security would do a good job. Screw the privacy, i just want to live some more. Dont mind even a strip search, but just do it to everyone. All the over sensitive, over dressed religious types please stay home or find some other mode of transportation. I have also experinced transit via Frankfurt with no transit security check whatsoever, even though the waiting area was a big transit lounge with restaurants and convenience stores run by people of all ethnicity. Scary, no checking prior to boarding either. Over confidence or just plain complacency, it is just a disaster waiting to happen. When will those resposible for passenger secuirty get rid of PC and grow the spine to do their job.

  25. It won't be long before the wearing of the filthy burqa and niqab is the law of the land for Canadian women if we don't stop immigration and multiculturalism and get tough with Islamic invaders. Where are all the politically correct losers like Margaret Atwood on this? They only like to deal with "white male" baddies, anything from a "minority" culture can't be criticized right?

  26. should i walk to the departure gate wearing a hood over my head with just my eyes showing and say this is my religious attire i would probably be thrown in jail etc etc….this veil business is getting a bit draggy and boring…maybe they should strip search these female gangsters they are stretching it a bit too far…think they are just making a few more points every time they get in the media…gives them more attention and of course the idiot media play right into it…

  27. COME ON CANADA AND GET OFF YOUR A*SES AND BAN THOSE BURKAS! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! TIME TO PUT YOUR FOOT DOWN!

    In Ottawa a former U.S. special forces soldier, trained to speak Arabic, said he's seen veiled Muslim women laughing at and deriding airport security personnel after refusing to lift their veils.

    The soldier was one of several who have shared their stories via e-mail or by telephone of two-tier treatment at Canadian airports.

    QMI Agency has reported that while Transport Canada rules required that each person must be checked immediately before boarding, airport employees say it often does not happen.

    THEY'RE LAUGHING AT US!

    Transport Minister John Baird has ordered a review of airport procedures and, on Tuesday, said anyone, veiled or otherwise, who puts up a fuss at airport security and refuses identity checks, ought to be arrested.

    "If people are intimidating and threatening airport workers doing security checks, we won't tolerate that in Canada," Baird said. "We're seeking 100% compliance not 99%."

    The special forces soldier said in his e-mail he was returning to Edmonton from Toronto last Christmas when he spotted a group of three men and four women. When the women were asked to enter a private room and remove their veils, the reader tells QMI the scene erupted. “They harangued this poor security guard for five minutes." He alleges they threatened to file lawsuits.

    “Finally this poor guard told them to get going.”

    After that the reader says the passengers began speaking in their native tongue mocking “simpleton Canadians” for letting them have their own way.

    The former soldier says he then confronted the travellers.

    “In their own language I calmly told them not all Canadians were imbeciles and they should really follow the laws of the land where they are. They were quiet as long as we were within earshot.”

    THEY'RE LAUGHING AT US WHILE OUR SOLDIERS ARE DYING OVER THERE! WHAT A JOKE!

  28. There HAS to be more to this story than is being reported. Everytime I fly my IDs are checked at least twice, and one is required to have photo-identification. On international flights, it is even more painstaking. This story doesn't have the ring of authenticity.

  29. That's where brought us Trudeaupian, apologetic, spinless, political correctness. Western world lost its common sense.
    Who is more likely to blow airplane? 60 years old nune from Finland or 25 years old Somali wearing burga?
    We have to styart calling things it real names!

    1. Stop immigration from third-world-islamic-slum.
    They have absolutely no respect for western universal democratic values.
    They are not willing to workl at all. Instead, they bring here their 3 or 4 wives and take wellfare for all of them.
    They do not care about Canada. The only thing they want is wellfare and Canadian passport so they can go back
    to their pakistan, afghanista, or other somalia to kill non-belivers..

    2. Remove all privilages for so caled "visible minorities". Every one should have equal rights!
    White christian male can not get a job in government institution that he pays taxes for!!!

    3. Stop issuing permissions for building mosques. They propagate voice of hate against westerners.

    4. Ban burqua and other head-bags. If any muzzie do not like our laws that he can go back where he came from.

    5. Shut down CHRC. It is an organization full of criminals (for example neo-fascist Warman)

    Canada could be a rich well-prospering place , like Switzerlan for example.
    but all the wealth that was created during last 50 years is wasted by libtards, multi-culti crap and over taxation.

    Wake up people!!! Unles u want to end up in Canadanistan full of slum, mosques, hate agains non-believers and
    libtards demolishing streets in a protest against whetever they they want….

  30. Here's what I'd do. I'd bring her and her luggage into a secondary search room, give her a (borderline) "intrusive" search (start at the anus and end at the back of her teeth) then go through her stuff with the x-ray and dogs. After that let her go on her way with the knowledge of not trying that again.

  31. The Israelis have a highly successful method of airport screening that few elsewhere emulate: they look you in the eye.

    Anyone who is about to hijack or blow up a plane is nervous. And it shows.

    Yet I've gone through security numerous times at airports and that generally doesn't happen. They look at my bag, my shoes, my hat…but they rarely look me in the eye.

  32. From what I understand the burka is not a religious requirement..so why are we tip-toeing around the issue ? Post a sign prior to entering the security check that reads something like this…" Please remove ALL face coverings , hoodies, sunglasses etc, for security check purposes!'' Persons failing to comply will be denied boarding privilages!!. Thankyou For Flying True North Airlines…….simple!!

    • And somehow, it seems to be so hard to do : )

      • All it takes is for one company to have the courage to make it fly , and the rest would follow……

  33. The personnel knew these kinds of issues and they handle it perfectly .
    They always take the woman aside and check her identity .
    They do it ALWAYS with my wife .
    I really appreciate their effort
    BTW, I am a graduate student here in Canada .

  34. Double standards induced by cowardice and denial produce a security nightmare where grandmothers from Summerside are frisked while belligerent masked women are given anonymity and access to airplanes.

  35. STEVE ; A SIDE ISSUE-Male taxpayers are still funding the Status of Women Canada as an official arm of the federal bureaucracy while male propsects seem to be steadily diminishing. Read this article if interested. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/the-….

  36. Freedom comes with a price. That price thus far has been our innocent men and women or soldiers of both the Canadian military and United States military (and others). If you would rather we just give the common courtisy in allowing masked individuals utilize other persons passports in order to board a plane and potential cause harm, the measure to show your face as that is your identity must be obliged to. That’s just a thought from some 25 year old.

  37. I don’t care who was responsible for 9/11 -it was something that never should have happened but it did and if they are putting in place security measures then EVERYONE should have to follow the rules but if I have to remove my glasses and shoes to go through security then they should have to show their face