[Rhodes22-list] Support the Troops! Yeah right - Political

[Brad Haslett]

 This is not right!  Last month, the city of San Francisco denied the
Marines a permit to film a commercial with their elite rifle team on 9/11.
They had their excuses, paperwork, etc., yada, yada, yada.  I guess the
Marines should have said they were all gay and planned to film naked and
everything would have been OK.  Now this.  Last week, the Oakland Airport
Authority wouldn't allow Marines returning from Iraq to enter the terminal
building.  Never mind they transited terminals in Germany and JFK.  This
isn't the first time it's happened in OAK either.  I happen to know a young
military person stationed in the Bay Area very, very well who can't wait to
get re-assigned to another part of the country because of the way he is
treated by the locals when he's in uniform.  The leftest bloggers are trying
their hardest to de-bunk this story but can't.  Sometimes the truth is just
that!

It doesn't matter what you think of the current administration, the war, or
anything else!  Our people who volunteer for the armed forces deserve to be
treated with dignity and respect.  It is not uncommon for those of us lucky
enough to get First Class seats when we travel on passenger airlines to give
them up to uniformed military personnel.  I never let a soldier buy a drink
on his own nickel in an airport bar.  In Oakland, they can't even get to the
bar.  This is disgusting and just flat wrong.

Of course the airport authorities in OAK have their excuses, just like San
Fran.  Oh yeah, don't forget Berkley where firemen can't fly American flags
on their fire trucks because of fear of vandalism.

Pathetic.

Brad

What happened to our troops in Oakland By Michelle Malkin  •  September 30,
2007 10:58 AM

[image: oaklandia.jpg]<http://michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/oaklandia.jpg>

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.

Big mistake from a region of the country that already has a bad,
longstanding rep as
anti-military<http://michellemalkin.com/category/unhinged/they-dont-support-the-troops/>.


All fair-minded observers should agree: The troops deserve better.

***