Michelle Malkin » What happened to our troops in Oakland

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 nut who dismissed it as “fake” without any evidence whatsoever (can you say p-r-o-j-e-c-t-i-o-n). 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 or here 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.

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

***

A commenter at Patterico’s notes:

When I was returning from the first Gulf War, we went through the quarantine process prior to boarding the plane to leave Saudi Arabia. After our baggage and bodies were searched we went into the quarantine holding area from which we could not leave, ensuring that no contraband would enter the US. Our first stop was Rome, and we stayed on the plane. We landed at JFK and went into the terminal for a couple of hours. A security detail stayed on board the aircraft. We then re-boarded and returned to Ft. Hood, TX.
Troops returning from overseas have to pass through customs. In the case of troop transports, this is actually done overseas, hence the quarantine area. The only processing we went through in the US was turning in weapons & other sensitive items when we returned to Ft Hood. Remember, troops do not carry passports in combat zones. I assume that the military follows the same procedures that they did in the 90’s vis troops returning from overseas deployments and they should be able to disembark during layovers in the US. I can tell you from personal experience, troops just want to get a quick stretch, a chance to clean up before returning home and maybe a cool drink: I hope the Oakland airport can accommodate these simple needs.

Posted in: They don't support the troops

Printer Friendly

comments (103)

trackbacks (36)

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

Trackback URL

Comments

« Older Comments

#136766

On September 30th, 2007 at 10:33 pm, Chief RZ said:

In 2004, I returned from Iraq. in Kuwait, we underwent the most thorough screening I have ever had at by U. S. customs. Every single thing in every piece of luggage was physically checked. The process took almost four hours. To re-do this in Atlanta or Oakland is totally unnecessary and borders on questioning the integrity of the U. S. custom’s system.
#136772

On September 30th, 2007 at 10:48 pm, Ombre Rose said:

On September 30th, 2007 at 2:28 pm, lgm said:
The TSA is a federal agency. If it can’t figure how to be nice to soldiers serving their country, blame the federal government, that would be Bush.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

THAT would be stupid.

Let’s just bring charges to the TSA staff responsibile for the decisions.
Let’s just – FOR A BLOODY CHANGE – just hold the persons who actually did it, TOTALLY ACCOUNTABLE!

Let’s use HATE CRIMES and DISCRIMINATION charges FOR A START.
AIDING AND ABETTING THE ENEMY by undercutting the Military – TREASON.

SEDITION.
#136785

On September 30th, 2007 at 11:35 pm, hadsil said:

Guess which city Oakland is right next to.
#136803

On October 1st, 2007 at 12:59 am, palladin said:

I’m not sure about the chain of command at Oakland Airport, but it could be that the management was just using TSA as the excuse and also making TSA do the dirty work.

It might be useful to drop a note to:
http://contact.tsa.dhs.gov/default.aspx

And ask for clarification, if there is a mismatch and TSA says they were acting under orders from Airport management.

IMHO quite often the AIrlines/Airport makes excuses for their own decisions/policiies and hide behind the TSA or “Federal Regulations”
#136815

On October 1st, 2007 at 1:35 am, BB said:

America is being Balkanized.

It is tempting to cut certain airports out of the loop, as one of our number suggested, based on their performance or lack thereof, but wouldn’t the moonbats then simply create campaigns to try to force the military out? And at what point do we say that any portion of this sovereign land is off limits to those that defend it? I realize certain San Fran folks already took action to limit military presence, but we don’t want to ratify such foolishness!
#136826

On October 1st, 2007 at 2:42 am, puhiawa said:

These people can be disciplined, embarrassed and made fools of. Bush refuses to do so. He has shown over and over again that he will sacrifice any individual military man or woman without compunction. he cares nothing about individuals. The people who voted for him did so one by one.
#136862

On October 1st, 2007 at 7:42 am, BobUSMC said:

As I’ve said before and I’ll continue to say it, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

TANGERINESONG, I’ll gladly help out any way I can, please let me known what I can do to help, this disrespect of our intrepid troops CAN NOT continue. There is an email ink at the music website linked to my userid here, it comes to me, feel free to use it.

Semper Fidelis!
#136989

On October 1st, 2007 at 12:13 pm, feebiebabe said:

Oakland is home of Rep Barbara Lee (D) – so I am not entirely surprised.

Weird, though,,,I wonder how recent this new change in proceedure is? I was at the Oakland airport a few years back and when the Marines got off the plane into the terminal most people stopped what they were doing and clapped and cheered and patted them all on the back.

This display was very powerful, very moving and there were plenty of tears to go around.

I would assume this display doesn’t really help Oakland’s…I mean the left’s agenda…perhaps that is why they decided to stop allowing troops in the terminals.

Shame on them.
#136993

On October 1st, 2007 at 12:16 pm, Roman Con said:

The only way to get these hypocrites to stand up and take notice is to hit them in their wallets (or woven hemp bags – whatever these loons keep their currency in). This will only happen if and hopefully when businesses turn up the heat. If FedEx took their business elsewhere, Oakland would notice. Alas, many businesses are sympathetic to moonbats and their causes, or, are at least scared to death of taking a stand against them.
#136996

On October 1st, 2007 at 12:18 pm, right4us said:

I say taser ‘em (the disrespecting airport personnel).
#137014

On October 1st, 2007 at 12:28 pm, feebiebabe said:

OT: I’d like to ask contributors to this list to refrain from calling for earthquakes to befall this region. I live here along with more than several others who post here. When/if the big one hits here, death will be massive. It’s a reality we live with each day as we make preparations to survive flooding, fire, and devastation that will make Katrina look like a church social. Thanks.

Thanks, Bear. I am going to second that motion, especially since I work on the 32nd floor of a high rise….threat of “the big one” scares the Bejesus out of me!
#137016

On October 1st, 2007 at 12:29 pm, meatpieandtatters said:

Do like I did and send Marilyn your thoughts and suggestions on how she can up her game:

Marilyn Sandifur
Media and Public Relations
(510) 627-1193
msandifur@portoakland.com
#137018

On October 1st, 2007 at 12:30 pm, feebiebabe said:

send Marilyn your thoughts and suggestions

I will have to clean mine up a bit before hitting send!
#137073

On October 1st, 2007 at 1:02 pm, sfcmac said:

“Lack of communications”, my ass. It’s lack of simple courtesy and respect.
Screw Oakland.
#137144

On October 1st, 2007 at 1:44 pm, CO of Fort Housewife said:

This reminds me of coming back from my last deployment. We were isolated at the Ireland Airport for at least 3 hours (it might have been more, I really can’t recall). Oh wait, it was a WEATHER problem! Guess OAK doesn’t have that kind of deniability this time. Don’t give us that BS about “lack of communications”. And to expand on what georgej (Comment #10) said, the ‘babykiller’ namecalling has been going on already. Me, BWI, August 2005, going back to Taji after convalescent leave.
#137176

On October 1st, 2007 at 2:10 pm, AlohaGuy said:

Another easy one – refuel at John Wayne Airport in Orange County instead. Our tax dollars would go into a county that appreciates the troops.
#137217

On October 1st, 2007 at 2:43 pm, Fasternu 426 said:

Liberals hate the troops and hate America period! They show it over and over but hide it by saying they “support” the troops. Their actions show otherwise.

Liberals hate America.
#137268

On October 1st, 2007 at 3:27 pm, CharlieT said:

Just a couple of thoughts about screening returning warriors and what a welcome back can look like. When I returned from the 1st Gulf war, every soldier’s gear was inspected several times to ensure no contraband, which to us was synonymous with unexploded ordinance. Even after multiple checks, it was not uncommon to see items in the last amnesty box prior to boarding the plane. As a senior office, I was present at the Corps Commander’s daily briefing and, almost daily, there were reports of soldiers attempting to bring “war trophies” in the form of unexploded CBUs (cluster bomb units) or grenades onto airplanes. The Old Man was livid that soldiers would jeopardize the safety of their fellow soldiers by transporting this ordinance on the planes returning to home base in Germany. The purpose was to ensure the safe return of a victorious army, not the debasement of any soldier. I am willing to give today’s Commanders credit for having the same noble purpose and following the time-honored tradition of “Take Care of Soldiers.”

As to the Oakland reception, nothing could have been more different than the reception we received upon our return to Germany. When we deplaned at Stuttgart International Airport, we came down the staircase and stepped onto a red carpet. A color guard was proudly displaying the United States flag along with the U.S. Army and VII Corps colors. A band was playing appropriate martial music and a General Officer shook the hand of every deplaning soldier and welcomed them back. The German authorities had no problem with any of this. The German airport personnel and others present at the airport treated us with respect. We boarded buses to be returned across town to base, where after turning in our weapons and gas masks, we were reunited with our families. Oakland could certainly learn from this.
#137359

On October 1st, 2007 at 4:22 pm, AmBraCol said:

Hmmm… It was for “security reasons”. I wonder what security risk US soldiers who are serving our nation present? Yet another reason to stay out of Kalifornia.
#137436

On October 1st, 2007 at 5:11 pm, dannavy85 said:

I say we sell Northern Ca. to the Chinese as a free bombing range, ring it with a fence and have a few brews while the bombs start dropping.
#137452

On October 1st, 2007 at 5:22 pm, Straight_Talk_Luigi said:

The War must be going well if the left is resorting to these desperate tactics. Just another reason to steer clear of the Bay Area.
#137514

On October 1st, 2007 at 6:07 pm, AlohaGuy said:

“Security risk” is funny. I remember seeing Ft. Lewis soldiers in Sea-Tac during the Vietnam War, carrying their weapons through the terminal. Felt plenty safe.
#138189

On October 2nd, 2007 at 4:25 pm, ArmywifeArmymom said:

Same bull crap — different war.